I used to think Schindler’s List a beautiful movie. It’s a story of a man who is, fundamentally, an outlaw. He has little allegiance to the society around him; he is immune to the moral zeitgeist of the time; obeying the law is a matter of practicality, not conscience. He wishes to run a business, but his talent isn’t business, but -schmoozing- networking. He’s nice, in a superficial way, while also not really caring. To be clear, he’s not an outlaw in the “principled rebel” way. He’s a sleaze.

Schindler sees [1] a genuine business opportunity. The Nazis have neglected a valuable workforce. Schindler threads the necessary needles and puts that population to work. They don’t really need to be paid, and Schindler builds a rather profitable business. As he does, he comes to identify with the source of his profit. He realizes the good he has done, and comes to value the good itself more than what led him to it. But we should not forget: what led him to it was a sort of societal sin. He is a criminal. His was a criminal act, not performed for an ideology, but for personal profit.

Schindler saved thousands of lives. Schindler broke the law for personal profit. These are not contradictory parts of a complex man: they are descriptions of the same act. This isn’t a murderer who saves a little girl from an oncoming train, it’s a story of one decision, which is at once a sin and a mitzvah.

That is the essence of the story. It’s beautiful. But rewatching the movie much later, I can’t help but think that I was so focused on the story of Schindler that I missed the substance of the movie. A movie has a story, but also has themes, characterization, and so on. A beautiful story can be told by an ugly movie.

The movie begins, and we meet Oskar. Schindler is calculating, Schindler is greedy. He covets money, he covets gold. He is cunning, certainly, he is also well connected, particularly to other semi-criminal businessmen. He is immune to the demands of his nation, he serves only himself and his bank account. One suspects international connections; at least he is unappreciative of the distinction between a man of one nation (Oskar, a German) and a man of another (Itzhak, a Jew). He is exploitative&emdash;the whole movie is about his exploitation! He is manipulative&emdash;the whole movie is enabled by his manipulation! He lacks compassion. In short he conforms to a very particular stereotype.

But it’s a movie! Schindler’s character develops. His pleas to his friends to join him don’t appeal to their thirst for money (with which he can no longer fully sympathize): “Come on, I know about the extra food and clothes you give them…”. He views gold as unvaluable: “this is gold! Two more people; they would have given me two for it”. He is self-sacrificing. He even teaches Amon Göth to appreciate that central Christian virtue, forgiveness. “Amon the Good… I pardon you”.

In short, he has adopted Christian values, become a true Christian. It’s a movie, it had to be so. Adopting Christian values is the only path to redemption for someone like him.

[1] Well, in real life, Stern tells him. Let’s not add “business acumen” to the already short list of Schindler’s apparent virtues. But for the consequences of his actions, I’m sure we would consider Schindler a man with no redeeming qualities.