‘No Other Land’ and ‘October 8’: A Necessary Double Feature

The recently released films “No Other Land” and “October 8” are the latest of many documentaries that address issues related to the fraught topic of the impact of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Their respective screenings have transformed the box office into a cinematic ballot box. Each has become a hit with audiences on opposing sides of the aisle. All viewers should intentionally make time – and hold space – for both films. Ideally, theatres should screen them as a double feature to help increase empathy and understanding among all those who care about the Jewish and Palestinian causes.

“No Other Land” is the product of four collaborating Palestinian-Israeli activists and directors – Basel Adra, Hamdan Balal, Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor. Recorded between 2019 and 2023, the film depicts the destruction of Masafer Yatta, a Palestinian community in the occupied West Bank, which had been resisting forced displacement following the declaration of an Israeli “firing zone” on their land. The documentary borrows its name in part from the testimony of one Palestinian mother interviewed in the film. When considering where she would go if bulldozers were to destroy her home, she pleaded that she had “no other land.”

When “No Other Land” was awarded the Best Documentary Feature Film at the 97th Academy Awards, Israeli culture minister Mike Zohar denounced the Oscar win as a “sad moment for the world of cinema.”  Zohar further stated that “freedom of expression is an important value, but turning the defamation of Israel into a tool for international promotion is not art—it is sabotage against the State of Israel, especially in the wake of the October 7th massacre and the ongoing war”.  Not long afterward, on March 24, 2025, the film’s co-director Hamdan Ballal was attacked by Israeli settlers at his home in Susiya in the West Bank, and was left with head injuries. Israel Defense Forces soldiers then invaded the ambulance that was transporting Ballal and detained him for a day before releasing him.

In a parallel timeline, “October 8 – The Fight for the Soul of America”  premiered in theaters across America on March 14, 2025. Directed, written and produced by award-winning filmmaker Wendy Sachs, it powerfully unpacks how society arrived at this moment when Hamas is being celebrated as freedom fighters rather than condemned as terrorists on the most elite campuses and institutions in America. It details the explosion of antisemitism on college campuses, on social media and in the streets of America in the aftermath of the deadliest day for Jews since the Holocaust. The film illustrates how “anti-Israel sentiment came to a fever pitch in the immediate aftermath of the massacre”, and how this “morphed into antisemitism.” Featured interviews included October 7th survivors, students, politicians, and experts in extremism and Jihadism. The film explores the organization Students for Justice in Palestine, revealing that it has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas in America. The movie also describes how social media is being manipulated by foreign actors including Iran, China and Russia. Director Wendy Sachs stated that she intended for the film to show a non-Jewish audience “what antisemitism looks like today, for them to see, when they see a ‘Zionists not allowed’ sign, that means ‘Jew.’”

Let there be no doubt, antisemitism is all too real. I know this viscerally as a third-generation Holocaust survivor and as someone who experienced Jew-hatred while living in the Washington D.C. area. October 8 emphasizes the point that criticizing the government of Israel is not anti-semitism, while maintaining that stating Israel has no right to exist does qualify as such. (T’ruah: The Rabbinic Call for Human Rights offers a helpful guide to parse out legitimate critique of the Israeli state from actual antisemitic rhetoric.) As someone who as of this writing hovers around the label of a Progressive Zionist, I feel it is indeed possible to reconcile the need for a safe homeland for Jews with the necessity of holding that nation to the same fundamental human rights to which every nation should aspire. I continue to search for the most effective means of achieving these goals, but this is where the goalposts should lay.

I indeed have my disagreements with both “October 8” and “No Other Land” for each film’s omission of the opposing perspective; namely, for Israelis, the October 7th terrorist attacks, and for Palestinians, the trampling of their human rights. Just as “No Other Land” chose not to interview other Israelis to provide their perspective, “October 8” elected to omit the response to the October 7th terror attacks from such popular groups as Jewish Voice for Peace and other Jewish organizations that embrace an anti-Zionist or post-Zionist Jewish stance. There also is scant reference in “October 8” to the horrific slaughtering of innocent Gazans and of the prospect of their ethnic cleansing in the wake of that attack. This, as well,  is comparable to the fact that “No Other Land” neglects to mention the October 7th terrorist attack, including the slaughter of 1,200 and the kidnapping of 251 human beings. One cannot fault the filmmakers for these omissions, as it was arguably not the point of either film to illuminate all perspectives. Rather, that responsibility in my opinion falls to the viewer.

Despite these disagreements, I never would call for those films to be muted for these omissions, nor for any reason. Yet, tragically, many fraught protests have occurred ahead of the screening of both “October 8” and “No Other Land.” These protests have become so intense for “October 8” that it was forced to have a line item in its budget for security. Moreover, an NYPD counterterrorism FBI units an others detected chatter threatening the Jewish community around the film, which necessitated the use of metal detectors at some of its screenings . While individuals indeed have every right to express their opinions, it should not come at the expense of attempting to silence the other’s voice. Feelings on both sides matter. One should not strive to negate the other. Doing so only amplifies the blind spots that form in any absolutist camp. Rather than removing one of these voices, why not combine them to expose the viewer to the opposing position?

When considered jointly, these two films paint a much fuller portrait of the current plight that drives a wedge between and among Jews and non-Jews across the world. The reality of the barbarism of October 7th and the ongoing hostage crisis do not annul Israel’s massacre of Gazans in response. The decades of the Israeli government’s mistreatment of Palestinians does not expiate the global rise and genocidal legacy of antisemitism. The empathic activist can make space for both. This allows room for nuance and helps facilitate mutual empathy. It eliminates the false binary that one people’s suffering must cancel out the other’s. In an era when “Truth Social” trumps actual truth, exposure to the message of both films reminds the viewer that there are two sides to every story. Only by listening to and validating the feelings of the other can real healing and reconciliation begin.

I applaud the filmmakers of “October 8” and “No Other Land” for creating these important testaments to the truth and current zeitgeist they reveal. I implore viewers to heed them both…