The Reader, the movie
In this movie, an adaptation of B. Schlink's "Der Vorleser", middle aged German barrister Michael Berg (Ralph Fiennes) recollects to himself his lifelong acquaintance with Hanna Schmitz (Kate Winslett), a relationship with whom he never disclosed to anyone close to him. Michael first met Hanna in 1958, when he was fifteen, she thirty-six. The two had a turbulent summer long love affair, dictated by Hanna that their encounters would begin with him reading to her followed by lovemaking. Michael next encountered Hanna in 1966, when Michael, now a law student, attended the Nazi war crimes trial of five female former S.S. concentration camp guards, one of whom is Hanna. Through listening to the testimony, Michael comes to the realization that he is in possession of information which could save Hanna from a life in prison, information which she herself is unwilling to disclose. In deciding what to do, Michael is torn between his differing views of justice. [source: IMDB]
As for the themes the movie is very interesting indeed, and actually I've been thinking about it a lot. A thing BTW I've done many times concerning WW2 in terms of guilt, justice, forgiveness, love, hate, coming to terms with history (one's individual history and the one of a nation one's part of). It's a beautifully crafted film: very well directed, a great cast (particularly Kate Winslett and Ralph Fiennes) and lovely scenery of Berlin and surroundings.
The scenes taking place in the various decades are quite accurate (for as far as I can be the judge of the fifties, since I was so little still). All in all I was impressed, but oddly enough not particularly moved. You know how easily I let the tears flow. Not this time though. There are various reasons why the movie didn't get me in its grip 100% and those have to do with certain choices regarding direction, script and score.
The script: in my opinion there's way too much emphasis on the short affair of the boy with the elderly woman. In essence the story is about the effects the affair has (had) on the man in his later life, and that "later life" is paid way too little attention to. We all three agreed that the last part of the movie was the most interesting, but it only took too little time proportionally. It would have been enough for us to sketch this initiation in lovemaking of the boy instead of overplaying it, however sweet the love scenes were, it gets somewhat tedious and disturbs the continuation of the story. The effects of the affair, particularly the unexpected end, and the confrontation later in the court room have an immense effect on the man psychologically: even though a sensitive, intelligent sweet man, he cannot give himself anymore ever again totally to anyone, his marriage fails, the relationship with his parents is difficult, loving enough as he is, he doesn't know how to show it to his daughter etc, and the guilt feelings he's suffering from and still hasn't dealt with... Those facts could have been worked out in a much more interesting way but that doesn't happen. What does happen in those short minutes is brilliant acting by Ralph Fiennes, who in an amazingly restraint way shows us the inner conflicts of this particular character.
The direction: As I wrote, the movie is beautifully made, in that regard I can only rave! Absolutely fabulous, and one of the reasons why I think everybody should go see it. Film is about images, after all, isn't it. ;) I so had the urge to hop on the train and head for Berlin! :) What I definitely don't understand, is the choice for this young German actor, David Kross (and Bruno Ganz for that matter), amongst an English speaking cast. I'm not saying I didn't like his acting even though I wasn't particularly impressed. What I simply don't like in movies is when actors don't speak their own language. Why not an entire cast of native speakers? The complication in this case is the fact that David Kross didn't speak English at the moment he was cast for this movie, so getting rid of an accent was impossible. Because of this reason the director had Kate Winslett talk English with a Hollywood kind of "German" accent... And Bruno Ganz, one of the best actors in the world, was forced to speak English too. Irritating, sorry, I can't stand it. Strange thing: Ralph Fiennes simply spoke his well-known perfect English! That's inconsistent. Things like this, IMHO, make a serious subject ridiculous, and that bugs me. I would have preferred either an entire German cast or, since the situation is clearly German anyway, an entire cast of native speakers of English speaking their language in a normal way.
The score: awful. Way too "obtrusive" and often totally unnecessary. There were moments when I wanted to scream "Can someone put the music off for a minute, I want to concentrate on the story!"
Anyway, if details such as language and music would have been less irritating to my ears, and the story would have focused more on the adult life of Michael Berg, I'm sure I would have been deeply touched. However, apart from these criticisms I highly recommend this movie. It has many qualities and the theme definitely makes you think. And if that happens to me when watching a movie - or reading a book for that matter - the product is a success. :).
More information about the movie on imdb
As for the themes the movie is very interesting indeed, and actually I've been thinking about it a lot. A thing BTW I've done many times concerning WW2 in terms of guilt, justice, forgiveness, love, hate, coming to terms with history (one's individual history and the one of a nation one's part of). It's a beautifully crafted film: very well directed, a great cast (particularly Kate Winslett and Ralph Fiennes) and lovely scenery of Berlin and surroundings.
The scenes taking place in the various decades are quite accurate (for as far as I can be the judge of the fifties, since I was so little still). All in all I was impressed, but oddly enough not particularly moved. You know how easily I let the tears flow. Not this time though. There are various reasons why the movie didn't get me in its grip 100% and those have to do with certain choices regarding direction, script and score.
The script: in my opinion there's way too much emphasis on the short affair of the boy with the elderly woman. In essence the story is about the effects the affair has (had) on the man in his later life, and that "later life" is paid way too little attention to. We all three agreed that the last part of the movie was the most interesting, but it only took too little time proportionally. It would have been enough for us to sketch this initiation in lovemaking of the boy instead of overplaying it, however sweet the love scenes were, it gets somewhat tedious and disturbs the continuation of the story. The effects of the affair, particularly the unexpected end, and the confrontation later in the court room have an immense effect on the man psychologically: even though a sensitive, intelligent sweet man, he cannot give himself anymore ever again totally to anyone, his marriage fails, the relationship with his parents is difficult, loving enough as he is, he doesn't know how to show it to his daughter etc, and the guilt feelings he's suffering from and still hasn't dealt with... Those facts could have been worked out in a much more interesting way but that doesn't happen. What does happen in those short minutes is brilliant acting by Ralph Fiennes, who in an amazingly restraint way shows us the inner conflicts of this particular character.
The direction: As I wrote, the movie is beautifully made, in that regard I can only rave! Absolutely fabulous, and one of the reasons why I think everybody should go see it. Film is about images, after all, isn't it. ;) I so had the urge to hop on the train and head for Berlin! :) What I definitely don't understand, is the choice for this young German actor, David Kross (and Bruno Ganz for that matter), amongst an English speaking cast. I'm not saying I didn't like his acting even though I wasn't particularly impressed. What I simply don't like in movies is when actors don't speak their own language. Why not an entire cast of native speakers? The complication in this case is the fact that David Kross didn't speak English at the moment he was cast for this movie, so getting rid of an accent was impossible. Because of this reason the director had Kate Winslett talk English with a Hollywood kind of "German" accent... And Bruno Ganz, one of the best actors in the world, was forced to speak English too. Irritating, sorry, I can't stand it. Strange thing: Ralph Fiennes simply spoke his well-known perfect English! That's inconsistent. Things like this, IMHO, make a serious subject ridiculous, and that bugs me. I would have preferred either an entire German cast or, since the situation is clearly German anyway, an entire cast of native speakers of English speaking their language in a normal way.
The score: awful. Way too "obtrusive" and often totally unnecessary. There were moments when I wanted to scream "Can someone put the music off for a minute, I want to concentrate on the story!"
Anyway, if details such as language and music would have been less irritating to my ears, and the story would have focused more on the adult life of Michael Berg, I'm sure I would have been deeply touched. However, apart from these criticisms I highly recommend this movie. It has many qualities and the theme definitely makes you think. And if that happens to me when watching a movie - or reading a book for that matter - the product is a success. :).
More information about the movie on imdb