thematically weak

Rating: 5/10 (24 July 2007)

The praise for this movie is hyperbolic and unearned. The "transformation" of the main character, which happens very quickly, and with only limited attention paid to him, is shoddily done, bad film-making passed off as something mysterious. It is abundantly clear why this movie has found a wide release in America and why it won the foreign language Oscar--it is typical Hollywood tripe. Major, unearned character developments, portrait of totalitarian society which, post-Orwell, post-Communism, post-Gorbachev even, is amazingly banal.
But the one thing I want to touch on here is the preachy, artistic pompousness that stains every part of the film. We're led to believe, implicitly, that it is not the love between the two artists which affects their observer, but art itself. Was anyone else offended by this? The first scene, of the collaborator's interrogation, shows that the main character is essentially inhuman, a lifelong devotee of the party. But then he undergoes a miraculous change, evidently finding more humanity and love in Brecht than in a crying, tortured man sitting across from him. It's implausible, and reveals the filmmaker's limited vision--it allows the film to harp on the importance of art, which, like the totally obvious revelations about totalitarianism, should be taken as a given within any work of art. Obviously, art is redeeming--we wouldn't be watching the movie if it wasn't.
A perfect example of the offensive simplicity of this movie is found when the male artist speaks a line something along the lines of, "If one loves art can he be anything else but a good man?" The main character, listening in, then goes home to his lonely life, meets a boy in the elevator who blabs incriminatingly about his father, is about to ask the name to arrest him, but then, supposedly remembering the quote about a "good man," shies away.
"The Lives of Others" is not bad, it is just unsurprising and uninspiring. Reflect on why this movie got a wide release in the states, and why it won an Oscar. But, I guess, if you think "Forrest Gump" and "Crash" are deserving of their Oscars, then you would have no idea what I'm talking about. There is a link between those awards winners and this--infantile storytelling and thematic barrenness.
Watch the last 20 minutes of "The Pianist" to see a more accurate human story about politics, art, and hatred. Or watch "The Conformist" for a more complex view of life under totalitarianism.