NAZA (2026)

The critic condemns the conduct depicted as devastating and damning. The review singles out the documentary’s account of Israeli military actions in Gaza.

The critic calls the documentary an essential, deeply unsettling account of the mechanics of genocide. They praise its shadowy rooftop interviews and striking visual form for illuminating the subjects’ contradictions and banal evils.

Ebiri calls the documentary a bombshell and an essential, deeply unsettling account of systematic violence. He praises its spare, artful visual approach, especially the contrast between Tel Aviv’s ordinary nighttime life and Gaza’s devastation.

Mintzer calls the film a brave, indispensable act of bearing witness, though its accounts of mass killing leave a sense of despair. He praises its sober, thoroughly documented interviews with IDF intelligence officers, which expose the systems and attitudes behind the killings.

Brody regards the documentary as a powerful artistic and moral achievement. He praises its restrained visual form and the way its interviews turn testimony into an act of witness.

Friedberg calls the documentary an overwhelming and vital work of investigative journalism. He praises its chilling portrayal of how Israeli military systems and personnel enable mass killing in Gaza.

The review presents the documentary as urgent and wrenching, with a gut-punch impact. It singles out the interviews with Israeli operatives about their actions in Gaza.

The critic calls the documentary essential and devastating, presenting it as an unflinching account that challenges denial and silence. They praise its precise, focused interviews for exposing the procedures and thinking behind the killings.

The critic finds NAZA a sobering, effective indictment of systemic violence and the technology enabling it. She singles out the hidden operators’ firsthand testimony for making the human decisions behind the devastation unmistakable.

Ross finds the documentary damning and effective, though it is less sure-footed when distinguishing itself from the filmmakers’ journalism. She singles out the stark contrast between the concealed perpetrators’ accounts and the victims’ eventual appearance on screen.

Bradshaw finds the documentary disquieting and effective at bringing the anguish of Gaza into sharp focus, despite reservations about the anonymity of its sources. He singles out the shadowy rooftop interviews and images of Tel Aviv’s prosperous life as a chilling contrast.

Wilkinson calls the documentary compelling, devastating and essential viewing. She singles out its systematic, sobering testimony and detail about how military targeting systems dehumanise and endanger civilians.

The critic finds NAZA a morally alarming, deeply unsettling indictment of Israeli military policy. They praise its stark rooftop imagery for implicating ordinary city life in the film’s account of collateral damage.

Carey presents the documentary as a devastating and urgent investigation into alleged Israeli military practices in Gaza. He singles out its anonymous soldiers’ testimonies and the film’s quieter scenes for deepening its critique.

The critic finds the documentary a chilling, compelling account of Israel’s war machine, though one visual device falls flat. They praise its measured pacing and methodical use of insiders’ testimony to expose surveillance and automated targeting.