Accepting the award for best international film for The Zone of Interest, Glazer took to the stage to make an impassioned call for his Auschwitz drama to make people reassess the contemporary conflict in the middle east
Jonathan Glazer, the director of Auschwitz-set film The Zone of Interest, won cheers and applause at the Academy Awards for a speech in which he decried the current conflict in the Middle East.
Glazer took to the stage to accept the Oscar for best international film – the first time Britain has won the prize – for his German-language, Polish-shot adaptation of the Martin Amis novel.
Glazer – who, like Wilson, is Jewish - continued: “Right now we stand here as men who refute their Jewishness and the Holocaust being hijacked by an occupation which has led to conflict for so many innocent people, whether the victims of October 7 in Israel or the ongoing attack in Gaza.”
She recounted how she had cycled to the camp to leave apples, and how she had found the mysterious piece of written music, which, it turned out, had been composed by an Auschwitz prisoner called Thomas Wolf, who survived the war.
It defeated a field that included Spanish-produced air crash drama Society of the Snow, directed by JA Bayona, and Japanese toilet-cleaner character study Perfect Days, directed by Wim Wenders.
Anatomy of a Fall, Zone of Interest’s main non-English-language rival on the awards circuit this year, was not nominated, after France’s Centre National du Cinéma et de l’Image Animée instead put forward the Juliette Binoche foodie drama The Taste of Things as the country’s submission.
The original article contains 446 words, the summary contains 233 words. Saved 48%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I often feel this bot is no better than selecting random bits from an article. I’m exaggerating a bit, but it’s clear the bot doesn’t actually understand the essence of what’s written.
That said, I do still appreciate it for getting at least a gist of what an article is about. And I very much appreciate the people working on it and making it available.
Yep. Often this sort of summary is generated by finding the most interconnected parts of text, and assuming they are the most important, then slapping them together. While it generally does pull out the most relevant bits, there’s no guarantee that they’ll make contextual sense together.
Once you understand how it works and its shortcomings, you can make better use of it as a tool.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Jonathan Glazer, the director of Auschwitz-set film The Zone of Interest, won cheers and applause at the Academy Awards for a speech in which he decried the current conflict in the Middle East.
Glazer took to the stage to accept the Oscar for best international film – the first time Britain has won the prize – for his German-language, Polish-shot adaptation of the Martin Amis novel.
Glazer – who, like Wilson, is Jewish - continued: “Right now we stand here as men who refute their Jewishness and the Holocaust being hijacked by an occupation which has led to conflict for so many innocent people, whether the victims of October 7 in Israel or the ongoing attack in Gaza.”
She recounted how she had cycled to the camp to leave apples, and how she had found the mysterious piece of written music, which, it turned out, had been composed by an Auschwitz prisoner called Thomas Wolf, who survived the war.
It defeated a field that included Spanish-produced air crash drama Society of the Snow, directed by JA Bayona, and Japanese toilet-cleaner character study Perfect Days, directed by Wim Wenders.
Anatomy of a Fall, Zone of Interest’s main non-English-language rival on the awards circuit this year, was not nominated, after France’s Centre National du Cinéma et de l’Image Animée instead put forward the Juliette Binoche foodie drama The Taste of Things as the country’s submission.
The original article contains 446 words, the summary contains 233 words. Saved 48%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Awful TLDR. Talks about Glazer, says he then she.
I often feel this bot is no better than selecting random bits from an article. I’m exaggerating a bit, but it’s clear the bot doesn’t actually understand the essence of what’s written.
That said, I do still appreciate it for getting at least a gist of what an article is about. And I very much appreciate the people working on it and making it available.
Yep. Often this sort of summary is generated by finding the most interconnected parts of text, and assuming they are the most important, then slapping them together. While it generally does pull out the most relevant bits, there’s no guarantee that they’ll make contextual sense together.
Once you understand how it works and its shortcomings, you can make better use of it as a tool.
I mean, it’s a bot that just selects pseudorandom bits of the article, there’s nothing else to it.