Out of the Ashes (2003)

Sorry, this movie sucks

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

I an unable to comment on the American post war boom-town scenes, and hadn't realised how opulent post war New York was compared to bombed out and ruined EuropeOnly one reviewer above has seen thro all the glitzy schmaltz of the reviews to say that Auschwitz was an extermination camp. I have similar difficulties with my father as a British POW and people say "Oh he was in a Death Camp, how did he survive ?" the short answer is that he wasn't. But from the preconceptions it makes having a meaningful conversation difficult. I have to say I found most of the scenes unbelievable. I think more should have been made that this was a collection of peoples memories, each with a different message. I was in similar difficulties with The Pianist, where I thought some scenes were obviously true and some obviously untrueFrom the allegations made by the survivors, I thought there was a case for Dr Perl to answer. This film is probably not a vehicle for an adequate answer.

I agree wholeheartedly with George Parker. No one would deny that dreadful things happened in Auschwtiz but AS A MOVIE this SUCKS. Gisella Perl left very vivid descriptions of the horrors endured which should have been the central theme.Instead we had cheap sets, lousy cinematography, inaccurate depictions (re uniforms, characters etc) and melodramatic overacting which all added up up to one disappointing MOVIE. PLAYING FOR TIME, THE GREY ZONE, ESCAPE FROM SOBIBOR & TRIUMPH OF THE SPIRIT all do better justice to the topic. Shame on the the Director, Jospeh Sargeant who also did PLAYING FOR TIME but seemed unable to reach the same heights this time round. Bringing in some "big" names, Richard Crenna, Beau Bridges etc hoping to, what, lend some class to the movie or to the lame overacting ???!! As Homer Simpson would put it ...... BORING !!!!!!

when i saw some loser idea from a previous commentator about this film being a melodramatic waste of time i was baffled. this film is the most emotional film i have ever seen. the idea that those Nazis who could do such things were themselves immune to it all but afraid of pain. its rare that you get a look at so many things of the camps, and this film shows you nearly anything you would imagine happening in a place such as Auschwitz. forget that comment that guy made about this film being so under par and just one of another. watch this for yourself and i guarantee if you have any sense of a good movie or good acting you'll know this movie is complete with both. no complaints on my part of this film other than the fact that since it was made on facts that in the end Doctor Joseph Mengele was not given a piece of his own medicine. any other way this was a great film.

The first 20 minutes was slow and I thought this was going no where. But, then when we start to see flashbacks of the concentration camps and what Perl saw and endured there; it gets really good. Christine Lahti is really good and will surely be nominated for an Emmy. I mean, it was awful how the interview panel tries to make Dr. Perl look bad because of the things she had to do in order to survive her imprisonment. And the film does have those shocking Nazi moments, like shootings in the head, killing pregnant women, and experiments on babies.FINAL VERDICT: This was a good movie about a Jewish Dr. who struggles with the moral choices she must make to survive Nazi imprisonment. Definitely catch this if you have Showtime.