Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor’s documentary NAZA is drawing audiences across North America while becoming the centre of a growing political and legal dispute. What began as an investigation into Israeli military targeting practices in Gaza has developed into a wider debate about civilian casualties, artificial intelligence in warfare, investigative journalism and the protection of confidential sources.
As the film expands into cinemas, its allegations face a detailed rebuttal from the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), protests at US screenings and a demand from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for an investigation into the people interviewed anonymously. The controversy now extends well beyond the screen.
NAZA Documentary Box Office: More Than $500,000 in North America
NAZA has surpassed an estimated $500,000 in domestic box office earnings after expanding to 85 North American locations across 30 cities in the United States and Canada.
According to The Hollywood Reporter, the documentary generated an estimated $378,250 over its second four-day weekend. Its projected cumulative domestic total reached $504,074 by Monday, October 12, 2026.
The figures remain estimates rather than finalised box office accounts. Nevertheless, the result marks a notable milestone for a politically contentious documentary released in the United States without a conventional theatrical distributor.
The film initially opened at New York City’s IFC Center before reaching additional cinemas. Its growing release has benefited from festival recognition, press coverage, participating cinemas and word-of-mouth, although box office figures alone cannot establish which factors contributed most to ticket sales.
The Guardian produced the documentary through its documentary operation, while JW Films is also credited in the official Venice festival production information. MK2 Films handles international sales. The absence of a conventional US theatrical distributor therefore does not mean the production lacks institutional backing or international distribution support.
The film’s commercial performance also needs context. Production costs, distribution expenses, theatre revenue shares and other financial details have not been fully disclosed, so its gross earnings cannot establish whether the documentary has made a profit.
For Movie Fans
Pedro Pascal’s Behemoth! has earned early praise as Tony Gilroy returns after 14 years with what the coverage describes as his most personal film. Dive deeper with our Pedro Pascal Behemoth Tony Gilroy film coverage.
From the Venice Film Festival to International Attention
The documentary’s growing theatrical audience follows its premiere at the 83rd Venice International Film Festival, held from September 2 to 12, 2026.
On September 12, NAZA won the festival’s Special Jury Prize. Its screening also received an exceptionally long standing ovation, reported at approximately 24 to 25 minutes. The Guardian described the reception as a record-setting response at the festival, although reports differ slightly on its precise duration.
The award and reception helped bring international attention to the film before its North American expansion.
In his review for The Hollywood Reporter, critic Jordan Mintzer described it as a “sober and thoroughly documented bombshell of an exposé.”
Rotten Tomatoes listed the documentary with a 100% critics score in coverage of its US release. That figure reflects the proportion of counted reviews classified as positive at the time of checking; it does not mean every critic reviewed the film or that its allegations have all been independently established.
The filmmakers previously worked on No Other Land, which examines Palestinian communities facing displacement in the occupied West Bank. That documentary won the Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature at the 2025 Oscars. Abraham and Szor shared its directing credit with Palestinian filmmakers Basel Adra and Hamdan Ballal.
The two films address different subjects. No Other Land focuses on displacement in the West Bank, while NAZA investigates military systems and decision-making during Israel’s campaign in Gaza following the Hamas-led attacks of October 7, 2023.
Jonathan Glazer, the Oscar-winning director of The Zone of Interest, served as an executive producer on NAZA. James Wilson was among its producers.
What NAZA Reveals About Israeli Military Targeting in Gaza
Running for 80 minutes, NAZA was filmed at night on rooftops in Tel Aviv. It features 24 Israeli military and intelligence personnel who agreed to speak anonymously, with their faces and voices altered to protect their identities.
The documentary examines how surveillance, intelligence databases and artificial intelligence-assisted tools have been used to identify suspected Hamas militants and support targeting decisions in Gaza. Through the interviewees’ accounts, it explores how potential targets are identified, how information is processed and how anticipated civilian casualties are considered during operational planning.
The film’s title comes from the Hebrew military acronym Nezek Agavi, used to describe the expected number of civilian casualties associated with an airstrike. The documentary argues that this terminology reflects a system in which anticipated civilian harm can be incorporated into targeting calculations.
Its investigation builds on reporting published between 2023 and 2025 by The Guardian, +972 Magazine and Local Call, an Israeli-Palestinian publication. Those investigations examined intelligence systems, target identification procedures and accounts from people familiar with Israel’s military operations in Gaza.
The Guardian has reported that its journalistic investigation involved more than 100 sources familiar with the military systems used during the war. The documentary itself features 24 interviewees. These numbers refer to different parts of the reporting process.
According to The Guardian, the investigation drew on leaked classified documents, verification of specific strikes and corroboration from other confidential sources who did not appear on camera. The publication has defended its methods for assessing the interviewees’ credibility.
The documentary presents accounts concerning the use of AI-assisted systems, the authorisation of strikes expected to cause substantial civilian casualties, the destruction of residential areas and the treatment of Gaza’s civilian population. It questions whether some decisions were consistent with international humanitarian law and the obligation to distinguish civilians from combatants.
These are allegations presented through the documentary and its underlying reporting. Anonymous testimony, even when supported by other evidence, does not automatically establish every claim in every specific case. The accuracy and significance of individual accounts depend on their context, corroboration and the evidence available for independent examination.
IDF Rejects NAZA’s Allegations in Detailed Rebuttal
On October 1, 2026, the IDF published a detailed response to the documentary, strongly disputing its conclusions.
The military described the film as a “distorted, misleading and disingenuous picture of the IDF’s target planning and striking process.”
The IDF argued that the documentary contains substantial factual errors, misrepresents anonymous interviewees and omits important context. It said the participants generally described limited or initial stages of targeting, rather than the broader process involving additional intelligence assessments and operational decisions.
The military also accused the filmmakers of manipulating interviews through editing and attributing malicious intentions to the IDF without sufficient evidence.
One major point of disagreement concerns the documentary’s account of strikes expected to cause very high civilian casualties. The IDF said it had never planned, approved or carried out a strike expected to kill approximately 500 civilians, as alleged in the film.
It also disputed the portrayal of artificial intelligence, maintaining that AI did not determine whether a person or object was designated as a target. According to the military, human personnel and established procedures remained central to targeting decisions.
The Guardian rejected the suggestion that its interviewees had knowledge limited to preliminary stages. It said its sources included personnel involved in intelligence, operations and final authorisation, and defended the investigation’s verification methods, citing documentary evidence and corroboration from confidential sources.
Neither account, by itself, resolves every disputed question. The IDF’s rebuttal does not automatically disprove all the documentary’s allegations, just as the interviews do not independently settle every factual issue.
International humanitarian law governs matters including distinction, proportionality and precautions in attack. Whether a particular strike violated those rules depends on the facts and circumstances of that attack.
Netanyahu Demands Investigation Into NAZA’s Anonymous Sources
The controversy intensified on October 12, when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called for an investigation into the documentary’s 24 anonymous military and intelligence interviewees and urged authorities to pursue possible prosecutions.
According to reporting by The Guardian and Al Jazeera, Netanyahu sent a letter to Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara, IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Eyal Zamir and Shin Bet director David Zini.
The letter called for an investigation and possible prosecution over alleged information-security violations, criminal defamation and damage to Israel’s diplomatic and security interests.
The demand widened the dispute from a disagreement over military targeting practices to questions about the legal exposure of people who provided confidential testimony.
However, a demand for an investigation is not a criminal charge or a conviction. Netanyahu’s request does not establish that any interviewee committed an offence. Any prosecution would depend on the evidence, applicable law and decisions by the relevant legal authorities.
The Guardian reported that military legal authorities indicated criminal prosecution would require evidence of a violation, such as the unauthorised disclosure of classified information. Other conduct could be considered through separate legal or disciplinary processes, depending on the circumstances.
The case raises questions about confidential journalistic sources. Anonymity can enable people to discuss matters of public interest when they fear professional, legal or personal repercussions. It does not automatically exempt a source from laws governing classified information or other legal obligations.
The reported letter did not establish that the filmmakers or interviewees had been charged with crimes.
Earlier Threats Against the Filmmakers
The investigation demand followed weeks of political backlash against Abraham and Szor.
In September, Netanyahu and other Israeli political figures called for the filmmakers’ Israeli citizenship to be revoked, accusing them of damaging Israel’s reputation and presenting its military in a misleading or hostile manner.
Culture Minister Miki Zohar also threatened to pursue citizenship revocation under a law permitting such action in certain circumstances involving a breach of allegiance to the state. Calls for revocation do not mean citizenship has been withdrawn. Reporting available as of October 12 did not establish that either director had been formally charged in connection with the documentary.
The Guardian also reported that right-wing activists gathered outside Szor’s parents’ home in September, where protesters reportedly used threatening language and demanded severe punishment for the filmmakers.
On September 15, the Committee to Protect Journalists condemned threats against Abraham and Szor. Its regional director, Sara Qudah, warned against treating such threats as merely political rhetoric.
The accuracy of the film’s allegations, the legality of any disclosures by sources and the legitimacy of threats against journalists are separate questions.
Protests at US Screenings as NAZA Expands
The film’s American release has prompted organised demonstrations.
On Friday, October 9, the Israeli-American Council organised a protest outside the Laemmle NoHo 7 theatre in North Hollywood, California, where NAZA was screening.
IAC chief operating officer Aya Shechter defended the demonstration in a statement:
“Our message is clear: Wherever lies are told about Israel, we will show up with the truth.”
The organisation had also arranged protests during the documentary’s New York Film Festival premiere in September.
The demonstrations reflect opposition to the film’s portrayal of Israeli military operations and its allegations concerning civilian casualties. Supporters see the documentary as an examination of military accountability and civilian protection, while opponents argue that it misrepresents military procedures and operational context.
The protests have accompanied the documentary’s expansion into additional cinemas, but the available box office figures cannot establish whether demonstrations increased or reduced audience demand. Festival recognition, reviews, publicity, bookings and word-of-mouth may all influence ticket sales.
IDF-Backed Counter-Documentary Challenges NAZA
The disagreement has also moved into documentary filmmaking itself.
The IDF backed a separate 49-minute production, NAZA: The Real Story, designed to counter the allegations in Abraham and Szor’s film. Released in September with English subtitles, it features interviews with senior military commanders and intelligence officers who served in Gaza.
The production argues that Hamas operated among civilian populations and maintains that Israeli forces followed military procedures and rules of engagement. It presents military testimony, photographs and footage in support of its account.
The counter-documentary was directed by Lt. Col. Roi Danino, Hagai Gutman and Ariel Averbuch.
Its existence illustrates the competing interpretations surrounding military targeting, civilian harm and the use of technology in Gaza. As with NAZA, the counter-documentary’s claims must be assessed according to the evidence supporting them, the reliability of its sources and the context of the events described. Its release does not, by itself, resolve the factual dispute.
NAZA’s International Release Plans and November Online Premiere
Beyond North America, NAZA has also attracted audiences in Italy. It opened in Italian cinemas on September 28 through I Wonder Pictures.
Brussels Signal reported on October 12 that the film had earned approximately €1.1 million in its first days of release. The publication compared that result with approximately €356,000 earned over the same period by the re-release of Avengers: Endgame: Encore. These Italian figures concern a separate market and should not be added to the US domestic total.
The Guardian has announced plans for the documentary to reach more than 50 territories, with further theatrical bookings expected in the coming weeks. MK2 Films handles its international sales.
A free online release on The Guardian’s website is planned for November 2026, potentially making the film accessible to viewers unable to attend cinema screenings. Its eventual reach will depend on availability, regional restrictions and audience interest.
Into More Documentary Stories?
Alex Gibney’s documentary Musk explores Elon Musk’s rise to power, and the coverage notes a legal threat surrounding it. Explore our Elon Musk documentary Alex Gibney Musk report for more on the film.
Conclusion: What Happens Next for NAZA?
NAZA has crossed an estimated $500,000 in North American box office earnings while winning a major Venice festival award and attracting international attention. At the same time, its allegations about Israeli military targeting in Gaza remain sharply disputed by the IDF.
Netanyahu’s demand for an investigation has added a legal and political dimension, but it does not establish criminal wrongdoing by the documentary’s anonymous sources. Protests, earlier threats against the filmmakers and the release of an IDF-backed counter-documentary demonstrate how far the dispute has extended beyond cinema.
With an international rollout planned across more than 50 territories and a free online release expected in November, the film is set to reach a wider audience. Its reception will continue to unfold alongside unresolved questions about civilian protection, military technology, confidential sources and the evidence behind competing accounts.
Source disclaimer: This article has been prepared from the sources listed below and the information available in the supplied research material as of October 12, 2026. Box office figures are identified as estimates where applicable, and disputed claims are attributed to the relevant parties. The article does not imply independent verification of allegations beyond what the cited material supports.
Sources
- The Hollywood Reporter: ‘NAZA’ Surpasses $500K Without Distributor After Sparking Protests
- TheWrap: ‘NAZA’ Crosses $500,000 at the Indie Box Office Without a Distributor
- The Guardian: Netanyahu Orders Identification and Prosecution of ‘NAZA’ Interviewees
- Al Jazeera: Netanyahu Demands Probe Into Sources for Award-Winning Gaza Film ‘NAZA’
- The Guardian: Global Release Announced for Acclaimed Gaza Documentary ‘NAZA’
- The Guardian: ‘NAZA’ Production and Investigative Reporting Background
- Venice International Film Festival: Official ‘NAZA’ Film Details and Directors’ Statement
- Venice International Film Festival: Official Awards of the 83rd Festival
- Israel Defense Forces: Official Response to the Film ‘NAZA’
- Jewish Telegraphic Agency: IDF Claims ‘Fundamental Errors’ in Its Detailed Response to ‘NAZA’
- Associated Press: Israeli Documentary ‘NAZA’ Opens in the U.S., Reigniting Debate Over the War in Gaza
- Brussels Signal: Netanyahu Calls for Criminal Investigation Into Sources Behind ‘NAZA’
Featured Image Credit: The Guardian / JW Films
Leave a Reply