User reviews

Oskar Grönig was a member of the SS and a bookkeeper at the Aushwitz concentration camp during World War II. In 2014 (when he was ninety-three years old), he was tried in a German court for being an accessory to murder. The details of the trial and related histories are recounted in this Canadian documentary.

Director Matthew Shoychet and writer Ricki Gurwitz are clearly skilled as their film has all the elements of a great documentary including solid footage - some going back to the Holocaust itself, clever title devices that summarize history as they juxtapose the footage, and the inclusion of all sides of the debate. The debate, of course, is whether Grönig should be on trial due to his advanced age plus his past efforts to fight against the denial of the Holocaust in the 1990s.

Some of the post-Holocaust histories include German trials (in the 1950s and 1960s) of those who were directly involved in the murders as well as the trials in later decades of those, like Grönig, who were captured and tried as accessories.

Another praiseworthy element of the film is the many intelligent interviewees. They provide great insight on many discussions including various views on forgiveness (which follows a very surprising event during the trial) and how the phrase 'never again' has ended up as a sad failure considering the genocides that followed the Holocaust.

By the film's conclusion, it is evident that even though the Holocaust ended over seven decades ago, it remains a real-life drama that can still cause shivers and bring out the best as well as the worst in people. It has obviously brought out the best in the creators of "The Accountant of Auschwitz". - dbamateurcritic

This is a worthwhile addition to the genre of Holocaust documentary. It deals not only with activities of Gronig (the epynomous 'Accountant') but also the difficulties of prosecuting war criminals in their 90s. The movie also discusses the changed legal basis for recent prosecutions in the post-Demjanjuk years.

RIP Eva Kor, who passed away this month, age 85. This was a fairly pedestrian documentary until Eva made an appearance and seemingly turned it on its head with her act of forgiveness.

The Accountant of Auschwitz is a lot more than just about Oscar Groning, the title subject. It focuses on the prosecution of war criminals in general, touching on some past cases and the lack of justice for survivors. The complexities of bringing former Nazis to justice is explored in depth.

The real emotional punches come from the interviews with survivors. They are remarkable people and represent the countless Holocaust victims with dignity, respect and courage.

I remembered seeing Oscar Groning in the 2005 BBC documentary - and immediately wishing that the smug man would somehow be brought to justice.

Even if you have seen Holocaust documentaries and films in the past - this will still hold your attention. It left me wanting to hug the nearest person and spread a little kindness in the world.

Overall entertaining but after the end you have the feel like the documentary is overly biased

For the record, I saw this immediately after Nazi VR (2017).

This was a very interesting documentary that went into court cases I never heard about and brought up an important question of who should be held responsible for atrocities. Hell, it'd make a great spark of classroom discussion and debate even.

One of the best things The Accountant of Auschwitz does is provide different sides of the argument. Who should be prosecuted (accountants, guards, executioners) and to what degree? Should anyone be forgiven? It doesn't really tell the audience how to feel. It just thoroughly informs and leaves the conversation entirely up to them.

There's an event that really caught me by surprise (the lady). I wasn't sure how to feel about it at first. While the act was understandable-ish, the prosecution should definitely continue. Now that I think about it, it reminds me of a documentary called Long Night's Journey Into Day (2000), which examines 4 out of 7000 cases that were brought before South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) since 1994 "to mediate between those seeking amnesty from apartheid-related crimes and the families of their victims." The TRC's restorative justice method is a stark contrast to the Nuremberg's Trials' retributive justice. I highly recommend watching both within the same week and asking yourself which is most appropriate for South Africa's apartheid and Germany's antisemitism.

That accountant was guilty, justice is blind. Age is no excuse for crimes. The only question is how do you punish them in a fair way. But I stand firmly on the side of those that seek justice. There are a lot of complexities in bringing a trial about. But at the end of the day you need to punish the guilty, no matter how long it takes. Its the morally right thing to do. I don't want to sound draconian but if you are guilty of crimes against humanity then you are guilty.

A really fascinating look at how a criminal can truly make themselves believe that they are innocent. Wonderful documentary. A must watch.

Very interesting and well put together I found the middle parts slightly all over the shop not necessarily done badly as I feel it would have perhaps been more powerful to focus in more detail on the main case than going to others and returning. Other than that though i wouldn't fault it and some may like that anyway.

This is my second attempt to write a review on this documentary; my first one mysteriously never made the upload!

Do the people who are showing sympathy, to the likes of the Oskar Gronigs of the world, feel any sorrow for the babies and young children he was an accomplice to gassing, torturing, brutalizing in the death camps? To say that payback should be forgotten just because so much time has passed by, is such an insult to the many who died and the few who survived. I remember reading and learning, about the Israeli Vengeance squads searching for the escaped Nazi war criminals, as a young child and I thought it was an honourable thing to do...I still do.

Brutal people who use war as the means to do what they get a perverse thrill from doing cruel acts should, live in fear all of their lives of being captured. We have had the Bosnian/Serbian search going on and we have the middle east and now the Russian v Ukraine war criminals being hunted. If nobody ever bothers to hunt them then these scumbags in future conflicts will think they can get away with it. And by the way, its not always the enemy that is the sadistic war criminal!

This is not a perfect documentary by any means (quite poor actually) but it is a good insight into events that are hidden away, never taught about or just denied. War crimes and criminals should always be exposed to the full vengeance of the justice system!

To have access to the trove of information, including much in the public domain from interviews and the trial of the 'Accountant' is a documentary film makers dream. But in this work, it is spoiled by scant regard for basic journalism and documentary makers 'Rule #1 - trust but verify' sources statements. That the subject was not even spoken to in the making of the film, nor statements included being second-source validated, was a real distortion, leaving the otherwise exceptionally interesting subject an Emperor with no clothes

We watched this for International Holocaust Day and all the family (including our 3 teenagers). Wow, it is wonderfully done and deserves all the awards it has won - totally riveting - keep your eyes out for the now 98 year old lawyer - I would wish the likes of him to defend me and mine any day - I hope his family are very proud

A vivid real life documentary of the hunt for a surviving war criminal. The footage is well shot and has a movie feel to it

Excellent journalism

Sad documentary, I already knew I would be angry, the impunity demonstrated throughout the documentary is infuriating, and as was well reported, each country carries its own load of guilt for past atrocities, ours, as well as the US, is slavery (complementing with the decimation of indigenous peoples), the conviction, although late, is representative, of the 600k soldiers, only 124 were arrested and convicted, tiny, but the courts bothered, since judges were also Nazis...

The documentary strays off course and offers very little information about Oskar Groning. The original bbc documentary I which he was featured gives a much better account of his history

In not to repeat the mistakes of history, we should learn about them. Oskar Groning was told in the 60s he would not be prosecuted. He openly and frankly discussed what happened at Auschwitz. He should not be prosecuted because he is doing more to prevent the repetition of history than his trial and conviction would ever achieve. Until he spoke, the world had only heard the story of the camp from one side. Thanks to Oskar, the history has been told.

If Oskar is to be prosecuted, then the member of the zondercommando, if alive, who admitted to killing a fellow prisoner who was German should be tried for murder.

I stopped watching when I saw Alan Dershowitz appearing. His hypocrisy in connection with his support for actions of the current US President and Jeffrey Eppstein is complete.

So when is the Queen of England been put on trail, well millions of Irish were murdered for 800 yrs in her and her families name, food that would have saved lives during the famine of the mid 1800's was sold aboard on her orders, land robbed, so when is she going on trail ? Or is it one rule of the rich and one for the poor and when is German ms merkel also going on trail for her threats to destroy countries that didnt sign up for Lisbon treaty ?

This whole segment of the distant past seems to be a battle between the deniers and the liars. This documentary certainly gave the platform to the eternal victims. Having the likes of the disreputable Dershowitz in their corner didn't help their cause. The film certainly displayed the insatiable lust for vengeance; even upon the unfortunate innocent individuals who were caught up in the bloodlust. The haphazard method the filmmaker used in order to garner sympathy towards the viewer was transparently obvious and somewhat insulting given the repetitively tiresome method used. In the end, I was left with a number of concerns with the dubious evidence presented and was therefore inspired to investigate the issues presented and see what factual verifications I could uncover doing my own research and reviews.

Look i think its horrible what happend back then. But is it really necessary to do this. are u going to trial every nazi on this plannet? yeah i know he did wrong but it wasn't only him u know...

Such documentary films are good and should be slightly better covered. What bothered me about this documentary and I don't think it's right is that a German lawyer travels around the world to invite witnesses and persuade them to make the long journey to take part in a 94-year-old Nazi's court. Pay attention to the rise of protests of opponents and supporters The city has benefited, the country has benefited with their restaurants, Pubs,hotels, even a local car dealer and the brand has benefited. Justice is different. An old man who is guilty and has watched large or small people being murdered where he may have participated invites his victims to his feet so that a court hearing can take place. They will never learned it the "Germans"