Ovation or Ballistic Missiles: The Schism of ’NAZA’

What about the documentary “NAZA” (2026) earned it a record-breaking 25-minute standing ovation at the Venice Film Festival and a comparison to “launching dozens of ballistic missiles” at Israel by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu?

The film’s subject matter and its reactions reflect one of today’s most divisive issues: the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. In this article, I introduce the film and its global reception, and I ask you to remain discerning in our polarized, propaganda-filled society.

The term “Naza” is derived from “Nezek Agavi,” a Hebrew acronym meaning “collateral damage.” Israeli filmmakers Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor produced the documentary with The Guardian to investigate Israel’s alleged acceptance of civilian collateral damage in Gaza, as well as the Israel Defense Forces’ (IDF) alleged systematic use of artificial intelligence in the region.

To avoid spoilers while still reading about the polarized reactions to “NAZA,” please skip to the second subheading.

NAZA Overview: Rooftop Interviews and Daily Bustle

What follows is the film’s account, built on anonymous testimony.

“NAZA” opens by acquainting the audience with its subject matter — the Israeli surveillance of Palestinians and air strikes in Gaza — and introducing its form: a collage of interviews Abraham conducted with 24 anonymous Israeli military and intelligence personnel, interwoven with snippets of archival, media, and live city footage. 

The interviews take place on the rooftops of high-rises in Tel Aviv, often with only the silhouettes of Abraham and the officers visible. The interviewees’ voices and faces are digitally altered to preserve their anonymity. Cuts are made between the rooftop interviews and views of the metropolis: civilians’ silhouettes in their comfortable apartments, bustling streets, billboards, and televisions broadcasting speeches by Israeli officials. 

The juxtaposition of ordinary urban life with the officers’ accounts of what they call collateral damage reinforces both their authority and their disconnect from society — they can see the city, but the city cannot see them.

Abraham’s neutral voice, however, fails to instill a similar indifference in the audience. He often lets long pauses linger after the officers make unsettling statements, leaving the viewer feeling emptier and emptier.

The Oct. 7 attacks in 2023 set the stage for the officers’ accounts, fueling sentiments that “there are no innocent people in Gaza” and their characterization of Gaza as “a factory of targets.” The film then introduces “Lavender,” which it presents as an AI-assisted targeting system that identifies suspected Hamas operatives through mobile phone data. 

The film then describes the IDF’s military tactics: algorithms that gather digital data to learn the routines of suspected Hamas officers, followed by the bombing of their private homes at night. An interviewee recalls hacking into a 12-year-old girl’s phone to view her correspondence with her father, a suspected officer. According to his account, both were killed when the father returned. The film also claims that, in one instance, officials approved the killing of 500 “Naza” for a single target.

These IDF officers answer questions impassively. One remarks, with insouciance, “the targets were like a video game because everything was done remotely.”

The film then turns to the IDF’s destructive practices in Gaza. According to one interviewee, the prevailing mindset was to destroy as much as possible, as quickly as possible, before Israel lost international legitimacy. The officers explain that they risked being fired if they voiced moral objections and that their jobs were purely technical.

Another interviewee recalls asking as a child how Nazis could live with themselves after the Holocaust, believing they were pure evil. Now, having taken part in the horrific operations he describes, he finds himself asking the same question about his own actions. Yet another interviewee asserts that the IDF’s actions in Gaza are a genocide and that he participated in it. 

The film eventually pivots toward politics and “Bibi’s Department,” a covert intelligence unit portrayed as the “department above all other departments.” According to the documentary, the unit monitors connections between Palestinians and international politicians and collects intelligence for the Prime Minister. Its ultimate goal is to prevent a Palestinian state, thwart peace, and preserve normal life in Israel. 

Acclaim, Condemnation, Everything in Between

At its world premiere at the 83rd Venice International Film Festival, “NAZA” received the Special Jury Prize. The 25-minute standing ovation from the international audience was the longest in festival history. Since then, the documentary has received accolades at various film festivals and secured theatrical releases in an increasing number of countries. The Guardian plans to stream the documentary for free, globally, on its website in late November.

On Sept. 14, Israeli Minister of Culture and Sports Miki Zohar called for the revocation of Abraham’s and Szor’s citizenship, branding their film as “treason.” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also attacked the film on Sept. 25, comparing it to “launching dozens of ballistic missiles” at Israel.

On Oct. 1, the IDF issued a 10-page official response, describing “NAZA” as “distorted, misleading, and disingenuous” and denying claims about autonomous AI targeting algorithms and thresholds of hundreds of civilian casualties. The rebuttal also claims that Abraham and Szor never sought the IDF’s comment before the film’s release or provided a copy when requested. On Oct. 11, Netanyahu called on senior officials to investigate the 24 anonymous interviewees for spreading false and classified information. He also threatened to reveal their identities. 

Meanwhile, “NAZA: The Real Story,” a counter-documentary, was released online with official Israeli governmental support. It was filmed by Lieutenant Colonel Roi Danino, Ariel Averbuch, an Israeli attorney and army reservist, and filmmaker Hagay Gutman. The 48-minute film centers on the IDF’s efforts to mitigate civilian casualties in its conflict with Hamas. The head of Israel’s National Public Diplomacy Directorate, Tzipi Hotovely, presented the counter-film’s three makers with a Certificate of Recognition. The film has also been sponsored by the Israeli Embassy to the U.S.

Israeli public opinion isn’t uniform. By Sept. 15, over 1,500 Israeli filmmakers signed an online petition defending Abraham’s and Szor’s freedom of speech. On the other side, far-right protesters staged demonstrations outside the home of Szor’s parents, demanding that she face the death penalty. A mural was painted in the Israeli city of Ashdod depicting Abraham and Szor targeted through the crosshairs of a gun sniper sight, which was later altered with labels of “heroes.” 

The film has also drawn mixed reactions abroad. Pro-Israel groups in the U.S., led by the Israeli American Council, have rallied against the screenings of the film in several states.

On Oct. 1, the same day the 10-page IDF response was released, The Guardian published a statement defending the documentary’s reporting, noting that the filmmakers spent three years verifying the evidence, corroborating it with leaked classified documents, and interviewing over 100 sources.

The two filmmakers continue to face backlash and said they are temporarily staying outside Israel on the advice of their loved ones.

See the Whole City, Look at All the Evidence

“NAZA” is more of a mirror than a window into the Israel-Hamas War. Many viewers enter the theater already convinced of what they believe, firmly attached to their preconceptions. The film merely reflects their division. Applause isn’t evidence. Neither is outrage. Neither are the producers’ assurances that their research is sound. Discernment uncomfortably resides between these competing voices: placing testimony on one side, rebuttal on the other, and thinking for yourself.

When the film streams in late November, I invite you to watch it and the counter-documentary, and to read the IDF’s response and The Guardian’s statement. Abraham and the officers could see the whole city from the rooftop. You can, at least, look at all the evidence.