I am writing this review on Oscar Nomination morning (although due to the fact that I refuse to post a review until the DVD has dropped you will be reading this much later) mostly due to my elation that it has been nominated for not only the marvelous performance by Kate Winslet (in the right category mind you) but also for Best Picture, Best Director and Adapted Screenplay. I've been chomping at the bit to write this review ever since I walked out of the theater a few weeks back, and since then I've seen the film a record three times and I would watch it again right now if I could. I've pondered this film, discussed this film, relived this film and can honestly label it the best film of the year and quite possibly one of the best films I've seen in a long time.Sure, you can be quick to pinpoint it's supposed faults, and you can try and label it something that it is not, but if you allow your eyes to open and your mind to absorb you may be able to see this for what it really is; a masterpiece.
When sitting down to write this review I asked my friend how I was going to be able to do so without being redundant or irritating. I mean, how many different ways can you say masterpiece before someone says "I get the point, now move on"? I'm going to try and get all that out of the way right now so that my review will be palatable.
`The Reader' is a masterpiece.
Okay, I'm done now.
Having read Bernhard Schlink's beautiful novel I was really anticipating this film. I feel that Kate Winslet is the finest working actress today and this just seemed like such an ideal role for her (Oscar, if you pass her over this year I vow to never watch another telecast). I of course try and shrug off all `high expectations', and thankfully with `The Reader' there was no hype. It hasn't been hailed as the best of anything, and while it has landed on a few top ten lists it rarely breaks close to the top. The reviews have been mixed, some raving it as a masterpiece, some labeling it a faux; an imitation of a more insightful film. The only awards the film has garnered up until the point have been for Winslet so walking into the film, I was not feeding into hype.
I was simply hoping to see a good movie.
The film tells the story of Michael Berg, a young fifteen year old boy living in Post-WWII Germany. One day while making his way home he falls ill and is helped back by an older woman named Hanna. After waiting out his illness he attempts to thank Hanna but he winds up falling into a steamy affair. The two bond over books, using reading as a form of foreplay, and the two become almost inseparable. Then for no apparent reason Hanna leaves town without a word and Michael is left wondering why his only love has left him. Years later while Michael is attending law school he gets the opportunity to sit in on a trial being held over war crimes and is stunned, and ultimately heartbroken, to see Hanna is one of the accused.
First and foremost it should be addressed that this is not your typical Holocaust film, for quite frankly the Holocaust is the least impressionable part of this film. The film, like the novel, deals strongly with the feelings of guilt and redemption. There is a moral play that runs throughout each scene that begs the audience to cast judgment, but not in an absolute way but in a more complex and understanding way. `The Reader' has no easy answers, but it throws at the audience a bit of a conundrum. It reminds me very much of `Dead Man Walking', a film that appears to have such an easy answer yet causes you to rip apart your own ideals.
I am keeping SPOILERS to a minimum here, but be forewarned that there may be a few.
When we meet Michael and Hanna they seem like an odd match. He is obviously better off financially than she is. He is attending school and is doing rather well. Hanna is working a dead end job and living in a small apartment. Her education is limited but her yearning for more is apparent. There is an attraction physically, which cannot be denied. While Hanna is rough due to the nature of her life she is a diamond in the rough, a beautiful woman trapped within the shell of her former life. Michael is young and coming into his own; a handsome boy with a head on his shoulders.
There's innocence within him that Hanna desires.
Their relationship is very fast and very graphic, but there is a sincerity there that one needs to truly look for. Some have complained that the relationship was pure surface; nothing but lust. They are missing something crucial. `The Reader' is a film filled with quiet moments that speak volumes about the characters. There is a deeper connection between these two souls, one that maybe they can't even recognize. There is a moment where Hanna finds herself inside a small church listening to a young choir and the tears are streaming down her face, and as Michael watches her from the doorway we can see it; even if he or even she doesn't truly understand it.
It is there.
As the film progresses and the two are separated we begin to truly see the deeper connection that they are feeling for the first time. As the trial proceeds Michael is caught between his own feelings of right and wrong; between what is ethical and what is not. He is disturbed by the revelations concerning his former love; distraught over what this means for him and whether or not it had anything to do with his personal attachment to this woman.
Can he bring himself to hate her? Can he bring himself to forgive her? Does she deserve that hatred or that forgiveness?
There is a moment when Michael is attempting to visit Hanna in prison when everything makes sense; his eyes swelling with an emotion he has yet to fully realize. He struggles to convince himself that he hates this woman, because hating her would make it easier to forget her.
`The Reader' is a masterfully crafted tale of love and loss; of what we tell ourselves in order to better understand something we haven't the capacity to grasp. There is the shame in Hanna's eyes as she hides her secret (one that you no doubt had guessed long before it was revealed, but the revealing of the secret is not really the point of the story), willing to sacrifice her very life so as not to be downgraded or looked down on. There is the guilt in Michael's eyes as he blames himself for Hanna's fate, unable to step outside his skin long enough to decide the correct course to case. This is a story about mistakes and missteps and regrets and the ultimate loss that comes from not fully understanding how to feel.
Technically, this is a flawless film. I remember reviewing `...Jesse James...' last year (this site still won't let me type in that full name) and going on and on about how technically perfect it was, from the cinematography to the score to the lighting to the mood to just about everything. `The Reader' is the exact opposite in scope yet just as profound. It is a much subtler film, and so the score, the lighting, the cinematography and the set designs are smaller, yet just as pristine. Everything is so crisp and delicate; adding layers to the mood perfectly presented by director Stephen Daldry. I was a little hesitant about Daldry's ability to transfer Schlink's novel to the big screen. I loved `Billy Elliott' and continue to love it more and more every time I watch it, but Daldry's latest effort was that 2002 debacle `The Hours' and so I was truly afraid that he was going to run the same gamut and deliver a similar piece.
`The Reader' is not only much more profound and poignant, but it is also executed much better than `The Hours' (to be fair, I need to watch this movie again, but I was not impressed the first or second go around).
When it all boils down to it though, this movie is all about two things; Kate Winslet and David Kross. Both actors deliver career highs (and to say that about Winslet is saying a lot since she is always top notch). Their performances are truly organic. That has become my new favorite word this year, for I feel as though it truly taps into the depth of these performances. There is a naturalness that fortifies itself within these performances, deepening with each flicker in the eyes or twitch under the skin. Try your hardest to watch Winslet's face (I know it's hard, especially since she is without clothing for practically the whole first hour of the film). There is a scene where she is lying in the bathtub and Kross comes in to hash out their argument. As he speaks you can see for the first time her hard exterior melting away and revealing this woman that she doesn't even know exists. It is so subtle yet so profound.
Winslet is utter perfection.
Kross is just as superb, sinking into his character and delving deep into his emotional responses to his current situation. The scene in the courtroom (all of the courtroom scenes are beyond breathtaking) when he notices Hanna for the first time is utterly immobilized. Watch as Kross exhibits such a natural gut reaction; as controlled as he can be yet giving way to lapses of uncontrollability.
The supporting cast is also superb, from Fiennes' dynamic understanding of Michael's emotional regression to Bruno Ganz's grasp of the real situation at hand. The one standout here is truly Olin, who proves to be one of the most important facets of the film. Her final scene with Fiennes is what makes the movie work, dispelling any easy sympathies for Hanna's atrocities with her cold standing. For anyone who has complained (and there have been many) that this film tries to condone the actions taken by Hanna I urge you to rewatch and study this scene, for in a few short words Hanna's actions are condemned wholeheartedly.
Remember, it is not her actions that we are sympathizing with, it is her inner person; cold and rigged yet incomplete, pleading for something or someone to make her feel whole.
Thanks in large part to David Hare's marvelous adaptation, `The Reader' lives up to its source material and delivers a truly outstanding and utterly astounding look at this tragic yet beautiful love story. If you walk away from `The Reader' unmoved then maybe you are just plain unmovable.
I'll close by saying that the Oscar's have passed, Kate won the gold (YES!!!) and I still agree wholeheartedly with every word in this review.
BEWARE OF SPOILERS.
There is a certain segment of the German mentality that is Hanna Schmidt. English Kate Winslet captures the intent of novelist Bernhard Schlink in her interpretation of the character. Hanna was an ordinary but proud woman of discipline who always did her duty, a woman without the ability to separate herself from what she knew was right and what was wrong, but a woman who was able to hide from herself what she did that was wrong.
She seduces fifteen-year-old Michael Berg. She finds him doubly useful as a reader of great literature. She knows it will not work. Of course how could it? She indulges herself but, being strong and proud, is able to divorce herself from him emotionally when the time comes, as it must. When he reads D.H. Lawrence's Lady Chatterley's Lover to her, she is genuinely offended at the open sexuality, but we viewers are taken back since what she is doing with 15-year-old Michael Berg is on the screen and naked before our eyes.
In a sense this is the somewhat familiar story of the young man of station and potential had briefly in his youth by the older woman who has neither station nor potential. They take advantage of one another for the time being, both knowing that they will move on. But young Michael is not fully aware of this old story because his station in life is, although above hers, still rather modest, and being fifteen and knowing a woman for the first time, he is in love as much as--or even more than--a fifteen-year-old can be.
She is short with him and selfish because she knows she will be tossed aside and so instinctively knows she needs to get something now. She calls him "kid" and consumes him, as would be the case in such a relationship. Yet there is his "reading." He has a talent for it and he enjoys reading to her. At one point she instructs him, reading first and then making love.
What is love? Hanna Schmidt does not know. And so her character is triply flawed. She has low self-esteem, hiding her illiteracy from all. She is removed from her feelings because of the past. That is how she has coped. What she has done she knows on one level was something horrendous; but on another level she only took the job at Siemens. What else was she to do? She was a guard. She had to guard the prisoners, otherwise there would be chaos. This is her defense. This is her belief. And finally, she cares for young Michael as she cares for herself, as one might care for valuable livestock, but she neither loves him nor herself. For again "What is love," as Tina Turner once had it, "but a second-hand emotion"?
At the end we see her, an old woman in prison being visited by the adult Michael Berg. She has put out her hand to him, and he, being human, has touched it. But he has withdrawn his hand. And now they stand and she leans, ever so slightly toward him to be hugged perhaps, to be touched for perhaps the first time in decades. But he does not respond. He cannot.
This echoes back to an earlier scene when he, as a young law student suddenly finds himself observing her trial. He realizes that she is taking the blame for the deaths of the Jewish "prisoners" because she would rather do that then reveal that she cannot read or write. It is interesting that young Berg realizes the truth of why she liked to be read to only then. And so he thinks to save her by letting the court know that she could not have written the order that condemned the prisoners to death. And so he makes an appointment to go to the prison and see her. But as she waits for her unknown visitor to arrive, he suddenly turns away. What he realizes, one speculates, is that there is nothing he can say to her or to the court that will change anything. Whether she wrote the actual order or not really doesn't matter. The others get off with lighter sentences, but all of them are equally guilty of whatever it was that was that allowed the German psyche to allow the holocaust. And too Berg is not clear about how he feels. Here is a woman he once loved who now is revealed as a monster. Yes, she is a monster, but strange to say almost an innocent monster.
It is curious that Berg so deeply loved her that he acquires her trait of emotional distance. He learns he can only sleep alone. His marriage fails. He is not as close to his daughter as he would like. And finally he is not able to help Hanna when she is alone in prison. He cannot bring himself to respond to her letters. And yet he reads to her. Hour after hour after hour he reads the classics into a microphone and sends the tapes to her to listen to in prison.
I wonder how this was received in Germany. There is such a guilt that hangs over the generations after the war. I wonder what they think of the humanization of a certain familiar mentality. And I must add that this mentality that follows orders and does its duty to the exclusive of its humanity is not something special with the Germans of that era. It is a human trait that is expressive of a human type that can be found in any society.
This is a deeply moving film, exquisitely written and directed and wondrously acted by especially the great Kate Winslet, and Ralph Fiennes who plays the older Michael Berg, and David Kross who plays the younger Michael Berg. The Reader is easily the best film I've seen during the past year. I have just seen The Reader and find the film fascinating. However, after reading some of the reviews posted below, I concluded that the timeline of events were missed by some viewers and that some were expecting a more tightly woven ending. I will address the former, but the latter is more like real life, composed of loose ends and no clear answers. I will refrain from giving away the plot twists, preferring to allow the viewer to enjoy the unfolding plot.
To clarify, the narrative timeline is important and the questions the story raises are still relevant. The male lead, Michael meets Winslet's character Hannah first in 1958, AFTER the war. Whatever she did in the war is part of her past when they have their affair. He would have been a small child in the war, he is fifteen when they meet, and in his early 20s in law school. Her sudden disappearances and many of her choices are dictated by a personal secret that has dire consequences later, when Michael, now a law student, sees her again in a courtroom.
The viewer must understand that post war Germany felt, and still feels shame over the Holocaust and faced serious challenges when it was over and the nation had to answer for crimes against humanity. It's difficult to say what any of us would do in the same circumstances. We were not there. Would a person be swept along? Would they rationalize? Would they act in fear? In habitual obedience? What role does ignorance play? Can someone who is capable of great kindness, even tenderness, also be capable of evil, of knowing unthinking cruelty? Does one act nullify the other? What is the punishment when a whole nation is held in thrall? It's all easy to answer from a point of safety and security.
Watch the film for Winslet and Kross, who are astounding in the lead roles, watch it for the lessons it offers and the questions it asks. Too often we are satisfied with pure entertainment in the theater, this film is a chance to take away something more.
Read Best Reviews of The Reader (2008) Here
The film:"The Reader" deserved its Oscar for best actress, but it also deserved the Oscar for best film (it lost to the inferior "Slumdog Millionaire.") It tells the tale of a young man growing up in post-war Germany who has an affair with a mysterious older woman. Without spoiling too much, the story ends up touching on the holocaust, how much we can blame participants, and whether or not love transcends these historical pains.
Normally, I dislike holocaust films. I find that Hollywood too often beats us over the head with the "it's BAD" message (This Just In! Hollywood Geniuses Discover Holocaust Was Bad!) as opposed to mining the much more interesting tales of personal struggle, loss, redemption, and ignorance. "The Reader" offers an intelligent, probing, and insightful look at the human costs on those who were not direct victims, and on the society of post-war Germany at large. It also tells a heck of a love story, to boot.
I felt so respected by the makers of this film. There is no heavy-handed moralizing, in fact, the message of the film seems to be that, while of course there are great moral wrongs that have been perpetrated, there are lesser consequences which do not make it into history books, but do have an impact on real people and deal them real pains that ought to be respected.
As mentioned in other reviews, this is not a movie for the kids, at least not kids who still titter when they see nudity on screen. The first half of the film is consumed by a lusty affair between a 32 year old and a 15 year old. It's not for immature audiences.
The Blu-Ray:
On the opening scene, I thought this film must be shot on digital. The source was just too clean, with little to no film grain in evidence. Upon further research, however, I have discovered that it was indeed shot on Kodak Vision2 and Vision3 film which Kodak advertises as producing less grain in low light and in general. Given this, and the fact that detail is generally so strong in this image, I can only assume that this Blu-Ray has been mastered without excessive Digital Noise Reduction.
It is a lovely 1.85:1 image which suits nice widescreen displays beautifully. Black levels are strong, loads of detail is evident in shadows, and colors are extremely naturalistic. There are many moments that offer the sort of "3-D" realism that the best HD can give. The quality of the image adds immediacy and impact to the already involving film.
Audio is very dialogue driven. This is not a BD that will rock your neighbors.
Extras are very strong. 42 minutes (!) of deleted scenes are presented in 480p widescreen. I watched them all, and I would say only one cut was truly unfortunate a little bit of backstory for Michael's law professor that would have added depth to the story. Mini-documentaries are also available, touching on the writing and casting process, as well as Kate Winslet's aging with make-up. Overall, it's a very strong slate of extras.
*********
Any fan of serious dramas and romances would do quite well to pick this up. It's a truly great movie that is very affecting and also thought provoking. It's a monument to respecting the viewer, allowing them to digest complex morality without beating them over the head with a "message." I would compare it to films like "The English Patient" or "I've Loved You So Long" (another 2008 Oscar Nominee).
It is also presented in an exceedingly beautiful HD transfer and a strong package of extras. Certainly, if you're doing a survey of 2008 Oscar nominees, you should pick this up over the trite, pat Hollywood fare of "Slumdog." It's also better than the very good, but somewhat flabby "Benjamin Button," and the excellent, but not as brainy "Milk." I can't recommend it enough.
Want The Reader (2008) Discount?
"The Reader" is an English-language film based on a German-language book, "Der Vorleser" by Bernhard Schlink, a novel in which the author explores questions of guilt and responsibility for the Holocaust in his parents' generation. He does so through the experiences of Michael Berg (David Kross), who, as a teenager in 1958, had an affair with a woman 20 years his senior, Hanna Schmitz (Kate Winslet). Years later, when he is at law school, Michael finds that Hanna is a defendant in a war crimes case. She is charged with the murders of hundreds of prisoners who died in a burning building when she was a guard at a concentration camp. Decades later, when Michael (Ralphes Fiennes) is middle-aged, he still has trouble assessing how much guilt to assign Hanna and by this time is carrying around some guilt of his own.It's probably impossible to write any opinion or lack of opinion about the events of World War II in Germany without stirring controversy. But, in the rest of the world, people interpret these stories as morality plays that can be applied to a broader context. "The Reader" was a bestseller in the United States. The movie has a great cast and an interesting story, but it may owe its critical success to the fact that it lends itself to being interpreted differently by different people. The question of whether people should be condemned for doing what most people would do under the circumstances, that was acceptable behavior at the time, remains a sticky issue in Germany. "The Reader" views the trial of a group of SS guards whose commitment to duty resulted in hundreds of deaths through the eyes of the younger generation, which is deeply ashamed of the nation's past.
The DVD (Weinstein 2009): There are 5 featurettes, 11 deleted and extended scenes, and a theatrical trailer. "Adapting a Timeless Masterpiece" (25 min) interviews director Stephen Daldry, screenwriter David Hare, and author Bernhard Schlink about the adaptation, themes, and the cast about the director's style. "A Conversation with David Kross & Stephen Daldry" (10 min) includes a few press interviews with the actor and director. "Kate Winslet on the Art of Aging Hanna Schmitz" (13 min) spends time in the make-up chair with Winslet and the make-up team as they age her 30 years. The composer talks about what the music needs to accomplish in "A New Voice: A Look at Composer Nico Muhly" (4 min). "Coming to Grips with the Past" (7 min) interviews production designer Brigitte Broch about locations, period design, and her own choice to leave Germany 40 years ago. Subtitles are available for the film in English SDH and Spanish. Dubbing available in French.
Save 62% Off
No comments:
Post a Comment