IMHO #10 is a post from: itsa FILM thing

Lives of Others

Today marks the 20th anniversary of the announcement by the East German government signifying the end to the socialist GDR regime and the start of the destruction of the Berlin Wall.

For most of us it’s hard to imagine what it’s like living under a government hell bent on forcing an ideal on its people. Today we acknowledge big brother but not in the privacy of our homes. We think it crude not to have a say in who represents our communities at a local through to national level. It’s hard to imagine a politician taking away your right to express yourself through art or to be told what is acceptable to read and watch. For the citizens of East Germany it was all too real only two decades ago.

Das Leben der Anderen (Lives of Others) is set in a drab 1984 where we observe the life of a Stasi agent, Gerd Wiesler, as he spies on others. He is renowned for his interrogation skills and his loyalty to the party is unquestionable. He is a proud and intelligent man who teaches at the Stasi University and carries out field work with a precision reserved for Swiss watches. A deliberate man, he lives alone and has very few interests outside of work. With his straight spine and piercing eyes he observes and reacts with a calculated soldier like efficiency.

When his superior and old friend, Anton Grubitz, becomes obsessed with advancing within the Stasi hierarchy he quietly disapproves. Anton drags him along to a theatre performance where Wiesler observes Georg Dreyman and Christa-Maria Sieland, a power couple working as artists with the blessing of the GDR. Through unfounded suspicions Georg is placed under surveillance which results in every inch of his apartment being wired. Wiesler is tasked with finding something, anything, to discredit Georg.

Around the clock Wiesler and a colleague monitor every spoken word and sound made. They type reports on the movements, conversations and even on their intercourse. The joy-filled life led by Georg and his feelings for Christa-Maria begin to affect the stone character of Wiesler. Fuelled by new-found emotions and the contempt for his superiors abusing the system he slowly starts to see life in a new light. Things come to a head when the previously loyal Georg himself opens his eyes to the wrong doings of his government.

It’s chilling to witness leaders of millions categorise their citizens, blacklist them, imprison, torture, spy and generally destroy lives. Many citizens, like Georg, simply wanted to live life and experience all it had to offer. Boxed in by a system not of their choosing they adapted and got on with their lives. Many however could not cope and so took their lives or tried to flee the country.

First time writer/director/producer Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck does a spectacular job of conveying the sense of oppression of the time. The world he has created is so grey and drab it’s almost as if the volume has been turned down on life. Without being consistently reminded you can sense through the visuals the subdued frantic mood of the populace. There are no gimmick shots or lavishly rendered special effect and nor was there any need for that. Just a dull portrayal of reality which mesmerises you. Florian’s story stands tall on it’s own merit and his flat and conventional presentation suits it perfectly.

Winner of  dozens of awards around the world this film deserves to be seen even if only to witness the performance of Ulrich Muhe who plays Wielser. Muhe was a teenager during the last days of the wall and like many of his colleagues in this film he witnessed first hand the oppression and revolt leading to 9 November 1989.

What an utter disappointment it is then to see the recycling machine that is modern Hollywood plan a re-make for release in 2011.

Das Leben der Anderen (2006) is a post from: itsa FILM thing

IMHO #9 is a post from: itsa FILM thing

IMHO #8 is a post from: itsa FILM thing

IMHO #7 is a post from: itsa FILM thing

IMHO #6 is a post from: itsa FILM thing

12 Angry Men DVD Cover

More than likely you have not heard of the director or most of the cast and the screenplay was penned by a predominantly unknown TV writer. They each have had respectable careers and in some cases a distinguished one. There are no big Hollywood stars here and you would be forgiven for scratching your head clean trying to find one and yet they are a part of cinema history. In working together to create 12 Angry Men these unlikely fellows got the ingredients right for magic on film.

Set during a time when only males were allowed to sit on the jury, 12 Angry Men opens to the final moments of a murder case in which an 18 year old ‘ethnic’ boy is accused of murdering his father. The jury is left in a small room to reach a unanimous decision which will either free the boy or send him to the chair. It’s Friday afternoon after a six day trial and it’s the hottest New York day of the year. Overwhelmingly the evidence is stacked against the boy and it comes as no surprise to see eleven of the jurors vote guilty on first count. Only one man has reasonable doubts and the will to stand alone against his peers. Throughout the course of the evening he attempts to convince the rest of the panel that the boy is possibly innocent.

Shot in the confines of a small rectangular room we witness a spectacular character study of the twelve men who are only known by their jury number. They sit around a rectangular table and clash over the facts of the case, their beliefs and values. Each man brings his own set of life experiences and throughout the evening we learn that they are as individual as their numbers. Stupid, impatient, ignorant, bigot, resentful, racist, insecure, inadequate, bully, arrogant, smug, bitter, extrovert, superficial, courageous, patient, calculated, forceful, meek and the rest of the gamut. Without it being too obvious the script ingeniously pitted a broad range of character types in a small room to create heated gripping conflict.

Over the years the script originally penned by Reginald Rose as a teleplay has been adapted to theater, TV and on the big screen numerous times. It is considered a classic studied in film schools all over the world. Theatre productions to this day perform the play and will do so well in to the future. This is all a credit to the original teleplay but also to Henry Fonda, producer and star, who recognised the work and asked Rose to adapt it to a feature length film.

Direction for the film was provided by Sidney Lumet who used the play roots of the script to great effect. Long one frame scenes make for gripping drama which is a credit to the cast and director. Everything is tightly directed and you even pick up bits of information about the jurors from their interactions in the background. Shooting in a small room is obviously limiting but Lumet used this to great effect. The first act gives us a broad view of the room and its occupants with the use of wide angle lenses only to shift to longer lenses and tight shots as the scenes intensify. The gradual change subconsciously creates a claustrophobic feeling. Lumet, with only TV credits at the time, went on to direct other classics such as Serpico in ‘73, Dog Day Afternoon in ‘75 and Network in ‘76. A string of hits anyone would be proud of. He is still directing films and kudos to him for a career over 50 years long.

It is the sum of all the humble parts that create this masterpiece. Frequently making the lists of favourites for movie goers, it continues to impress with age and with each viewing. I can only share my highest recommendation with you. Taking my advice to watch it is up to you.

12 Angry Men (1957) is a post from: itsa FILM thing

IMHO #5 is a post from: itsa FILM thing

IMHO #4 is a post from: itsa FILM thing

IMHO #3 is a post from: itsa FILM thing