Purely Joyful Movie!

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

The movie is wonderful and true, an act of love in all its contradictions and complexity

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

I side with those who rate this film very highly, and find those who argue more negatively to be unconvincing. I'm glad to read in some of the other reviews that the novel upon which this film is based is quite wonderful. But please don't let that opinion become a stick with which to beat up a very good film in its own right. (I knew nothing about the novel before watching the film; I didn't find the jumps in time at all confusing—by now such editing has become commonplace and allows us to see connections that would otherwise be much more obscure.) Furthermore, the objections to the modern-story you will read in some user reviews miss the point. Of course it is "flatter" than the story of what happens to Sarah during WWII and after. How could it not be? But that is a necessary dramatic technique. The reporter becomes obsessed by a need to find out more and more—to follow Sarah's story wherever it must take her; and in doing so, she finds a way to cope with problems in her personal life, and she is recaptures a terrible chapter in history that is almost impossible to imagine. The further we get from the time WWII and the holocaust, the more "unreal" such stories are in danger of becoming: fodder for mindless comic-book action movies and alternative realities. I like Captain American, to be sure; and Inglourious Basterds is a great film in its own way, too. But the historical record does need to be kept alive, and brought home with immediacy. And yes, these things could well disappear from memory. This novel and film have found an intriguing way to tie us to the past, and to allow many many fine actors to shine. Highly recommended; but be warned: it is not an easygoing experience!

Six million Jews died in the Holocaust. Sarah's Key is yet another story about a family who was sent to the camps, torn from their home in the dead of night, never to return. Between Shindler's List, Anne Frank, and oh so many others, we have seen scenes of mothers being separated from their kids over and over again. And yet, each time feels like the first time. Sarah's Key is yet another drama set in the darkest time in modern history, and there are no real surprises in it. You know exactly what is going to happen, but you still hope until the last minute that there will somehow be a happy ending. I can't help wondering if those millions felt that same sense of hope as they walked to their deaths in the showers.The dialogue in Sarah's Key is not great, which is why it will never be a film for future generations. The imagery and story, however, are fantastic. The movie is worth seeing because there are 6 million stories to be told about the Holocaust, and every time we see or hear one of them, we are one step closer to making sure it doesn't happen again.Of late, I have been mesmerized by new acting talent in major roles—new actors with better timing who are less "starry," and more real. Sarah's Key is no exception. The young Sarah, played by Melusine Mayance, was wonderful. Much of her performance was silent, and she was more than able to pull it off. Kristen Scott Thomas has to be the saddest actress I know. Seriously, she must be on major meds because I can't can't think of anyone who has played sadder roles. Four Weddings and a Funeral, The English Patient, The Horse Whisperer, and my personal favorite, Random Hearts. Sad. Sad. Sad. But again, the dialogue was off. When her daughter asks her if she is having an affair, her answer is that it is more complicated than that. What mother, searching for a Holocaust survivor, would tell her sixteen-year-old daughter that the search was more complicated than an affair and they can discuss it when she gets home? Really?The French are strange birds, and let's face it, during the war many of them embraced Nazism—or worse, didn't care one way or the other. But the French Resistance was the finest fighting force in all Europe, and their lives were filled with intrigue, with danger around every corner. Such complicated creatures, the French. I get to say that because I was married to a Frenchman, one whose mother lived through WWI and WWII and escaped through Portugal to America with her kids in tow. She told me that everyone has the best and the worst of human nature in them, and this movie shows that struggle between good and evil. At one point, the question is asked, "How do you know what you would have done?" I have asked myself that question many times, and few of us ever have to learn the answer.See the movie. If the subtitles are putting you off, stick with it; the second half is in English.

We'd heard good things about the book, and KST can do no wrong (impressive that she knows how to say things like "load-bearing wall" in French, no?), but the film itself was a disappointment. Mélusine Mayence gives a strong performance as the young Sarah and the main strand of the plot, set in 1942, is certainly engaging, but the secondary plot featuring KST as an investigative reporter seems contrived and condescending—as if we needed a framing tale about a contemporary woman and her contemporary problems to get us involved in a film about the Holocaust. My wife thought that the storyline with Sarah's brother, the cupboard and the key was a bit grotesque as well, like one of those Grimms' fairy tales they never let you read when you're a kid. A few scenes seem designed to help French audiences feel better about the role their grandparents might have played in these events: Apparently there were lots of Jewish kids who were sheltered by farm families, as shown in the film, but the scenes with the kindly guard at the transit camp didn't seem very plausible. All in all, I felt that "Sarah's Key'' was constantly plucking at our sleeves and reminding us that we were watching a high-minded, sensitive work of historical fiction; it's interesting that viewers who were previously unaware of the role played by the Vichy regime in the Holocaust seem to have been more impressed by this film than those who already had some background in the subject, which of course is still being debated. By contrast, Claude Miller's "A Secret" (2007), also currently available on streaming Netflix, tells a similar story— how a desperate, impulsive act at a life-or-death moment can change the history of a family for generations—in a much subtler and more convincing way; it has a great cast (Julie Depardieu, Ludivine Sagnier, Mathieu Amalric…), and we strongly recommend it. The final scene is a real heartbreaker.

Sarah's key intertwines a story of indescribable hardships during the 1942 holocaust period, with one of a modern day journalist engrossed in writing an article about the Vel' d'Hiv. In 1942 the French government supported a Nazi-decreed raid on the Jewish population living in Paris. Many Jewish residents were rounded up and taken to Vel' d'Hiv (a disused velodrome) where they were deprived of food and drink for days and finally taken to the concentration camps. Among those held captive was a young Jewish girl called Sarah Starzynski. Before being taken along with her mother and father to the velodrome she locked her little brother Michel in a closet in hope of keeping him safe. She promises to return and let him out and that promise is a driving factor behind her story. Closely weaved with the powerful scenes of Sarah's deportation and strive to escape is the story of 50 year old Julia Jarmond. A French journalist who's task of writing an article about the velodrome leads her to shocking discoveries about her own connection to this history. Her research unveils the story of Sarah and her escape from the concentration camps. However, she later learns that the house she is to inherit is in fact the house that Sarah and her family were taken away from. This collision between the past and her own future forces Julia to ask herself some questions about her own life, her work, her difficult relationship with her family and her relationship with her unborn child. Their stories become very closely connected to the point where they are almost inseparable. Julia's heartfelt mission takes her to meet those closely connected with Sarah as a child and has a tremendous impact on those who knew her. Apart from conveying the main moral of the importance of understanding the past and how it can affect our present the movie ties in strong concepts of brutality, indifference, and responsibility. It has grim examples of the cruelty of some of the French and German officers as well as the idea that they weren't all bad with one guard actually helping Sarah and her friend escape. The movie puts much blame on the French government and the indifference of its citizens and shows shocking instances of both indifference and compassion of the French people. Although Julia's story contains some powerful moments of past and present interlocking, her family issues and her unborn child are weak plot lines comparing to that of Sarah's. Her everyday modern issues take away from the gravity of Sarah's tragic story and give the film a bit of a modern cinema cliché. Despite this the film is still very gripping with Kristin Scott Thomas putting on an astounding performance. Being 2/3rd in French it is a film you must pay attention to in fear of getting lost but it is a movie I recommend to all those interested in the holocaust and its connections to our modern world.