Search

» » The Reader (2008)

Short summary

Post-WWII Germany: Nearly a decade after his affair with an older woman came to a mysterious end, law student Michael Berg re-encounters his former lover as she defends herself in a war-crime trial.
THE READER opens in post-war Germany when teenager Michael Berg becomes ill and is helped home by Hanna, a stranger twice his age. Michael recovers from scarlet fever and seeks out Hanna to thank her. The two are quickly drawn into a passionate but secretive affair. Michael discovers that Hanna loves being read to and their physical relationship deepens. Hanna is enthralled as Michael reads to her from "The Odyssey," "Huck Finn" and "The Lady with the Little Dog." Despite their intense bond, Hanna mysteriously disappears one day and Michael is left confused and heartbroken. Eight years later, while Michael is a law student observing the Nazi war crime trials, he is stunned to find Hanna back in his life - this time as a defendant in the courtroom. As Hanna's past is revealed, Michael uncovers a deep secret that will impact both of their lives. THE READER is a story about truth and reconciliation, about how one generation comes to terms with the crimes of another.

Trailers "The Reader (2008)"

To avoid legal consequences, the crew delayed the filming of sexually explicit scenes until after actor David Kross' 18th birthday on July 4 2008.

Stephen Daldry's first choice for the lead role was Kate Winslet, who originally turned down the offer due to a scheduling conflict with Revolutionary Road (2008). When Nicole Kidman accepted the role, the producers built in a hiatus in order to allow her to finish filming Baz Luhrmann's Australia (2008). However, by the time Kidman was set to begin her scenes on the film, she withdrew because of her pregnancy, vacating the role. Winslet, who was now available, agreed to replace Kidman.

Bruno Ganz plays Michael Berg's Holocaust-surviving professor here, and famously played Adolf Hitler in La caduta - Gli ultimi giorni di Hitler (2004).

David Kross learned English specially for the film.

Kate Winslet's omission of Harvey Weinstein in her Oscar win acceptance speech was intentional. Even though she'd not been sexually propositioned by him, she found his aggressive 'business behavior' with her over the years to be downright repugnant and therefore purposefully did not thank him.

Producers Sydney Pollack and Anthony Minghella both died before the completion of the movie. As the film was nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards, the Academy made an exception from their rules not to name more than three producers as nominees because of this rare circumstance. In the end the two producers Donna Gigliotti and Redmond Morris who took over duties were nominated as well as the posthumously honored Minghella and Pollack.

When Michael is reading to Hanna: "She was dead, and past all help, or need of it.." and she begins to weep vehemently, he is reading from Chapter 71 of The Old Curiosity Shop by Charles Dickens.

When selling the rights to his novel, Bernhard Schlink insisted that the film be shot in English.

Ralph Fiennes was always first choice to play the adult Michael.

When Michael narrates: "I'm not frightened. I'm not frightened of anything. The more I suffer, the more I'll love. Danger will only increase my love, it will sharpen it, it will give it spice.[...]" he is quoting from "Intrigue and Love" by 18th Century German poet and playwright Friedrich Schiller.

Author Bernhard Schlink always envisioned Kate Winslet as playing Hanna.

In the film version of The Reader, young Michael Berg's sickness is scarlet fever, while in the book he got hepatitis.

The Latin lines Michael quotes to Hanna are "Quo, quo scelesti ruitis? Aut cur dexteris / aptantur enses conditi?" These are the opening lines of Horace's 7th Epode, a short poem where he expresses outrage at the fact that his countrymen are still engaged in civil war. "Villains, where are you rushing to? Why are your hands / Grasping those swords that were sheathed?" (translation A.S. Kline). The Greek lines he quotes are the opening stanza of Sappho's 16th fragment: (transliterated) "Oi men ippeon stroton, oi de pesdon, / oi de naon phais' epi gan melainan / emmenai kalliston, ego de ken' ot- / to tis eratai". "Some say a host of horsemen, others of infantry, and others of ships, is the most beautiful thing on the dark earth: but I say, it is what you love." (translation Denys Page).

David Kross' mother was initially reluctant to let her son make the film as it meant 4 months out of school. He was only allowed to pursue the role if he passed his exams.

Stephen Daldry read the book in one sitting on a train journey.

The Reader is the first English speaking role of German actor David Kross although he had previously played lead roles in German movies such as Giovane e violento (2006) and Krabat e il mulino dei dodici corvi (2008).

Shot over a period of a year.

Producer Scott Rudin was originally a producer of the movie but he got into conflict with executive producer Harvey Weinstein. Rudin wanted to push the release date back to 2009 to avoid an Oscar campaign along with Il dubbio (2008) and Revolutionary Road (2008) both which were also produced by Rudin. Eventually Rudin left the film and had his name removed from the credits. Ironically, The Reader was nominated for an Academy Award 2009 in the Best Picture category (and thus got producer's nominations) but neither Doubt nor Revolutionary Road.

Stephen Daldry's third film - and the third time he landed a Best Director Oscar nomination.

Before Kate Winslet accepted the role of Hanna, Nicole Kidman, Marion Cotillard and Naomi Watts were considered for the part.

The film's original cinematographer was Roger Deakins. From September to October 2007, he shot scenes that didn't feature the character Hanna and shot all the sequences with Ralph Fiennes as the adult protagonist. After filming was shut down (to give Nicole Kidman, who had been cast as Hanna, time to finish filming Australia (2008) before joining the production), Deakins left to shoot Il dubbio (2008) and begin pre-production on A Serious Man (2009). Once Kidman withdrew from the film and was replaced by Kate Winslet, filming resumed in March 2008; the new cinematographer, Chris Menges, shot all of Winslet's scenes.

Production designer Brigitte Broch emigrated from her native Germany in the early 1990s, mainly out of protest at the atrocities that her previous generation committed or tolerated during World War II, settling in Mexico. The Reader - A voce alta (2008) marks the first time she returned to Germany.

Kate Winslet originally campaigned in the Supporting Actress category so as not to upset her chances in the Lead Actress category where she was up for her role in Revolutionary Road (2008). That worked in her favor at the Golden Globes but Academy voters overwhelmingly went for her as Lead for The Reader - A voce alta (2008).

Alexandra Maria Lara (playing young Ilana Mather) also appeared in La caduta - Gli ultimi giorni di Hitler (2004) together with Bruno Ganz. He played Adolf Hitler and she played Traudl Junge, his private secretary.

Despite the poster showing Kate Winslet and Ralph Fiennes' characters together when Winslet's is still young, Fiennes only has one scene with her when she is much older.

David Hare opted not to include voiceover in the film version, differing significantly from the novel which consists of many lengthy interior monologues.

Kate Winslet won the Best Actress Oscar for her performance in this film, but Best Supporting Actress at the Golden Globes for the same film. All four of her fellow nominees (Meryl Streep, Angelina Jolie, Melissa Leo and Anne Hathaway) in the Best Actress category at the Academy Awards that year have won Best Supporting Actress Oscars at one point in their careers.

Kate Winslet's Best Actress Oscar winning performance was the only nominee in the category in a Best Picture nominee that year.

Jonas Jägermeyr appears as one of the seminar students, and also starred in I ragazzi del Reich (2004) as a student being indoctrinated into the Nazi Code.

Juliette Binoche was considered for the role of Hanna Schmitz.

Three composers were considered to compose the original music - Nico Muhly, Ozren K. Glaser and Alberto Iglesias.

Anthony Minghella snapped up the film rights before the novel was published with the intention of writing and directing the film himself. David Hare was very keen to adapt the novel but Minghella refused. Eight years later Minghella went to Hare and asked him to write the screenplay as he simply couldn't find the time to do it himself. Ironically, Minghella died prematurely following an operation during the film's production.

Angelina Jolie was considered for the lead role.

Michael Berg reads 'Emilia Galotti' by Lessing. Volker Bruch (a seminar student in this film) and Burghart Klaußner (the judge} also starred in Goethe! (2010), with Volker as the friend of Goethe and Burghart as the father of Lotte. Lotte's favorite book is Emilia Galotti.

English film debut of Florian Bartholomäi, appearing as Michael's older brother, Thomas.

The only film that year to be nominated for Best Picture at the Academy Awards, but not at the Producers Guild of America Awards.

In 2005, Kate Winslet appeared on the English TV comedy series Extras (2005) in Extras: Kate Winslet (2005) as a bawdy, irreverent version of "herself." In that guise, she made fun of actors who do movies about the Holocaust specifically to try to win Oscars, including a dig at her future The Reader - A voce alta (2008) costar Ralph Fiennes, who starred in Schindler's List (1993). Her "Kate Winslet" character denies that she is making a Holocaust movie for noble reasons like using her profile to keep the message alive about the Holocaust: "And I don't think we really need another film about the Holocaust, do we? It's like, how many have there been? You know, we get it - it was grim, move on. No, I'm doing it because I've noticed that if you do a film about the Holocaust - guaranteed Oscar! I've been nominated four times. Never won. The whole world is going 'why hasn't Winslet won one?'...That's it. That's why I'm doing it. Schindler's bloody List. Il pianista (2002). Oscars coming out of their arse." Three years later, Winslet made The Reader (in which she played a guard at the Auschwitz Concentration Camp) and did win an Oscar for Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role.

It took a total of seven hours to transform Kate Winslet into Old Hanna.

When Hanna commits suicide by hanging in her prison cell, she uses the books that Michael read to her ('The Odyssey,' 'War and Peace,' etc.) as a platform.

In the film version while Kate Winslet is swimming and David Kross is writing a poem about her, there is a cut on Michael's lower lip. This is because in the book, Michael was struck by Hanna when one morning on their bicycle tour, Michael left their inn early to get breakfast and when Michael returned, Hanna was furious for leaving her alone.

In the film version, when Michael was with his friends, swimming and Sophie came up from swimming and ask him "Are you alright", Michael suddenly stares and then get up and began to run as if to catch up somebody. This is because in the book he suddenly saw Hanna looking at him together with his friends.

In the book, Michael asked Hanna's name on their 6th or 7th tryst; in the movie Michael said "I've been here 3 times".

In the book, their cycling tour was for 4 days while in the movie it is only 2 days.

User reviews


  • comment
    • Author: Uickabrod
    Before I start reviewing, let me say something personal: As a German, one can hardly watch movies about the Holocaust, WWII or any related topic unbiased. As I have discovered myself, no German family is without a history related to the Third Reich, almost none are without grave guilt, or at least the fear thereof, and most who say otherwise either lie knowingly, or simply try to evade further inquiry.

    Reading some of the other reviews, I realized that for me, the movie conveyed something slightly, but decisively different: It is not so much about understanding HOW people could ever do the things they did, but rather how it is possible, that people we love, and people that have been loved by people we love could be so guilty and so loving, so despicable and lovable at the same time. It is about how we expect the guilt to show up somehow, how we expect to know the killer, the monster, at first sight and say: how could anyone not have seen it? Yet we have to admit sooner or later, that we were wrong, or were we? The question really is: How could I have ever loved someone who did things as horrible and disgusting as Hannah did? And just as much: If I am unmerciful now, having learned of their guilt, is it because they did what they did, or because they disappointed my own belief in their innocence?

    At one point, Hanna Schmitz asks the judge: "What would you have done?", and I think that therein lies an even more disturbing and unsettling question: What would I have done? What would you have done? How can anyone know for sure what WE would done? It is too easy to think of oneself as morally sound, with a firm belief in what is right and wrong. It's what Germans call the "mercy of late birth" - the luxury of not having been in the position to make that choice.

    So, what made this movie worth giving the full 10 points out of 10? It is well-crafted, well-played, believable, at times even beautiful. It captures both the fascination Michael feels with Hannah, and his disbelief, even disgust while exploring the ugly truth about her past. It conveys the struggle between our compassion and the reluctance to show mercy against the ones who did not. It leaves the viewer with the same, disturbing questions that have not been answered sufficiently in the past 60 years (nor will they ever be). It does not provide simple answers, but rather raises more questions, left to be unanswered. As Lena Olin's Character says: "If you want Catharsis, go to the theater!"

    Other than providing beautiful, well-toned cinematography, a well-written script, love of detail and convincing performances even by the supporting cast - what more can you expect from a truly great movie?
  • comment
    • Author: Minnai
    Kate Winslet is just outstanding in this very interesting film that is almost two stories-in-one. The first part is a sexual story of an older woman having affairs with a teenage boy and the second part is her war crimes tale and what happens afterward. The first is a somewhat happy jaunt of a short story and the second is a very serious and depressing story. That's where Winslet really shines. Obviously, she's developed into an an outstanding actress.

    The second part is what most people, I assume, will remember about this film. Can "Hanna Schmitz," a Nazi employee (so to speak), who was part of concentration camps, be a sympathetic character? To me, that's what it looked like that's the question the story was asking. The answer may have come in the final minutes of the movie when her ex-lover "Michael Berg," now grown up and played by Ralph Fiennes, confronts a survivor of the camp. That, too, was very intense and interesting scene. Lena Olin is riveting as "Rose/Illana Mather."

    "The Reader" was full of quiet, but intense scenes. This is a very thought-provoking film, especially for one that doesn't start off that way but look almost like some soft-porn flick to get our attention. It is anything but that.

    For Germans, this film must bring out many emotions and thoughts. Guilt and forgiveness are just two of the issues that are dealt with in this unique film. "Hanna Schmitz" turns out to be an incredibly simple-yet-complex person, unlike any I've encountered on film in a long time. You see her in all kinds of light, both good and bad.

    Kudos, too, to David Kross' acting as the young Michael Berg. It must be strange for someone his age (barely turned 18) to do the scenes he did with 30-something Winslet.

    Overall, a very different and excellent film that stays with you and makes you ponder its main characters.
  • comment
    • Author: FEISKO
    There's an urgency in human nature to understand. When it comes to the Holocaust, history's bleak, unsettling period, it doesn't matter what book you've read, film you've seen or account you've heard; in the end, your response it halted by its incomprehensible conclusion. How could humanity course its way towards such a violent, destructive path? How could people knowingly send men, women, and children to their impending doom? Most puzzling, how could the world allow it? Even though its been 63 years since the blood-drenched annals of World War II, its aftermath today is still bone chilling.

    After a six year celluloid dry spell, Stephen Daldry returns to the director's chair in a brilliant, sexually charged, and oddly heartbreaking tale about the complexity of human morality and the lifelong repercussions that result from our actions. Adapted from Bernhard Schlink's best-selling German novel, "The Reader," Daldry's visual translation is a powerful, emotionally absorbing film that is one of the year's best. It's superbly crafted.

    With World War II over, Germany, in 1958, is still recovering. Deep within Heidelberg, Germany, Michael (David Kross), a young pubescent teenager haven fallen ill, is comforted by Hanna (Kate Winslet), a hard working woman who is twice his age. Taken by her generosity, Michael revisits Hanna to offer his gratitude. What begins as an awkward reunion escalates into a seductive, forbidden affair that intensifies when Michael begins reading to the distant, empty Hanna, who is deeply awakened by Michael's spoken literature. Too young to understand love's complicated implications, Michael is emotionally devastated when Hanna suddenly disappears. Nearly a decade later, unable to forget his passionate summer while studying law, he attends a Nazi trail, and to his dismay, hears Hanna's distant voice.

    "The Reader" is a complex film; maybe a little too complex for some. Though the film pertains to Nazism and the "sins of our fathers," in essence, "The Reader" is a film that reflects the emotions inside all of us. During a lecture, Michael's professor comments, "Societies like to think they operate on morality but they don't." In this cynical age, how far from reality is that statement? During Hanna's trial, she's questioned why she participated in the Nazi party's horrendous war crimes, broken she replies, "It was my job." Oddly enough, that seems to be the justification most people use. Surprisingly, though, "The Reader" isn't about her exposure as a war criminal, but an exposure on an individual who took the wrong path. She's not a bad person; she's simply made wrong choices. However, when it comes to having involvement in the Nazi's liquidation of the Jews, how "wrong" can you get? "You ask us to think like lawyers," cries on student, "what are we trying to do?" A distraught Michael replies, "We are trying to understand!" But, just who exactly is trying to grasp a deeper understanding: the court or Michael? How can Hanna's past be forgiven? Director Stephen Daldry brings the much needed emotional layer that a character such as Hanna Schmitz desperately needs. Although her actions are beyond unforgivable, strangely, we sympathize with her. Maybe it's her other shameful secret. Maybe it's superb character development.

    "The Reader" is a film that is driven by it's raw performances. In one of her finest hours, Kate Winslet gives the performance of a lifetime. It's a haunting and heart-breaking. David Kross, who's only 18, is impressive as the teenager with raging hormones; it's such a daring performance. Winselt and Kross bring this picture together. Their performances are jaw-droppingly brilliant. Completing the role of Michael, as the tortured grown man, is Ralph Fiennes, who balances Michael's despair through his melancholic emotion when he encounters a grown Jewish woman, played by Lena Olin, who was also at Hanna's trail. Although her scenes clock in less than 10 minutes, Olin, too, is breathtaking.

    When "The Reader's" credits rolled, I sat quietly shaken by what I had witnessed. It's a film that is impossible to forget. When a grown Michael asks Hanna, "Have you spent much time thinking about the past?" Heartbroken, she replies, "It doesn't matter what I think. It doesn't matter what I feel. The dead are still dead." She's right.
  • comment
    • Author: Bloodhammer
    The film is a series of profound moral dilemmas—while contrived by the author, they are fair questions—that resonate deeply in the 21st Century: The role of guilt in victims, perpetrators, individuals and collectively, as well as justice, forgiveness, redemption, shame and, of course, literacy and its role in Western thought.

    All this is a pretty heady mix for a film, but Stephen Daldry (as with "The Hours" ) makes literary conceit play very naturally here. David Hare's screenplay and the remarkable cinematography of the always remarkable Roger Deakins together with a sensitive score by Nico Muhly, this is indeed rarefied film-making.

    But the actors are what drag the audience into this story. David Kross is amazing as the young Michael who has to play a range of virginal innocent to wizened and bitter. It's the key role in the film, and we're all lucky he was found to play this role. And the ever confounding Kate Winslet. What an amazing career for this young actress! Running through a list of her credits, she has some of the best performances of the last decade: "Holy Smoke," "Eternal Sunshine…," "Iris," "Finding Neverland," "Little Children." But here she does something very different. Playing what amounts to a monster, we see that they too are human. Not many actresses could bring this off, but it may be her greatest accomplishment to date.

    Ralph Fiennes brings a continuity to the work David Kross begins, and there's a brief appearance by Lena Olin who commands the dignity the role deserves.

    I'm puzzled at the lukewarm reception to this film. I almost missed seeing it. And it turned out to be one of my favorite and the most heart-rending films of the year. All involved should be very proud.
  • comment
    • Author: Zymbl
    Very well acted and presented and a faithful representation of the main points of the novel on which it is based. This film encourages us to look closely at very difficult issues surrounding the atrocities of World War II. I am at a loss to understand why so many critics have been so damning of it. Perhaps it is too subtle for them to understand. It seeks to outlaw the false and intellectually lazy theory to explain the holocaust, namely that the horrors were committed by monsters. In its place we are offered contextualization, not as excuse but as explanation of how quite ordinary people were able to do extraordinarily dreadful things. We avoid these uncomfortable facts at our peril.
  • comment
    • Author: Gravelblade
    Kate Winslet, I absolutely adore her, she's my favorite actress of all time. I still can't believe that she hadn't won an Oscar, her first nomination was in 1995 with Sense and Sensibility. Finally after 14 long years, she finally won the coveted award with the movie The Reader. I finally was able to see this movie the other day and it blew me away, I'm still debating if this really was my favorite Kate Winslet performance, but once again with a strong cast telling a powerful story, The Reader was definitely one of the best films out of 2008. So many holocaust films have been made, it's hard to make another that stands out, but we really haven't had a story where the Nazi guards were on trial. A lot of people debate if this movie is trying too hard to push sympathy on Kate Winslet's character, but my love for this film is to just show that they were human as well, hard to believe, but that our mothers, sisters, friends, whoever could have done something so shameful.

    Michael Berg in 1995 Berlin watches an S-Bahn pass by, flashing back to a tram in 1958 Neustadt. A teenage Michael gets off because he is feeling sick and wanders around the streets afterwards, finally pausing in the entryway of a nearby apartment building where he vomits. Hanna Schmitz, the tram conductor, comes in and assists him in returning home. The 36 year old Hanna seduces and begins an affair with the 15 year old boy. During their liaisons, at her apartment, he reads to her literary works he is studying. After a bicycling trip, Hanna learns she is being promoted to a clerical job at the tram company. She abruptly moves without leaving a trace. The adult Michael, a lawyer, at Heidelberg University law school in 1966. As part of a special seminar taught by Professor Rohl, a camp survivor, he observes a trial of several women who were accused of letting 300 Jewish women die in a burning church when they were SS guards on the death march following the 1944 evacuation of Auschwitz. Hanna is one of the defendants. Stunned, Michael visits a former camp himself. The trial divides the seminar, with one student angrily saying there is nothing to be learned from it other than that evil acts occurred and that the older generation of Germans should kill themselves for their failure to act then. But Michael is conflicted on what to do, if to speak out on Hannah's behalf on some of her innocence in the murders or keep quiet.

    This is one of the most powerful movies I have ever seen, it was so incredible and just heart breaking. One of the things I respected about the film was the way they handled the awkward "love story" between Michael and Hannah, she's older, he's younger, but it's not even a perverted thing, so strange to say that. I don't know how to put it exactly, but their connection was real and in some sense they both needed each other. If you have the chance to see this movie, I seriously suggest that you take it, the powerful performances really make this film captivating. The story is so heart wrenching and painful, but was told so well. Kate now finally has the award she's deserved for so long and pulls in a terrific performance with The Reader.

    10/10
  • comment
    • Author: Crazy
    What is guilt? I believe this is the central question behind Stephen Daldry's new film The Reader. Based on the novel by Bernhard Schlink, the story asks its audience what a true monster is. If you know a secret, one that could exonerate someone from being found guilty of murder, should you help her even though you know she's accepted her guilt despite being unable to stop it? What if that person was someone you loved? There is some heavy material thrown about in the second half of this film, emotions run high and people must make decisions concerning some very dire situations. One thing is for sure, though, once that decision is made, no matter which side of the fence you fall on, some shred of guilt, some feeling of remorse, is inevitably going to follow you around for the rest of your life. This is what we call being human, because as Bruno Ganz's Professor Rohl says, "our justice is governed by laws, not morals." It doesn't matter whether something was right or wrong, it's whether it was legal or illegal. Unfortunately our souls don't work that way.

    As said, these moral quandaries crop up in the brilliantly paced and constructed second half of the film. The power involved in the characters' actions all weigh heavy on those they touch. Perhaps the weight would not feel as palpable without the events of the first act, but either way, that portion of the film is too light and innocuous. We learn about young Michael Berg's, (a wonderful turn by David Kross, who is the true star of the film), affair with an older woman named Hanna Schmitz. This woman is very troubled and in a state of constant flux where her emotions are concerned. She loves Berg, but can never quite allow herself to fully commit to that feeling, her past continuously nagging at the back of her head, remembering what it was she used to do with those who read to her. Kate Winslet's performance as Hanna is quite good, but like the film itself, doesn't come into its own until the second act, when all the secrets finally become uncovered.

    It is a good beginning, the unabashed love of a young 15 year old and his first sexual partner. He becomes her orator of stories and partner in romance, but they both know it could never last. School would be commencing and Berg would see the young girls his age, ever comparing them to Hanna, and her manifesting his feelings with her own jealousy, knowing that she must let him go … this time sending herself away rather than those she "befriended" of her past, those she sent off to whatever fate awaited them. Whether this violation became so deeply rooted in the boy, I'm not sure, but when he goes off to law school and crosses paths with his first love again, this time as she awaits charges of Nazi war crimes, he is torn on what is morally correct. It becomes his obligation to let the truth come out, despite the activities she partook in during the Holocaust. According to the law, he must divulge the information for justice, but his moral compass may not be able to do so.

    The story truly is wonderfully acted and directed, pulling at the audience's emotions and engaging them throughout. However, while the second half is the most intriguing and resonant, it also contains the one activity that I found abhorrent. Now older, Michael Berg is played by Ralph Fiennes, a lawyer, recently divorced and with a daughter. His journey back home, to his mother that has all but given up on him as a distant figure unable to open up to those that love him, becomes one of returning memories. Discovering the books he once read to Hanna almost two decades earlier, the guilt of what he didn't do makes him set upon a mission to right that wrong. But the way in which he does so is really quite wrong to me. He seems to condemn her for what she did still and only creates cassettes of stories to send her to assuage his own selfish need for forgiveness. He never appears to care about her, because if he did, he would have made different choices in that courtroom years before. Berg shows the selfishness that followed him the entire story and really got me thinking that maybe he was a worse human being than Hanna. It's an interesting dynamic to be sure, one that subverts the somewhat "touching" conclusion the filmmakers seem to want to attempt.

    The Reader is an interesting look at German guilt and the people's need to place blame on others for the Holocaust in order to somehow absolve their own indifference of doing nothing when they themselves knew what was going on. One of Berg's classmates gets the whole issue correct in a little tirade about the absurdity of the trial. Here they all were, guilty themselves of knowing what went on in the thousands of camps, yet putting on trial only six women because a survivor, (interesting to see Lena Olin play a mother and daughter—the beauty of a film spanning decades), wrote a book fingering them. Just as Germany needed to place blame, so did Michael Berg. Rather than put it on his own shoulders though, like Hanna eventually selflessly does, he decides to side with the masses, sitting back silently and then trying in earnest to deal with his eventual guilt, not to apologize to the person he let down, but to somehow forgive himself. It is quite the despicable act and I'm not sure if that was the filmmakers' intent, however, that is the lasting impression it left on me.
  • comment
    • Author: Mr_Mix
    The Reader is one of my favorite movies from the year 2008. It is incredibly complex in the way you react to the characters of the movie. It carries many emotions from sensuality to anger all the way back to that of sympathy and resolution. Many moves advertise themselves as unbiased and fair but nothing gets close to that like The Reader which is able to build sympathy for a character you would never think you could feel towards.

    The acting in the movie was phenomenal. Especially that of Kate Winslet who draws out many emotions from whoever is watching. She plays an ex-Nazi guard who has an affair with a 16 year old boy played very well by David Kross. Her bitter, cold attitude, random behavior as well as her past history seems unjustifiable and deplorable. Yet you can do nothing more than feel empathy and compassion towards the shame and humiliation she feels about her one well kept secret. In the course of her affair she ask for one thing, to be read to. From this do you see the humanity within her. Ralph Fiennes also gave quite a nice performance as an older Michael Berg who looks back on his life and then later finds a way to open himself up through his time of self reflection and sudden realizations towards life. David Kross plays the younger Michael Berg whose performance was undoubtedly a very good one, maintaining his presence in not letting himself being totally overshadowed. Overall the performances are very deep and will keep you thinking long after you have seen the movie.

    The directing and writing also was very key to the emotions felt in this movie. Every scene had to be done precisely and consistently to feel genuinely touched rather than feeling falsely drawn in. Stephen Daldry did that under his great subtle direction. The writing by David Hare allowed actors such as Ralph Fiennes, David Kross and of course Kate Winslet to give such stunning and deep performances and take the film to another level.

    I found this movie to be very compelling in many ways. The emotions felt here were not cheap gimmicks but that of feeling true sympathy and forgiveness towards what we would normally describe as something wrong, shameful and reprehensible. I can't remember another film that made me feel these emotions for a character especially after learning one startling secret after another. This film succeeded in ways that almost movie would likely fail in, it did not come off as generous or light but as remarkably fair as a film or any type of medium can get shedding light on both sides of the spectrum. This is a film that is amazingly thought provoking and will bring out the humanity within all of us and should not be missed.
  • comment
    • Author: Low_Skill_But_Happy_Deagle
    Like all works of art that endeavor to "illuminate" the Holocaust, "The Reader" ultimately finds itself looking for answers where none can be found. Yet, the beauty of the film is that it seems to acknowledge the impossibility of its task. Thus, rather than trying to resolve all the issues it raises, the movie simply lays them out before us, trusting that, in the final analysis, we will be able to come to our own conclusions about what, if anything, it all "means."

    Though it is set in a number of different time periods, the story proper begins in 1958, when a 15-year-old German boy by the name of Michael Berg is seduced by a 38-year-old woman named Hanna Schmitz. For a summer, the two carry on a secret, illicit affair, wherein the woman introduces the boy to the joys of physical love, while he reciprocates by reading the classics to her between bouts of passionate lovemaking. Flash forward to 1966 when Michael, now a university law student, discovers, much to his horror, that this very same Hanna who meant so much to him in his youth is actually a former concentration camp guard currently standing trial for war crimes. The story goes even further ahead in time as a now middle-aged Michael keeps up the relationship by sending his personalized recordings of books to Hanna as she serves out her time in prison.

    There has been some criticism leveled against the film that it aims to cast a Nazi mass murderer in a "sympathetic" light. Yet, what ultimately comes across in the story is not how "likable" a person Hanna is but how sadly tragic. Like all fine drama, "The Reader" goes beyond the two-dimensional stereotypes of heroes and villains to examine the complexity of human relationships and the messiness of the human condition. The movie keeps us emotionally off-balance throughout. Even in the early stages of the courtship, we are torn between our attraction to the characters as individuals and our revulsion at the difference in their ages. Hanna is particularly enigmatic as she embraces a child two decades her junior yet seems to find some strange fulfillment in him that goes beyond the obvious physicality of their relationship. Despite the touchy nature of these scenes, we get a feel for what brings these two very different characters together at this particular moment in time.

    As the story moves on, the screenplay confronts many of the thornier issues surrounding what exactly happened in Germany in the middle of the Twentieth Century, questioning how so many "average" people could, at best, have turned a blind eye to the events that were occurring, and, at worst, have allowed themselves to become complicit in the mass atrocities. There's a beautifully incisive scene in which a young law student confronts his professor, demanding to know how the man has been able to live with himself for all these years, knowing that he did not do everything within his power to try and stop what was happening. In that brief, shining moment, we get a sense of what it must have been like for the people in Germany in the decades following the war when so many, Hanna included, simply turned their backs on the past in an effort to move on with their lives.

    Perhaps the most complex character in the story is Michael, who, as he ages and learns more and more hidden truths about his first love, must come to terms with the fact that the woman he thought he knew on the most intimate of terms may, in fact, be an unrepentant mass murderer. Yet, love is not something that can be turned on and off at will, and it takes Michael decades to figure out just how best to deal with the moral dilemma raging in the very depths of his soul.

    Michael is played first by David Kross in the period from 1958 to 1966, and then by Ralph Fiennes in the time thereafter. Both are superb, with Kross, in particular, delivering a performance of such delicacy and sensitivity that he sets the groundwork for what Fiennes is called on to do later in the film. And, of course, Kate Winslet, in the role that won her an Oscar, demonstrates yet again why she is one of the screen's great actresses.

    Kudos must also go to screenwriter David Hare, who has adapted Bernhard Schlink's complexly structured novel with integrity and taste, and to director Stephen Daldry and cinematographers Chris Menges and Roger Deakins for the sumptuous look they have achieved with the film. Together, these fine artists have created a work that challenges the intellect and roils the emotions.
  • comment
    • Author: Doktilar
    I read the book this movie is based on about 10 years ago, and as I watched the movie, it came back to me. I am not a Nazi sympathizer - very much NOT so - but at one point during the trials when Kate Winslet's character (Hanna) asks the judge, "what would you have done" kind of sums it up a lot. By reading the book beforehand, there is a lot more insight that perhaps the movie doesn't clearly give. From the beginning in the book it seems obvious that Hanna is illiterate and so later she on more apparent that she could never have possibly written the reports she was accused of.

    Why she allowed it to happen that she got put in prison, one does not really know. Was it to help with the guilt she felt for what she knew she had done even if she did not write the reports?

    Whether this story is really true or not, it's an interesting look on the other side to the Holocaust. Hitler did not just enact a huge amount of genocide, he also brainwashed even his own to a certain *ideal* and it was an obey or be killed. Orwell's 1984 is a fantasized yet so true of this way of thinking.

    Please read the literature and books and everything you can find on the Holocaust. The brilliant minds we lost during that time will never be recovered.
  • comment
    • Author: Mohn
    Stephen Daldry knows how to tell a story, knows how important it is to make each of those characters relevant and indispensable, more importantly, emotions are finely portrayed, but it is the cerebral quality of his work that both impresses and irritates the audience. Somehow, he let go of his control and made "Billy Elliot" exuberant and glorious, with each note and emotion spilling out of the screen. His restraint might have lessened the impact of the dark nature of the tragedy in "The Hours"; somehow the balance continues in "The Reader", a powerful testament to the complexity of humans and their interactions. In "The Reader" learning occurs, consequences, origins, and motivations are carefully explored and analyzed, leaving out some of the mystery for us to decide. Choice is key here, and some choices are carry a bigger weight than others. The marvelous Kate Winslet, who should be honoured for the quality of her work, with as much recognition as it is humanly possible portrays the central character of the story, a woman whose life might have been shaped by unfortunate events, mostly undisclosed to us, and some of her own genetic makeup. We, as the lawyers and the students in the film, get to evaluate the evidence and choose to make a statement to justify hers and our own ethical standpoints. It is the intricate and deft interpretation of Hannah that anchors the story. Although, the story follows Michael and their relationship from his teenage years to the devastating conclusion, the film succeeds because Winslet is able to show every bit of the confusion, rationale, and emotion that her character possesses. She seems cold and detached, but as we look, we discover that there is more to her than we can see from the moments we see her on the screen. Hannah carries secrets inside her soul, somehow keeping herself alive, surviving, living an austere existence that hypnotizes, seduces, and repulses those she encounters. Michael is seduced by this mysterious woman, and his own future is shaped by those moments they spend together. What he doesn't realize is how big of an effect their time together will have on his life. Their early scenes are powerful and presented with a strong sense of realism and brevity. They're probable the best of the film and might have to be reviewed to understand how key they are to the further growth of Michael's life and reactions to others. Winslet does not say much, but her manipulations provoke her desired effects. As their paths diverge and meet, their relationship changes as one observes the dramatic turn of events that brings them together again, and how Michael's actions have dire consequences for both of them. It is during this period that we think we begin to see how relative everything: what is moral and immoral, logic and emotional, simple and complex. Highs and lows are hit again, as we become more involved in one of the most powerful and dramatic moments of their lives. In the final act of the film is when Winslet and Feines do some of their most outstanding work ever; she even surpassing her masterful turns in "Revolutionary Road", and "Eternal Sunshine". Every gesture, every look, every enunciation add details and shed light to who they were, are and might become. It is subtle work, haunting, and bewitching, the work very few people are able to do. "The Reader" reaches its amazing conclusion with a couple of scenes that might break whatever little strength we might still have left. "The Reader" isn't an important work, but it is a work that should be recognized by the quality of its work, a finely tuned and produced piece of cinema by people who recognize how magical, powerful, and intelligent films can be.
  • comment
    • Author: Conjuril
    This isn't meet-cute. Fifteen-year-old schoolboy Michael Berg (David Kross) first encounters his 36-year-old future lover Hanna Schmitz (Kate Winslet) by throwing up in her doorway. It's a dismal rainy day in a German city in 1958 and he has taken ill on the way home from school. She cleans him up and accompanies him to his family. He turns out to have scarlet fever, and is kept at home for months. Once he's well again he goes back carrying a bunch of flowers to thank Hanna for her kindness, but realizes he's turned on, and bolts in embarrassment while she's bathing. Eventually Michael returns and happily loses his virginity. A regular ritual of reading, bathing, and lovemaking develops between him and Hanna. He reads to her; she bathes him; the sex is mutual. She is a tram conductor with a harsh manner, and several huge secrets. She seems to be using Michael, but she's also enjoying him mightily, and he is reaping enormous rewards, though his affair puts pressure on his relations with family and schoolmates.

    Bernhard Schlink's original The Reader was an international bestseller. A lawyer and judge who writes, Schlink departed from his usual detective stories with this novel that becomes a meditation on Nazism--the denial of the surviving participants and the incomprehension of Germans like Michael who were born in the aftermath. Michael's feelings toward Hanna become much more complicated than simply those of a youth introduced to love by an older woman--as complicated as the feelings of Germans about the demons in their modern past. As for Hanna, she seems to understand nothing and to be more concerned about how she appears than what she has done.

    The book is in three parts. First there is the love affair of the schoolboy and the tram conductor, which ends abruptly and painfully when Hanna suddenly disappears. In the second part it's eight years later and Michael is a law student attending trials of Nazis with fellow students and their seminar teacher, Professor Rohl (Bruno Ganz). One day the young man is horrified and riveted to learn one of the defendants is none other than his long lost Hanna. She turns out to have been an SS guard at a satellite of Auschwitz and she's on trial with five other women for allegedly allowing several hundred prisoners to burn to death locked inside a church. This trial paralyzes Michael. He has never gotten over his first, interrupted love idyll with Hanna. Now he is filled with guilt for having loved her but also a sense that he should help her when he realizes he has information that might lower her sentence.

    The last part, thirty years later, consists of several brief visits by Michael, first to Hanna in prison, then to the posh Manhattan flat of a Jewish woman, Rose Mather (Lena Olin), who was at the trial. She was one of the survivors and wrote a book about her experiences that was used in evidence. This provides a kind of coda.

    Schlink's novel is neat and arresting, a page-turner that conceivably makes you think. Its Holocaust issues are cunningly intertwined with a sensuous--and rather peculiar--coming-of-age story told by a sensitive man still struggling to understand his experience and his country's. I read the book with interest, but found it a bit contrived. This together with Stephen Daldry's previous choice to film Michael Cunningham's The Hours shows a weakness on the English director's part for stories that are a little too clever and schematic.

    This time the screenplay by the British playwright David Hare does damage to the book by altering its chronology, chopping it up and muddling the original linear three-part structure. Hare has said in interviews that the interpolated device of Michael's telling his story to his grown daughter was necessary to make sense of his voice-over. (That,however, is debatable.) Having settled on this device, Hare felt obligated to keep interjecting the mature Michael, played by Ralph Fiennes, at points throughout the film. The omnipresence of Fiennes' glum face undermines the sense of the young Michael's eagerness and, later, shock and confusion.

    Fiennes as Michael revisits a cosmetically aged Kate Winslet as Hanna three decades later when she is about to be released from prison. Michael could never bring himself to visit her, but sent her tapes of himself reading the same books he read to her during their affair. Fiennes is a cold fish, hard to relate to the lively and sweet personality of young David Kross.

    The film is hampered from the outset by its use of the outmoded artifice of dramatizing a story that takes place in another country and another language and yet having everyone speak English, with several of the main characters played by Brits (Winslet, Fiennes) putting on German accents. Bruno Ganz speaks with less of a German accent than they do.

    There is much of interest in this glossy production, beautifully photographed on location by two of the best DP's in the business, Chris Menges and Roger Deakins. Ganz's professor is an ambiguous, subtle characterization. But since the drama of the unfolding story has been destroyed by breaking it up into pieces, the only thing that remains alive and beautiful and strange are the love scenes between Kross and Winslet. There is good chemistry between the 18-year-old Kross and the 34-year-old Winslet, and their nude scenes are bold and intimate. It's only when the machinery of what Schlink and the filmmakers are trying to tell us about German guilt and denial goes into action that things begin to be clunky and cold. Unfortunately, that is a big part of the picture.
  • comment
    • Author: caster
    We don't know. We think we do but we don't. We make decisions or sometimes decisions are made for us but we think we've made them. Then suddenly, there we are. We can't be certain how we got there or where we will be when everything settles but we do know that we are alive. Some experiences are life altering and we can run from them or embrace them. Staying to see them through though can bring incredible bliss but also tormented turmoil. We just never know. One such experience was had by a young Michael Berg (David Kross) and is chronicled in Stephen Daldry's THE READER. How could he know that when he pulled into an alley to be sick that he would meet the woman who would shape his entire life? How could he know that getting close to her would pull him the furthest he's ever been from himself?

    Of course, when you're a sixteen-year-old boy and a woman who looks like Kate Winslet disrobes in front of you in the privacy of her bathroom, how much thought really goes into the decision that has presented itself? However little it is, it is certainly less than is warranted. This is especially true in West Germany of 1958. This is a Germany that is uncertain how to proceed, how to be its new self in the eyes of the world and the eyes of its very own future generations. Winslet plays Hanna Schmitz, a compassionate woman but also abrasive and stern. Winslet strikes the perfect balance between directness and desire in Schmitz, making her complexities part of her appeal. She is a good fifteen years older than the young Berg and she knows much better than he of her country's history. What he knows, he has read in books, been taught in school. What she knows, she lived first hand. So when the two come together, naked in each other's arms, the meeting is as redemptive as it is passionate. Berg is just happy to be in love and having sex but Schmitz is washing herself clean with the youthful vigor of Germany's tomorrow.

    The summer ends and so does the affair, as one would expect. Just when it would seem that the two would never meet again, life steps in to ensure that past decisions, perhaps made in haste, can come to see their consequences. Berg has grown some and is a college man, studying to be a lawyer, when he catches sight of Hanna Schmitz again. Their latest chance encounter is far less exciting though as he sees her on a class outing to a courthouse. Schmitz is on trial for crimes against humanity for her time as an officer in the Nazi party during the Second World War. Berg's memory of his first love would now become a question of his own morality. How could he love someone who was now accused of such atrocities? How could he be so intimate with someone he apparently never truly knew? And yet, now that he knows her past, does he really know how her past came to be? After all, what is the face of evil? Is it Hanna Schmitz or is it something incredibly bigger than her?

    Ralph Fiennes is the future of Germany. He plays Berg as an adult. His life is orderly, very clean, crisp and cold. He made decisions that made him the man he is and he can never say whether they were the right ones or not. What he can see is that we all make decisions that either hurt or harm other people and that the atrocities committed by his past generations are not as far outside the realm of understanding as he might have originally thought. More importantly, redemption is not that far either.
  • comment
    • Author: Freighton
    "The Reader" isn't about the Holocaust, about Auschwitz, about German collective guilt or the guilt of complicit or evil individuals, even though it features a World War II war crimes trial. It is not about a love story, though there is a beautiful, sexy love story depicted in it. It is about the transformative power of art, in particular, in this case, literature. And literature, a teacher at one point in the film says, is centrally about the control of information—the protecting, the withholding, the selective disclosing of information (whether by characters in the story or by its narrator). If we accept this thesis, literature is crucially about secrets, and "The Reader" is largely, primarily about the harm keeping secrets can do. When Michael (Ralph Fiennes) decides, after all, not to visit Hannah (Kate Winslet) during the trial he is observing as part of his training as a young law student, to press her to disclose to the court the information that would partially exculpate her from the worst, false accusation against her—which could lessen her sentence—it is hard to figure. But it makes sense if we understand, as above, what the film is about, and see that he has decided to let her harm herself with her pridefully protected secret just as she so deeply hurt him by her refusal to admit the same secret to him. That's why he later doesn't write to her along with sending the tapes. Why, when he asks whether she thinks about the past, he doesn't mean their past, but her own guilty history. Why he is not more tender in that visit. In sending her the tapes, he thus clearly is not re-enacting a lover's tender mercies. He is offering her an avenue to her own richer partaking in the kind of exploration of human moral experience, questioning of choices and, ultimately, self-examination that literature presents opportunity for. And, one surmises, it works—additionally prompted by the emotional distance evinced and moral query posed during his final visit to her—with the sad but perhaps just twist represented by her subsequent, final choice. He later unburdens himself to his daughter, as, earlier, the lifelong emotional distance he has held himself in in the protection of his own deep secret has earlier been revealed to have harmed her (among others, we must assume), and his relationships with her and them.
  • comment
    • Author: Velan
    David Hare wrote one of my favorite female characters in "Plenty", Meryl Streep brought her to life in the most extraordinary way. Here, Hare writes another power house female character. It doesn't have the intellectual aspirations of "Plenty" but there is also a form of mental illness in his character. Kate Winslet is magnificent. Her early scenes with the wonderful David Kross are filled with compelling, contradictory and totally believable undertones. My misgivings are to be pinned on Stephen Daldry, the director. His sins as a filmmaker start to become a sort of trade mark, visible and palpable in the moving "Billy Elliot" and the shattering "The Hours" I can't quite pinpoint what it is but in "The Reader" that element is more obvious than in the other two. Maybe it has to do with loftiness. There are moments so frustratingly long and slow here that he lost me in more than one occasion. In any case, the cast makes this film a rewarding experience. Besides Kate Winslet and David Kross. The tortured Ralph Finnes has a couple of wonderful moments as well as Bruno Ganz and Lina Olin in a dual role.
  • comment
    • Author: Doulkree
    The story is a simple one, with a twist. A boy has an affair with an older woman, who one day abandons him without a word. A quiet, sensitive boy, in post WW2 Germany. Finding him retching outside her house she takes him in and cleans him up. When he recuperates and comes to thank her, the relationship becomes kinetic.

    He is educated, she is not. He is innocent, she is not. They make a trade. If he'll read his books of literature to her, she'll please him sexually. He learns little of her, and she doesn't offer much to him, except her body. When he pleads for more, she berates him with: "you mean nothing to me." It is a prophetic remark that shows us more of her, but little else is forthcoming, and when he hesitantly asks her if she means it, she seems to grudgingly back down. As it turns out this exchange may be crucial for the boy's, and our understanding of her character.

    A few years later, when attending a war crimes trial for a class, he is stunned to see his former lover as one of those accused. She was a guard at Auschwitz. The young man is devastated, but holds his silence to his friends. He decides to visit her in jail but backs out. Then he realizes that he has evidence that can change the course of her trial, but continues to keep silent.

    It is his silence that makes up the core of this movie, and it is it's unraveling that is left to the audience. Is his reason simple or complex? Is he acting out of cowardice, malice, or a sense of justice? As a man (Ralph Fiennes) he one day decides to send her one of the books he used to read to her. But not the book, rather a tape he has made of himself reading the book. He had realized in the trial that the one thing he knew about her, was the one thing that might have given her a more lenient sentence: she is illiterate. How this could have been a mitigating factor I won't divulge.

    Using his tapes and looking at the books she teaches herself to read, and starts to write to him, but he never responds, continuing his silence, and yet continuing to correspond to her as a "Reader." What are we to make of him? Or her? My take on it, is that she was a simple, concrete soul, used to taking orders, and able to separate herself emotionally from her job, yet remaining shallow in spite of all the fine literature she is exposed to. She ends up being able to read, but never able to fathom. She comes across not as callous, but as vapid.

    He on the other hand comes across as a weak man, unable to grapple with the paradox of loving a "monster," who he never knew as a monster. Unable to offer much except that which he can do at a distance. He is not callous, but is, like his erstwhile lover, emotionally hollow.

    Winslett is haunting, and emanates pathos. The boy David Kross is winning as a winsome lad. All in all the movie held up well and was engrossing, but I could have done without the final scene with Lena Olin, who plays a victim of the holocaust, imperiously, and unsympathetically, and the scene seems to have had only one purpose: to allow her to get in the pregnant line: "you can learn nothing from the camps."
  • comment
    • Author: Ghordana
    Kate Winslett's performance as Hanna makes this film a memorable experience. Her vacant stares are anything but vacant and will haunt you long after you have left the theater. The subject matter is much more than just an affair with an older woman, albeit this love affair impacts the young man throughout his life. It is more a morality play and a philosophical question of German guilt.

    Bruno Ganz, who plays the professor, actually includes Karl Jaspers' The Question of German Guilt as required reading for his young law students, including Michael Berg, Hanna's lover. The professor also requires his young law students to attend a trial for low level guards from the concentration camps.

    While watching the trial scenes, I tried to make a decision as to what I would have done if I were in Berg's position. It is not an easy question. I guarantee you will be torn apart by this film.

    The young Michael Berg, David Kross, gives a stunning performance. And Ralph Fiennes, as usual, gives the performance he should, reserved, yet multi-layered if you look deep into the philosophical questions this film poses.

    It is based on a book by Bernhard Schlick, adapted for the screen by David Hare, and directed by Stephen Daltry. I highly recommend this film.

    One last thing, on a personal note, I fell in love with Bruno Ganz in the Wim Wenders film Wings of Desire and I am still in love with that man. So sexy.
  • comment
    • Author: Fecage
    "Every single day -- 365 days a year -- an attack against children occurs that is 10 times greater than the death toll from the World Trade Center...We know how to prevent these deaths -- we have the biological knowledge and tools to stop this public health travesty, but we're not yet doing it." Jean-Pierre Habicht, professor of epidemiology and nutritional sciences at Cornell.

    Eight million of the eleven million childhood deaths a year could easily be prevented. That's because almost 60 percent of deaths of children under 5 in the developing world are due to malnutrition and its interactive effects on preventable diseases. Is this not a holocaust?

    An old Soviet piece of gossip had it that Comrade Khruschev was interrupted during his famous 'secret' speech before the Communist Party elite when he denounced Stalin's crimes in 1956, three years after Stalin's death. A voice from the audience shouted, "Why didn't you speak out against these crimes when Comrade Stalin was committing them?" Khruschev looked up from his speech and asked loudly, "Who said that?" A long silence ensued after which Khruschev observed, "That is why."

    When you see "The Reader", ask yourself why you are doing nothing about the holocaust which is happening every year to the poorest children of the world. Is it because you are afraid to be seen as being 'silly' or too 'socialist' or 'soft hearted' or because the system demands that you pay attention to the important things of life like obeying your bosses and keeping order and besides, "What can a lowly person like myself do about the situation" and you're too busy speculating on what the real estate market will be doing in the coming months and finding a pair of jeans at Jeans West which will fit.....

    Michael meets Hanna when he is fifteen. Unbeknownst to Michael, he is coming down with scarlet fever. He is throwing up in an alley on a very rainy day when Hanna, the tram conductor, stops to offer him a warm place to rest until he feels better. Hanna also cleans up his vomit from the pavement. Hanna believes in orderliness and cleanliness. This penchant for order is apparent from the beginning of their relationship and these traits lead her to offer Michael baths and to bathe herself as well and as the movie progresses the motherly Hanna and her son-like friend begin to explore the attractions which flow from such erotic circumstances.

    Both Hanna and Michael are full of hidden passions. Michael could have been a Heydrich in Prague, had he been born 15 years earlier. He is clearly 'officer material'. Hanna, on the other hand, is a working class woman born 30 years earlier into a society which would tell women that their highest aspirations could be fulfilled by staying in the kitchen with the children when they weren't engaged in taking in a church service. with the family. Education was unnecessary. Both Hanna and Michael are intelligent and attractive. Both are turned on by the doors which are opened to them by great literature. Both are also social products of their own German culture, with its various and sundry facets of puritanical, psychological repression, including a kind of reserve which leads to the peculiarly German goodness of keeping one's mouth shut in public about things political, things which the authorities have well in hand. Hanna's fear of exposing her own illiteracy and Michael's fear of public condemnation as a young law student at speaking up for Hanna in a court of law are the stuff of tragedy.

    Sound familiar?

    Even after many steamy sexual encounters, Hanna is shocked by passages in D.H. Lawrence's LADY CHATTERLY'S LOVER, telling Michael that it is the equivalent of smut and that he should stop reading from it, almost as his mother would have. But clearly, Michael is not attracted to Hanna because she is a mother replica--Oedipus, no. One has only to compare and contrast Michael's screen mother with Kate Winslett's Hanna to know that.

    However, it is 'klip und klar' that Hanna loves Michael and he loves her but, unbeknownst to them both when they are together, their love runs very, very deeply. They might believe that they will get over their summertime romance as time goes by, but the reality is that such love does not die, no matter what happens: there are no conditions for it.

    There are elements of Fassbinder's "Ali, Fear Eats the Heart" and "Berlin Alexanderplatz" in "The Reader". "Sophie's Choice" also comes to mind. See this movie and be prepared to cry for humanity because as Thoreau observed, ""Most men lead lives of quiet desperation and go to the grave with the song still in them." Methnks this is especially so in cultures as deeply built on the authoritarian personality character structure as the German one is.
  • comment
    • Author: Silverbrew
    If you have not seen the movie or if you have not heard to plot synopsis please take my word for it, this movie is powerful, it may shake you to the core. It is about hard choices and how we deal with them. Now please stop reading.

    p l e a s e

    Hanna's secret, that she is illiterate is so crucial to who she is. We tend to understand why she acts as she does, but one of the central and pivotal decisions in the movie is Michael's decision to do nothing about his knowledge of that secret. Pay back for the hurt that she has caused? I do not think so. It is more a decision to honor her startling choice of responsibility for 300 deaths over revelation of her secret. there is no doubt that Hanna also bore guilt for the deaths. She is seemingly the only honest person in the courtroom, telling the truth when all have lied. It is only about herself that she lies. Michael could have confronted her, could have revealed the information to the court in several other ways, certainly through his professor he could access the right people, but he keeps Hanna's secret for her and suffers for it even more than he had before.

    This is a story of honest and proud people trying to remain true to who they believe themselves to be. She does not intellectualize her decisions, "I was a guard." "You can't let prisoners run loose!" It never occurred to her to ask why these people were prisoners but one look at her life and we see that she too was a prisoner. This does not absolve her of her guilt, but it does explain her actions. Unlike the other guards she understands too late that there was another way and for that she accepts responsibility.

    But even more than the admission in court, her decision to send Michael to New York produces the most compelling scene in the movie as the agent of the guard confronts the victim and survivor. It is heady stuff and though the victim is sometimes criticized for being cold and bitchy, how else could she be when a stranger brings such news and an apparent plea for forgiveness. And what seems like a cold inquiry, "What was your real relationship with that woman?" turns to be the source of redemption for Michael, he finally admits to another his secrets, in the scope of things they are not big, but they have weighed on him for over 30 years by that time.

    One last thing, the strange sad, beautiful gift of a tin. It was the wrapping that was more valuable than the gift.

    I did not always understand the motivation of the actors, but in the end their unexplained motives play out as in real life leaving us the viewers to pick up the pieces and move on.
  • comment
    • Author: Rare
    The most heart rendering, touching, disturbing and yet immensely beautiful movie of the year. I can not remember when last time I was so much moved by a film. Only another movie coming in mind called Monster's Balls. I don't know why I am comparing these two movies, apparently nothing similar but perhaps somewhere vast intrigues of human mind and its dilemmas, the complexity and overall hands of destiny bring the character of Halle Berry with Kate Winslet and Billy Bob Thornton with Ralph Fiennes.

    The human pride has collapsed dynasties in histories. The Reader takes you to a journey of what human pride and fear of being ashamed can bring down on us, perhaps life long imprisonment to someone just to keep the secret; to someone else it perhaps brings rotting in the agony of repent and living a life worse than death.

    This movie poses many glitches of relationships. Accepting love as of any situation is the key, listening to heart and be bold in love is another. Why did young Michael could not meet Kate during trial? Why didn't he save her? Was it his own fear of exposing an apparently socially unaccepted affair or was it the respect towards his once lover's secret what he bore although his later life. Can someone just be convicted of guilt even the then law and order compelled her to do the job? When Hannah asked the judge "what would you have done if your were in my place?" not only makes him and the juries to silence but also brings the question before us, what would we have done if we were born during Nazi regime and sent to camps as guards? Could there be a choice? What will be her alternative? So many questions...I was dumbfounded with numerous questions of our social structures and be-wilderness of human natures. And overall sometimes people think they can find their ways in lives but never tries to understand what their hearts want. Is it his weak nature or is it moral dilemma to protect somebody who is convicted of felony? But then who is responsible

    I am sure when you watch this movie you will face similar questions. If Kate Winslet doesn't win Oscar for this role then it will be injustice to this beautiful actress who portrays her character with so much subtleties and nuances that I have seen rare in recent past. Same applies to the character of young Michael by David Kross and nonparallel Ralph Fiennes as the elder one. The expressions of this English Patient actor are marvelous. But it is no doubt a Kate Winslet movie all in all. A wonderful creation by Stephen Daldry and exceptional cinematography.

    I thought Slumdog was the movie of the year but then that was a loud movie. The re-fineness of the Reader is very exceptional, sets it miles apart from other movies. It is in that genre of movies that tell complexities of love and its non-confluent ends, or you keep on thinking was it not supposed to be like this. Would it be made more beautiful when at the last scene Ralph Fiennes finally opens up his closed heart to her daughter? I don't think so.
  • comment
    • Author: Talvinl
    Stephen Daldry hit the nail on the head for his interpretation of the novel. His choice of location, cinematography and casting were spot on, which enabled him to deliver a well depicted version of the novel.

    Kate Winslet and David Kross were the backbone of the film, as they portrayed Michael Berg and Hanna Schmitz, respectively, as they were written in the novel. Ultimately, their chemistry and interplay was particularly electrifying and makes the audience really feel for their characters. Surprisingly, Ralph Fiennes portrayal of the older Michael Berg was a major let down, as he did a poor job in emphasising the pain and suffering that the character goes through.

    The court scene is another disappointment. Although it is depicted as written in the novel, the scene would have been strengthened if the film makers had shown flash backs of the events surrounding the Holocaust, which was the major event of this film.

    The film is worth watching, but it is no masterpiece.
  • comment
    • Author: Hinewen
    Good film about the relationship of a young man who meets an older woman with whom he has an affair, little suspecting her past or how it would effect the rest of his life. Multi-Oscar nominated film is a good little drama, but one that has left me scratching my head as to it's best picture nomination.(Equally bizarre is Kate Winslett's Golden Globe win as a supporting actress when she's on screen a large chunk of the film) While I do like the film, I don't love it. I found it often as distant as the lead male character becomes. For me the problem that David Hare's script often reduces the inner conflict of the hero by having him speak not from the heart but the head. Basically, the dialog is much too clunky and it under cuts much of the rest of the emotion. Its not one of David Hare's better works (I'm a huge Hare fan and rarely has his dialog ever just sort of laid there like a dry text book). Its a good film and I do recommend it, but as as best picture contender I would discount it as not quite in the league of the other four nominees. (I'd give Winslet the edge on best actress)
  • comment
    • Author: Usishele
    In watching movies I have a couple of basic rules. The one rule in that list that pertains to this movie is: "The actions and decisions of sane or flawed characters in a movie must make some sense in a real way". In this movie they do not.

    Here are two questions that I'll ask and you tell me the honest answer. Question 1: Would you keep a secret hidden that although embarrassing would make the difference between a 4 year prison term and possible life in prison? Question 2: If you were studying law and had information that could radically change the outcome of a trial would you withhold it?

    My guess is that 99.9% of people would say no to both questions. In this movie, the other choice was made for both.

    This alone destroys the credibility of the film's premise, but there is much more. Here's another question: If you had a love affair with a much older women while you were 16, would you eventually take your daughter to her grave site and recite every gory detail, promising her a "big surprise" before doing so?

    I could go on but you get the point. The basic premise of the movie IMHO is brilliant, that is, "how could so many people do such inhumane things to other human beings while thousands of others knew but did nothing". The gigantic problem with the movie is the question was pondered while multiple characters in the movie did implausible things.

    This movie could have been brilliant; sadly it is anything but.
  • comment
    • Author: Survivors
    Kate Winslet's portrayal of Hanna Schmitz, a former Nazi death camp guard living in Berlin in 1958 and working as a trolley car conductor, is one of the strongest roles in her impressive acting career. Somehow she was able to create a character that the audience could feel some degree of empathy with, despite her having worked in Auschwitz, selecting prisoners for extermination. To her, it was just a job, like any other. She had no education (she was illiterate). She befriends a young high school student, Michael Berg, and they carry on an unlikely love affair. Before they made love, Hanna insisted that Michael read to her, thus the title. She weeps as Michael reads Homer and laughs to Mark Twain. A complex and fascinating character, she lived her life from day to day, with her past buried safely behind her. That is, until a death camp survivor published a book which included details about Hanna's past, resulting in a public trial and the sordid details of her past are retold in court.

    The story is narrated by Michael Berg, as told through a series of flashbacks, beginning with when they first met in 1958. While Hanna Schmitz's character is played by Kate Winslet for the entire film, Michael Berg's character is played by 2 different actors, David Kross plays young Michael Berg and Ralph Fiennes as the adult. While Kate Winslet steals the show, the movie is putatively about Michael Berg. More's the pity, since his character is not all that appealing. As a callow youth and as an equally callow adult, he doesn't seem very engaging (as an adult, he is too busy to attend his father's funeral). This is the movie's biggest flaw. Kate Winslet is in a supporting role when she should be the main attraction.

    The plot is complicated, and the heavy use of flashback narrative doesn't help things. The movie begins in the present, flashes back to 1958, into the 1960s, with a flashback within a flashback to 1944 (as re-told in the court proceedings), and then into the 70s, 80s, & 90s.

    I would recommend this movie despite the plot simply to watch Kate Winslet's study in the banality of evil. It's one of the great and memorable performances of 2008.
  • comment
    • Author: Delaath
    Based on the novel by German writer Bernhard Schlink, The Reader (Der Vorleser) tells a story about a passionate affair between a 15-yr-old student and a 36-yr-old woman in the 1950s, post WWII Germany. Hanna Schmitz is the mysterious lady working as a tram conductor who loves to be read to by young Michael Berg during their trysts. Their affair lasted a summer and as intense as it started, Hanna left just as suddenly without a word. The next time Michael saw Hanna is 8 years later, in a courtroom where she is the defendant of a war crime trial and it is then where he finally finds out her secret she has fiercely guarded her whole life.

    The director, of 2 Oscar-nominated films: Billy Elliott & The Hours, Stephen Daldry has once again highlighted the complexity of the main characters in this film. Revolving around Golden Globe winner Kate Winslet's portrayal of Hanna Schmitz, Kate's ability to create an image of a stout German lady is pretty impressive, packaged together with a German-accented English and she also bares all, both literally and creatively, in this film. David Kross, the newcomer as the young Michael Berg, is the true-blue German who in turn had to learn English to be able to act in this film and Ralph Fiennes does a fine job portraying the older & perpetually-troubled Michael, who couldn't forget the past that had created such a great impact to the rest of his life.

    The Reader's premise surrounds the moments when Michael reads to Hanna every time they meet, mainly from works of German literature like The Odyssey, The Lady & The Little Dog and even The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn. It lightens up the pace a little bit with a touch of humour and also when it links significantly towards the ending of the film. The trip to the concentration camp is poignant and hits home the cold reality of the effects of the Holocaust; the people who worked in it, and the people who died in it. In this film, we get to view it from the point-of-view of the people who worked in it. To them, it's just work in which they have to be responsible in their assigned duties and if it involves selecting a group of people to be sent to the gas chambers, they will do it with diligence. The question posed to everybody else is: 'So what would YOU have done?'

    Containing flashbacks of the past and present, the film is intermix with Michael's memories of the affair in 1958, his law student times 8 years later & to his present life in 1995. Unfortunately, the pacing of the film is slow and the plot's main twist was revealed too early on in the film and so it killed the whole build-up to Hanna's 'secret'. Also this being a German story by a German writer based in Germany but shot in English with English actress (Kate Winslet) & actor (Ralph Fiennes) somehow just doesn't seem convincing enough. As compared to the book itself, the inner struggles of Michael especially during the trials are not shown in its full strength to prove his guilt of betrayal to Hanna.

    Overall, watch this film for the effects of post-WWII on the people left behind, to appreciate the changing years and landscape of Germany and most of all to experience award-worthy Kate Winslet, David Kross & Ralph Fiennes acting skills.
  • Cast overview, first billed only:
    Ralph Fiennes Ralph Fiennes - Michael Berg
    Jeanette Hain Jeanette Hain - Brigitte
    David Kross David Kross - Young Michael Berg
    Kate Winslet Kate Winslet - Hanna Schmitz
    Susanne Lothar Susanne Lothar - Carla Berg
    Alissa Wilms Alissa Wilms - Emily Berg
    Florian Bartholomäi Florian Bartholomäi - Thomas Berg
    Friederike Becht Friederike Becht - Angela Berg
    Matthias Habich Matthias Habich - Peter Berg
    Frieder Venus Frieder Venus - Doctor
    Marie-Anne Fliegel Marie-Anne Fliegel - Hanna's Neighbour (as Marie Anne Fliegel)
    Hendrik Arnst Hendrik Arnst - Woodyard Worker
    Rainer Sellien Rainer Sellien - Teacher
    Torsten Michaelis Torsten Michaelis - Sports Master
    Moritz Grove Moritz Grove - Holger
    All rights reserved © 2017-2024 hd.thomson-multimedia.com