Géza Röhrig Explores the Heart of Darkness in 'Son of Saul'

G�za R�hrig is a Hungarian poet, theologian and teacher. He's also the star of one of the most controversial films of 2015, "Son of Saul," first time writer-director L�szl� Nemes's bold and radical look at the Holocaust.

The film won the Grand Prize at this year's Cannes Film Festival and the Golden Globe for Best Foreign Film. It is on the short list for the Best Foreign Film Oscar as the entry from Hungary. (The nominations come out this Thursday.) And R�hrig himself was a surprise runner-up for the Los Angeles Film Critics Association Awards, making him an Oscar dark horse for Best Actor. (Currently he places 10th on Gold Derby's combined survey of Oscar contenders.)

R�hrig hasn't acted in a few decades. He starred in two Hungarian movies in the late '80s before moving to Jerusalem and then, Brooklyn, studying at a Hasidic Yeshiva. He wrote his first book of poems shortly thereafter and has since had seven volumes of his poetry published as well as a collection of short stories.

The honest and riveting new film dares to broaden the visual and aural manner in which viewers experience cinema.

"Son of Saul" is filmed mostly via close-ups of its main character, Saul (R�hrig), a member of the Sonderkommando, who has made it his mission to bury a dead boy he is convinced is his son. Saul's face is the film's central focus throughout with the background remaining blurred. The film has no score, simply the harrowing sounds heard at Auschwitz-Birkenau, where the film takes place.

The Sonderkommando consisted of Jewish prisoners, chosen by the SS, who were forced to assist the Nazis in exterminating their own. They would lead camp prisoners to the gas chambers, getting them undressed and calming them before helping to escort them inside. Afterwards they removed and cremated the corpses and cleaned the space for the next group of victims.

The 107-minute narrative chronicles Saul's determined journey to save his boy's body amidst an actual plotted rebellion at Auschwitz-Birkenau.

The film succeeds, in large part, thanks to R�hrig's astonishing and immersive portrayal of the titular Sonderkommando, given a possible last chance at redemption.

Edge recently spoke with the gracious and veracious R�hrig.

Why this role?

EDGE: You did a few Hungarian films when you were younger but this is your first internationally acclaimed feature. How did this role come your way?

G�za R�hrig: I met the director in New York via a mutual friend and he kept in touch. As he was preparing his first feature he sent me the script, mostly to get my take on it because he knew that I am very engaged in the subject matter. So we picked up the conversation we had started in New York and slowly but surely we both realized I would/should be (involved) in the movie in some capacity. I believed in the movie. It was a very strong script.

EDGE: What made you want to play this part?

G�za R�hrig: I felt most movies dealing with this subject matter were not really honest. They meant well, but they treated this topic way too lightly. They were focusing on the exception. In other words, two out of three Jews were murdered during the Holocaust in Europe, and most movies focused on the lucky third, the ones who made it. But everyone knows that every single survivor survived due to a systematic error. No one was meant to survive. We wanted to make a movie that focuses on the first two-thirds.

I understand why they (most filmmakers) stayed away from the center of hell, the trouble zone where the Sonderkommando was working right around the gas chambers and the crematoria. They knew that you couldn't really, ethically make a movie about this unless you forge a new cinematic language... it took seven years for the director to come up with a new grammar because you're not just talking stylistic changes and vocabulary changes.

We wanted to focus on the Sonderkommando, a lesser-known aspect of the event-that's the content. And in terms of the form, the idea of reducing the scope through using my close ups for the entire movie and using (the notion) of one day of one man's life visually, dramatically.

So (we did so) by reducing the scope, realizing that less is more and that you can't explicitly show too much horror. Rather we used the power of suggestion by leaving things blurry and out of focus. (This left things) to the viewer's imagination. That is the way to deliver a lasting impact instead of going for the emotions. We all know we feel better after crying. (But) we didn't want the film to be cathartic. In fact we were (trying) to deliver a punch to the stomach or the throat-something that is much more scary, as opposed to having your regular reassuring and hope-granting, entertaining, melodramatic kitsch, (which comprises) the regular average Holocaust flick. These films basically use and abuse this catastrophe for dramatic value, running uncharacteristic stories of rescue or survival in front of a historical background. We were not interested in doing another one of those.

Researching the role

EDGE: Nemes' decision to focus solely on Saul's face and blur the background provides the film with its true power. Did you feel the pressure of knowing your face was vital to the film and how did you prepare for the part?

G�za R�hrig: It seemed appropriate because the face is the meeting point between the world and the person. The face has more muscles in it-around the eyes and the lips-than anywhere else in the body combined. It's an extremely sensitive surface. Everything is visible on the face...

That presented a challenge because the camera was very close, just about 30 inches from my face so every tiny little move or change on my expression was visible immediately. And I wanted to keep the character somewhat enigmatic. I did not want to reveal too much, simply because I understood what it must take in an unspeakable situation for a Sonderkommando member to do his duties. The only way to do such tasks is to desensitize, depersonalize yourself, shut down your emotional system and wear a thick protective armor of empathy. In order to survive, you have to stop thinking, you have to stop feeling, you have to go on autopilot. You have to keep everything at a bare minimum. That was the state of mind I was heavily interested in.

EDGE: How did you research the role?

G�za R�hrig: My readings were my prime resources. I tried to read everything possible in all the languages I can read in-to find accounts, not just the usual books but specifically on the Sonderkommando. I went to libraries searching for testimonies of former Sonderkommando members during trials for Nazi criminals and I was very interested in making sure my knowledge was as precise as possible.

I wanted to know the 'hows' of what they did. How they were spending their days?... How were they doing what they did? What instruments, tools were they using? Where they searching the bodies for jewelry? How? Were they piling up bodies for the ovens? How? Which one first? Which one last? What did it look like? What did it smell like when they opened the doors? Who was doing what? Who put the poison in? What size scissors did they use to cut the women's hair? When were they cutting it? Where were they cutting it? I needed these technical things to be able to bring this character to life. Because I felt like from my own life experience nothing really qualified me... it was simply a different planet. And the words and the feelings we come across in our every day free life they just can't be converted to the reality of Auschwitz.

Primo Levi, this great Italian thinker and survivor says normality collapsed in the camps, and as a result of that, everything else got disfigured, language included. So when we say now, 'I am hungry,' it basically means we skipped a meal. The word hunger meant something entirely different in Auschwitz. You are not hungry in Auschwitz until you don't look at your fellow human being as something edible. In our reality we don't look at each other as something edible. But in Auschwitz people did that.

For me, I felt the reason I'm not any better or worse actor to play this role is that it's such an atypical role that takes you to such a different world. And I don't think that Robert DeNiro or Jack Nicholson would have had it much easier.

Knocked him out

EDGE: Do you feel like achieved any insight, any further understanding of the Sonderkommandos?

G�za R�hrig: Yes, I definitely did. Even as a third generational (survivor), I think I knew much more than the average person, even in the killing zone. People in Hungary are quite knowledgeable, Jews especially, of what happened. But when it comes to this cursed crew, this special squad, the Sonderkommando, I vaguely knew what they were about. So once I started reading literally thousands of pages I definitely learned a lot and not just on an informational level but on an existential level. What were they facing-the moral ambiguity and dilemmas that they faced?

EDGE: What was working with Nemes like?

G�za R�hrig: L�szl� is very disciplined. He's the most well prepared filmmaker I have ever met. He knows every aspect of filmmaking... He's intimately involved in choices. He's not bossy; he's just a very curious guy. He understands that being a filmmaker is somewhat a god-like profession... He was very good in picking his team, which is a sensitive task... Unlike other movies I (did) earlier, where people end up doing other people's jobs and there's a lot of confusion and personal issues, the climate, the atmosphere of the shooting was very focused and devoted. Working overtime. Very low budget: $1 million euro. And after a day or two we just all (knew) we were in good hands with L�szl�.

EDGE: What was your reaction when you saw the finished film?

G�za R�hrig: I remembered the takes, but still it kind of caught me off guard. It swept me away, knocked me out. Partly because of the sound. The sound was entirely (done in) post-production. The sound design track deserves a lot of kudos, it took five months for L�szl� to work on the different noises and screams and commands and I think it's as important as the picture. This movie is so layered and so rich and my experience watching it for the first time in Cannes, was that the sound was the greatest (part) of the movie.

Acting again?

EDGE: Do you plan on acting in the future?

G�za R�hrig: I hope so. Yes. It has to be the right fit. I'm not for commercial use, especially after something dignified like 'Son of Saul.' But I would be happy to (do) a movie that is done by the right people and the right way, for sure.

EDGE: You alluded to past Holocaust films and I was curious if you thought there were any that are essential in helping us comprehend what happened?

G�za R�hrig: My belief is that the task of cinema, when it comes to this subject, is to testify, to be witness to what really happened. And movies, I find really disappointing or ridiculous, like 'Life is Beautiful.' I do not doubt (that) the movie's well-meaning, but to misrepresent the reality of such an enormous catastrophe. To have Roberto Benigni grab the gramophone to send a love message to the women's side of the camp is faking something-I find it inappropriate, distasteful. So I would say that by and large I find these movies useless. There are some that are better than others and I don't want to sound dismissive, but the ones that really speak to me are the documentaries, not the features.

Representing the Holocaust

EDGE: 'Life is Beautiful' was a divisive film. Many liked it and it had accolades, including Benigni's Best Actor Oscar; but I found it offensive.

G�za R�hrig: One of our secretly hoped intentions was to somewhat redefine the genre. There was this ongoing debate in circles, especially in the 80s, was can it (the Holocaust) be represented? The truth is, strictly speaking, impossible to recreate. But as much as it's impossible, it's equally necessary (to try to recreate it). It's such an important thing that if we hope and want humankind to learn lessons from any genocide then it has to be a point of departure of our thinking and policy making.

What is the real driving force behind this movie is to appeal to the younger generations who are less connected with history. I'm a father of four so I'm very well aware of the digital, ritual reality our children are growing up with. And they think that history is boring. They don't get that we are not talking about history on the informational level.

I'm not worried about Holocaust denial. It's a marginal phenomenon. It always will be a marginal phenomenon. I'm much more worried about people who know the facts yet they are not aware of the significance and the weight of it and I think that the lessons to be learned from any genocide is to see the full potentiality of human evil and to see how fragile and weak our civilization is and how it can collapse in no time. And to see that the demonic side-the dark side-of the human psyche is not a dummy. It actually excels, but in science and technology nowadays. So the most important thing to take home from this is to realize that authority, in general, and political power, in particular, if it goes unchecked by us, then anything can happen. So we have to be very vigilant. I understand that it's easier to go on and close the book, but it's going to open up on the same page.

Seventy years after (the Holocaust) it's safe to say not much has been learned from all this and it's attested by the alarming frequency of the genocides that followed the Holocaust: Cambodia, Bosnia, Rwanda, Darfur. So this is permanent possibility. And it's not a parochial issue. It's not about this group or that group. We are talking about the human family.

His mission

Please note: Spoiler Alert:

EDGE: In the film, your character, Saul, is on a mission to bury the body he thinks is his son. Is he trying to rediscover his humanity?

G�za R�hrig: I think that what he's doing is a reaction to what he's witnessed. He witnessed something extremely special. This boy surviving the gas chamber beat the system. No one was supposed to do that. Even if it was for a few minutes, he survived. His death was different. And witnessing this boy agonizing for his life, breathing, somehow resurrected this shred of his humanity or feelings, empathy in Saul that was long numbed and forgotten.

So he's very grateful to this boy. And I think he owes him one. And what good can you do with a person who's dead already, besides bury him? It's his way of revolting, in an internal way. As opposed to the rest of the gang who were politically revolting which was absolutely legitimate. To (try and) get the hell out of there and save their skin. It's fine. But I think what makes Saul special and extremely noble is because he's doing something for someone else... something higher, something more than sheer survival. And I think that's very important.

He was not able to bury the boy in the proper way with the Kaddish but he was able to save him from the flames. And that is something. All we can be accounted for is the effort we put into things. The outcome at the end is not in our control.

EDGE: The profundity lies in his attempt to do it.

G�za R�hrig: It's a par excellence human thing because animals don't bury (their dead). We are so many races and religions and backgrounds and traditions, there are very few core values we can all adhere to. I just find solace and hope that there are people like Saul, even in such places.

A personal history

Watch the trailer to "Son of Saul":