In its response, the IDF said it had never authorised a strike that could involve civilian casualties of anywhere close to that number.
The IDF also said AI had never independently selected targets and that “Lavender”, the AI system cited in the documentary, was an intelligence-analysis database, not a list of targets approved for attack.
The IDF also denied that strikes were authorised using fixed civilian-casualty estimates such as 20 civilians for a junior Hamas operative and 200 for a senior commander, as the film had claimed.
The film premiered on September 10 at the Venice Film Festival, receiving the event’s longest-ever standing ovation at 25 minutes, but will have its first UK screenings on Friday.
.jpeg?f=3x2&w=732&q=0.6)
An advert sent out to customers of ODEON for the anti-IDF film NAZA (Image: JC)[Missing Credit]
Odeon, which is showing the documentary, sent out an email advert to customers, which read: “Shot at night on the rooftops of Tel Aviv, Naza offers an unflinching look at the systems behind Israel's calculated mass killing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza.
“This immense new project comes from Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor, two of the Oscar-winning directors of No Other Land, and received a record-breaking 25-minute standing ovation at the 83rd Venice International Film Festival.”
It has not been confirmed whether the caption was written by Odeon or the film’s promotional team.
But one recipient of the email has criticised the cinema chain for its failure to include the fact that almost every aspect of the documentary has been disputed by the IDF.
In an email seen by the JC, she wrote: “Dear Odeon team, thank you for your recent email promoting the preview screening of Naza.
“I’m a monthly Unlimited member, and I was dismayed by how the film is described. The opening paragraph states, in Odeon’s own voice, that the film shows ‘Israel’s calculated mass killing of Palestinian civilians in Gaza’. That is the filmmakers’ contention, not an established fact.
“The IDF has publicly rejected the film’s central allegations and questioned its reliance on anonymous sources, and Odeon’s wording gives customers no hint that any of this is disputed.
“I have no objection to you promoting the film. But there’s a real difference between promoting a film and asserting its claims as fact, and the second is not something a cinema chain should do on a subject this sensitive. Wording such as ‘the filmmakers allege’ would have been entirely appropriate.
“I’d ask that you amend the wording of this email if it is still being circulated, and that future marketing for politically sensitive films attribute claims to the filmmakers rather than presenting them as fact. I’d also welcome a reply explaining how this email was approved.”
The JC understands the customer is yet to receive a reply and Odeon did not respond when contacted for comment.
In its 10-page rebuttal of the film’s claims, the IDF said: “The process [of target selection] is not the responsibility of intelligence, but of operational bodies that manage and carry out targeting processes. Accordingly, it is apparent that in various cases interviewees raise speculation and assumptions without a factual basis.”
The IDF also accused the filmmakers of not including “many of the other individuals involved in the full targeting process,” such as those “responsible for planning that mitigates civilian harm, legal advisers who review proposed strikes, and commanders responsible for approving or rejecting them”.
“To fit the narrative the film seeks to promote, the filmmakers also omit context essential to understanding the war in Gaza and the IDF’s conduct during it,” it went on.
This included Hamas’ deliberate strategy of embedding itself in civilian areas, the army added.
