Los Angeles, California – Executive producer and co-financier Danny Cohen of “The Zone of Interest” has publicly criticized director Jonathan Glazer’s 2024 Oscars acceptance speech, while still commending the film as a “great piece of art.”
During a recent podcast interview, Cohen expressed understanding towards those who were upset and angered by Glazer’s speech, which addressed both the film and the ongoing Israel-Hamas conflict. Glazer’s speech, delivered upon accepting the Academy Award for best international film, sparked controversy for its intertwining of the Holocaust narrative with current geopolitics.
Cohen emphasized the importance of separating the film’s historical storytelling from the context of present-day conflicts in the Middle East. While acknowledging the film’s significance in Holocaust education, he lamented the confusion caused by Glazer’s remarks in light of the political sensitivities surrounding Israel and Gaza.
Furthermore, Cohen revealed that Glazer did not seek his input or approval regarding the content of his acceptance speech, indicating that directors have autonomy in such matters. This lack of consultation left Cohen at odds with Glazer’s public stance on the Israel-Gaza conflict, which he believes oversimplified a complex and deeply entrenched geopolitical issue.
The film’s other producers, including James Wilson and Len Blavatnik, distanced themselves from Glazer’s speech, further highlighting the internal discord within the production team. Despite the artistic merit of the film, tensions surrounding the politicization of its themes threatened to overshadow its creative achievements.
Cohen’s unwavering support for Israel, amid escalating violence in Gaza, underscored the personal and political stakes involved in the controversy. He criticized Hamas for its role in perpetuating the conflict and lamented the loss of civilian life as a tragic consequence of the ongoing hostilities.
In conclusion, Cohen argued that the timing and platform chosen by Glazer to express his views were ill-suited, detracting from the film’s artistic merits. While acknowledging the director’s right to free expression, Cohen emphasized the primacy of allowing the film itself to speak for its message, rather than relying on fleeting soundbites or controversial speeches.