The Lives of Others - (Das Leben der Anderen): Microphone? What microphone?

Ulrich Muehe RIP

(the guy who played Wiesler)

"a bit schmaltzy," you bet.

If only more playwrights and actresses had introduced Stasi loners to Brecht, the Wall woulda been down in 1970.

I thought the movie was schmaltzy but still surprisingly effective, this mostly due to the central performance. Liked it much better than the highly-regarded domestic (American) melodramas I've seen recently: Mystic River blah blah.

I don't buy either of these absolutist, omniscient critiques, though:

the Stasi officer Wiesler helping Dreymann is such utter nonsense that it ruins the whole movie. It would never happen that some one with over 20 years of continuous indoctrination by the Stasi would help a mortal enemy of the State

-- Tracer

(Imagining that Weixler could exist) betrays ... a misunderstanding of the nature of totalitarianism in general, and the Stasi specifically. No Stasi agent would have been able to keep a secret like that, because everything was rigorously cross-checked and verified. No Stasi agent would have been on control of an entire investigation, from surveillance to interrogation, the way Weisler was.

-- Alfred

The world isn't sufficiently well-regulated to allow that kind of absolute & total certainty. Not even the world of the Stasi. It's always at least possible that human decision-making and/or fallibility could alter the program. There's always a corner here or there where something happens differently, for some unforseen reason. And it's always possible that a seemingly well-indoctrinated man might experience a change of heart even without the agency of "a death, an assault, an an acid trip."

But, yeah, the ending was kinda corny.

it's a total melodrama. nothing wrong with that.

and the criticism that this could never happen is just silly. no one ever defected? no one ever passed secrets to the americans? give me 1 break. or in other words, what contenderizer said.

i mean if you're going to deny even the remotest possibility of change in a human being i don't really see how you can buy any sort of drama.

xp: A totally unpersuasive one. Hollywood remake coming soon! really!

If you'd like to see the lead actress in a good, offbeat thriller: Summer '04

Oh yeah.

ok well it also has that problem then.

well i tried to get a discussion started about east german prostitutes but nobody went there with me

well the one in this film isn't going anywhere good before the wall comes down but as far as that's concerned we could just as well as be talking about that clooney/soderbergh noir number

and you know not to holla but I couldn't give a shit less for a minute about how the "stasi creep" is "sanctified" or whatever, lots of antiheros have gotten by with much much more in the way of redemption for a lot less sand

i think part of it is that most brits and americans know jack shit about east germany and so this film functions as a de facto history lesson whether it likes it or not; it fails in this regard i think, but it's not fair to look at it only from that pov

my biggest complaint: no musical numbers

which is where "top secret" really pulls away from the pack

this movie really needed Omar Sharif.

And Hildegard Knef.

most brits and americans know jack shit about east germany and so this film functions as a de facto history lesson

right, and I think it's especially cheeky to complain about the treatment of the protagonist here when like 2/3rds of the entire anglophone cinematic tradition is about those colorful rapey blood-soaked sociopaths who built our respective countries into what they are today, america esp. with all them westerns (also I finally watched gangs of ny lol)

i complain about those too!

though the usual western trope is the exact reverse, right? the law-abiding man of peace who circumstances force to become a killer in order to protect his family/town/etc

"You are a good-looking boy. You have big, broad shoulders. But he is a man. And it takes more than big, broad shoulders to make a man."

right, and I think it's especially cheeky to complain about the treatment of the protagonist here when like 2/3rds of the entire anglophone cinematic tradition is about those colorful rapey blood-soaked sociopaths who built our respective countries into what they are today, america esp. with all them westerns (also I finally watched gangs of ny lol)

what the fuck does this have to with the fact that the protagonist's evolution into a Rilke-loving quasi-softie is convincing?

I saw it. I liked it, though I had a little more trouble with the believability of Dreyman, rather than Wiesler.

fukk all y'all i CRIED REAL TEARS at the end of this

so this is showing on the big screen here soon - worth seeing? didn't want to go through the thread for fear of spoilers. should be noted I'm not a big fan of calculated shmaltz (I did cry in theaters during A.I. though)

it's pretty good, looks really nice, and obv the historical setting is fascinating. but maybe leave 10 mins before the end if you don't like schmaltz :)

haha - not sure how the people I would be seeing it with would take it. I'll tell them I need to make some stock trades

yes it's good. leave when they stop steaming envelopes because maybe you are allergic to envelopes.

i liked this a lot, saw it in the cinema and really loved it until the end, which is pretty shit. But apart from that enjoyable.