Interesteg What makes it different from others?

ReaderKenka Let's be realistic.

Supelice Dreadfully Boring

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

tomboneill34 This film is wonderfully topical. Eichmann is riveting in his ordinariness. He repeats over and over his conviction that he obeyed orders, and he prides himself that his superiors had nothing to complain about in the efficiency with which performed his duties. He also says it would have been futile to resist. He might easily have held an MBA from one of our finest business schools today, or a law degree from one of our foremost law schools. One goes along to get a along. What adds to his topicality is that today the American government is proceeding against Erik Snowden and Bradley Manning on what it seems to take as the self-evident principle one should always obey orders--especially if one is in the armed services or is an employee of the government. Eichmann does not lose his temper and is not irrational. On the contrary, he is wonderfully consistent. He functions therefore as a kind of terrible wake-up call indicating what one can come to if one will go all the way with the notion that orders from superiors relieve one from moral responsibility.

AnonII In support of R.S.H. Tryster and his response to Eyal Sivan's defense, allow me to add this very latest scholarship and observation from a highly renowned university professor of modern Jewish history and Holocaust studies, Deborah E. Lipstadt. In her 2011 book "The Eichmann Trial,"(Next Book/Schocken, NY), she indicts this "putative documentary" for its fatal procedural flaws, describing how the filmmakers "spliced together different portions of the trial without letting their viewers know that they had done so. They mixed the audio from one portion and the visuals from another. They inserted laughter where there is none. They selectively quoted from witnesses' testimony, thereby distorting the import of their words. In so doing they created scenarios that never occurred." (Lipstadt provides a detailed example of this.) "Most reviewers," Lipstadt continues, "unaware of the film's creative approach to the facts, took what they saw on the screen as a legitimate portrayal of the trial..." which it clearly as NOT.

Paula Blair This documentary is supposed to be fake to express the falseness of Eichmann's trial - it was a 'show trial' to hold Nazi war criminals to account. He was kidnapped and taken to Israel - thought to be home for all Jews and put on trial there even though his crimes were against humanity and committed all over Europe.Although the outcome of his execution was irrefutably right, the process of getting to it was not.If you are interested in this you should read a book by Hannah Arendt called 'Eichmann in Jerusalem' to find out more.Always keep an open mind - sometimes lies need to be told to get to the truth.

kam-wing pang The first thing that comes to mind after watching this, is that the whole judicial trial in 1962 was pretty much one sided. There didn't seem to a defense for Adolf Eichmann. One could look at this in a dark way and say that if he was tried today with O.J.Simpon's lawyer, he would have gotten away with crime against humanity...This film doesn't try to portray a fair trial of a Nazi criminal, which it wasn't. All it intended to do was to document some of the proceedings in 1962. But nevertheless, even if Adolf Eichmann was guilty without a shadow of doubt, it would have been more satisfying to have seen the defense putting on a fight, and not seeing judges complaining about a witness' answer to a question as vague, when the question was itself vague.Maybe I'm expecting too much... but the film does the legal system no justice.The most interesting thing by far is seeing Eichmann's little nuances and behaviour as he sits back and listens to the prosecutor's statements and eye witness accounts. You can almost see the indifference in his eyes, there is no remorse and I would guess not much of a conscience.The 350 hours (originally 500 hours, but most of it was not recovered) of film which this documentary was based on, is a historical 'document' and this should be of great interest to anyone who wants to learn more about one of the darkest times in man's history.