Simple, Direct and Triumphant

Rating: 8/10 (26 July 2009)

I watched this movie because it won the Oscar for Best Foreign Language film of 2006. This film won over the more high profile "Pan's Labyrinth" which recently topped a list of best foreign language films of this decade. Naturally I was very curious to check it out.
The story is set in Communist East Germany in the 80s. It was about the notorious surveillance of the dreaded Stasi on suspected "enemies of the state." In this case, Agent Wiesler (Ulrich Muhe) was tasked by his superior Grubitz (chillingly portrayed Ulrich Tukur)to spy on the goings-on in the house of prominent playwright Georg Dreyman (Sebastian Koch)and his girlfriend and lead actress Christa-Maria Sieland (Martina Gedeck).
However, despite the veteran that he was, Wiesler becomes sympathetically involved in the lives of the people he is supposed to observe. This is especially when it was revealed that the surveillance had been ordered by Cultural Minister Bruno Hempf (a very greasy Thomas Thieme), not for national security reasons, but only because he selfishly wanted to get rid of Dreyman in order to have Sieland for himself.
The situation is very claustrophobic and may become boring, but it doesn't. This is a testament to the success of its solid direction by then newcomer Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck. It also holds the audience's interest because of the very effective acting of the lead actors. The main actor is not Koch nor Gedeck, instead the focus of the movie is on Wiesler, the character played by Muhe. We clearly see his character develop from a heartless government agent and inquisitor into a man who followed his heart rather than his head, and fully accepted the consequences of his actions.
Overall, this movie is very good as a study of the political situation in East Germany back then, as well as an excellent character study of the people caught up in this situation. It is worth the time invested to watch it.
Now whether it deserved to win the Oscar over "Pan's Labyrinth," that is a bigger question. Definitely the delivery of the message in "The Lives of Others" is simple and direct, while the approach in "Pan's Labyrinth" is allegorical and metaphorical. Comparing apples and oranges, It boils down to a matter of taste among the jurors who voted. Both films are excellent in their own ways.