Here's a link for more info on the film.
1. In To Kill A Mockingbird, Atticus urges Scout to "try stepping into another person's shoes and consider things from their perspective" to keep her from getting into fights. In the film, Wiesler does just that. Why is that important for each of us to do?
2. What changes Wiesler, the spy?
3. Consider the Minister, a man of power, and the corruption of that power (This is one of the major themes that tie to Hamlet) and/or think of key moments where characters use their power to serve their own interests. How do these men contrast with Wiesler?
4. O.Scott, A New York Times writer commented, in his review of the film that, "'The suspense comes not only from the structure and pacing of the scenes, but also, more deeply, from the sense that even in an oppressive society, individuals are burdened with free will. You never know, from one moment to the next, what course any of the characters will chose.'" Respond to his critique.
5. Would you agree or disagree that Christa- Maria is a Christ figure?
6. When we first meet the characters of Georg and Wiesler, we can understand them as opposites. Georg is a radical playwright and Wiesler is a member of the Stasi Party and as such works to police the output of people such as Georg. However by the end of the film we see that these characters have become less polarised, and through Wiesler’s actions the two men have an important connection. Why did the film-makers do this? What's the message, or function?
7. What did you learn about history that perhaps you didn't know before?
8. React to any aspect of the film you want.
1. Stepping into another's persons shoes is important for us to do because it helps us resolve any conflicts without any altercations, and also improves our understanding of humanity as well. When we disagree with each other, thinking from another's perspective may cause us to understand why the other feels a certain way, and we may even sympathize with that point of view, like Wiesler did with Dreyman. Doing so can resolve conflict without confrontation, and that is why it is important for each of us to do so, especially when there is a disagreement.
ReplyDeleteI agree completely. In order to create a good solution to a problem all points of views need to be considered, and the only way to do this is to walk in another person's shoes. We all have different perspectives and different ways we believe the world should be, so seeing other points of views is important for making good compromises.
DeleteI agree that stepping in someone else's shoes is important for resolving conflict, but sometimes our differences with each other are so major that any attempt at sympathizing with the other side is futile.
DeleteEven with Wiesler's intervention, the conflict between rebels and the Stasi continued on, resulting in death and disaster: Christa-Maria would have never had her life ruined if Wiesler had done his job and jailed Dreyman like he was supposed to, instead of switching sides and trying to aid the enemy. Sometimes, enemies can talk it out and end conflict, but at other times trying to intervene can exacerbate the situation and make a mess out of an otherwise smooth defeat in battle.
I agree that it is important to see all sides of an issue as failing to do so could often result in unnecessary conflict. By understanding why Dreyman was doing what he was doing, and seeing his desire to fix all the injustices that plagued his life, Wiesler has a change of heart and slowly turns against the Stasi and the socialist regime.
DeleteI agree that it is important for us to see other people's perspectives in order to prevent conflicts and allow us to at least see where the other side is coming from. As in politics, war, or our day-to-day lives, seeing things from the other side's perspectives would definitely resolve many of these conflicts, or at least make them much less about hatred and more about a simple difference of opinion. Wiesler exhibits this fully, changing from a Stasi agent to a sympathizer in the span of one assignment.
Delete5. I disagree with the statement that Christa-Maria is a Christ figure. I feel that she is portrayed to seem like one in order to emphasize the betrayal she performs later on in the story. If CMS were a christ figure, then she would have chosen to be punished for Dreyman's crimes, essentially dying for his sins in the same way that Jesus Christ did for humanity. However, in the end she ended up betraying Dreyman and, as a result, the subtle christ imagery that had been set up throughout the film was destroyed. However, that is only in the scale of the entire film. To Dreyman, CMS acted as a christ figure as she guided him and motivated him to do good, but to the audience she only appeared to be one up to her betrayal.
ReplyDeleteWhile it is true that she was more like Judas than Christ in the sense of betrayal, I think that overall Christa-Maria is a Christ figure. She was the final sacrifice to save Dreyman, and as such, is like Jesus to him.
DeleteWiesler changes because the more time he spends observing Dreyman, the more he empathizes with him and internalizes Dreyman's life; Wiesler himself has no major preoccupations or interests outside of his career, and so he latches onto the drama in Dreyman's life.
ReplyDeleteAlong the way, certain turning points launch Wiesler farther and farther away from the side of the Stasi. When the child in the elevator blabbers about his father criticizing the Stasi, Wiesler has a chance to exploit the situation and nab an enemy of the state. At the same time, doing so would ruin an entire family just because someone voiced their opinion about the government, and so Wiesler decides to take the side opposite the Stasi, finally seeing how foolishly intolerant and unmerciful the system he serves is.
I agree with this statement, as Wiesler clearly changed a lot throughout the course of the film. He was one of the people who originally thought Dreyman was suspicious, and did not laugh in the cafeteria with his coworkers when someone made a joke about the Hempf and the Stasi in the cafeteria. However, he changes so much over time as to eventually defying the Stasi and removing any evidence of the typewriter before the Stasi could find it and arrest Dreyman.
DeleteI agree with you that there were many turning points in the movie where it showed Wiesler becoming a "good man." I think that the biggest however is when Dreyman plays the "Sonata for a Good Man" on the piano while Wiesler listened in. Wiesler is influenced by more of his inner character and morals than the state. That is why in the end, he chose to oppose the Stasi because he knew imprisoning these people was adding fuel to the fire and not the honest and right thing to do. Instead of being used by the state, he chose the side of fee-will even if it costed him his career. Living with that kind of past of imprisoning others and "ratting people out" would haunt anyone forever and Wiesler knew that. That is why he saved Dreyman and is later thanked in the end of the movie when Dreyman dedicates his book "Sonata for a Good Man" to Wiesler.
DeleteI agree the more Wiesler observes the situation of mission Lazlo the more he empathizes his cause. He thinks deeply on the way Dreyman lives and is always watching but that turned out to be a good thing. Maybe there were some flaws to the plan such as the death of Christa-Maria that was unexpected and a act out of hate from the Minister. But Wiesler see's the flaws and mistakes in the government that he has tried to uphold through his work. In the end he takes the side of Dreyman and the cause of his play writes
DeleteI would agree that Christa-Maria is in most ways looked at as a christ figure not only in the way her symbolism through her always wearing white but the way she brings people together and builds people up such as her boyfriend Dreyman. She gave hope and love to Dreyman when he felt like he didn't want to write anymore she made a simple decision to stay home instead of going to see the minister and that built up Dreyman's drive to keep writing. Going back to symbolism she has many times throughout the film where what she is wearing plays a part she seems to always be wearing white even a white robe when coming out of the shower. Although as what was mentioned she also wore red lipstick when coming out of the shower and that is when she died. Her personality also plays a part she plays a very well known actress. She is known all over Germany for her work in Dreyman's plays. She is well known just as christ is well known.
ReplyDeleteChrista-Maria can be a christ figure in that way, but she also busted Dreyman in the end and threatened his life. In that sense, she is not a christ figure.
DeleteHi Jordan, I agree with your reasoning regarding the symbolism Christa-Maria displays. There is lots of evidence to prove that Christa-Maria was in the film to sort of display a Christ figure.
DeleteI agree that Christa Maria can be seen as a Christ figure and that she is always wearing white to represent purity; however, I also disagree because near the middle of the movie, we can see Christa betraying Dreyman by telling the people where the typewriter was which can harm him. She just wanted to be free from the 20 years in jail -- she only thinks about her own well-being.
DeleteI learned that East and West Germany were still separate countries until 1989. I also learned that East Germany was a lot like other countries where the citizens don´t have the liberty to speak their own mind. The characters in the movie had to use code words and had to watch what they said because they were being listened to for being radical thinkers. The Stasi also invaded the apartment because of a typewriter. It reminds me a lot of the USSR.
ReplyDeleteI agree that people don't have the right to speak up about their opinions or feel that it isn't safe to.
Delete2. Wiesler changes dramatically over time. At the beginning of the film, there was a scene of him interrogating another person by depriving him of sleep. At the end, he essentially saved Dreyman by hiding his typewriter and eventually lost his job. What caused the changes in Weisler is the connection he felt with Dreyman. By listening to his conversations, Weisler felt that he intimately got to know Dreyman. He especially changed after hearing the big fight between Dreyman and Maria. Weisler decided to help them by approaching Maria as a fan at the bar. Ultimately, his help was not forgotten as Dreyman dedicated a book to Weisler.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with your statement that it is the intimacy he shared with Dreyman that changed him over time. I feel that the main reason was the incredible amount of corruption that was present in the secret police at that point, coupled with the fact that Dreyman was essentially innocent of any crimes until the circumstances of the constant interrogation and surveillance on his life drove him to desperation.
Delete2) I think what changes Weisler is that the sad moment of Georg's wife's death. Weisler noticed and felt sorry for Georg because G. didn't have anyone else to be accompanied of. From that moment on, W. stopped the 'searching of George's literary writing'. Then, he moved on his life and he didn't want to harm G. any more. He payed respects to G. by buying his own book at the end of the movie.
ReplyDeleteI think he actually started feeling compassion even before this point. And although the point when Christa dies did force him to feel more emotions for Dreyman, in the end of the movie, he didnt buy the book to pay respects, but rather as an understanding that DRayman was thanking jim.
DeleteI think the way the critique addresses the characters' behavior is very interesting. It was apparent that some of the main characters felt that with their free will they should be doing something to change their society. There were several instances in the film where this did leave the audience in suspense. An example is when we saw Christa-Maria sabotage Georg to save her own acting career. She could have kept the writing's hiding place a secret to spite the Stasi, but instead she went along with their desires, for her own selfish reasons. Wiesler's actions are another example of this suspense; the audience never knew what Wiesler would do next to protect Georg. The biggest surprise of them all, in my opinion, was when he hid the typewriter. That was extremely risky so I would not have expected Wiesler to do it. The entire movie, Wiesler worked by himself to protect Georg's next published work.
ReplyDeleteI thought the movie was well made was good at keeping the audience engaged. The characters were somewhat unpredictable considering the historical time frame and the location, so I enjoyed watching.
5. Would you agree or disagree that Christa- Maria is a Christ figure?
ReplyDeleteI disagree that Christa-Maria is a Christ figure. Instead, I see her as more of the sinner. The only reason why Christa-Maria cheats on Dreyman with the Minister (Hemp) was because her addiction to drugs and her ambition for her career. Christa-Maria is the reason why Dreyman is under surveillance: Minister wanted to find flaws in Dreyman so he can have Christa-Maria. When Christa-Maria started being herself and stopped cheating, the minister is salty so that he jailed Christa-Maria for drug abuse. Not putting Dreyman into consideration and only caring for her own good, Christa-Maria is the one who blew Dreyman's cover as well. If She wasn't in the play, this entire chain of events wouldn't happen. She is the ultimate sinner in this film and should not be considered a christ figure.
I agree that Christa is not really a Christ figure. Although she wears white, her actions are not pure like how white is normally symbolized. Instead, she plays a role where she seems to be innocent when she hides many emotions and actions by acting. She also does have an addiction to drugs which is normally seen as a cancerous thing. Therefore, I also agree that she is not a Christ figure in this movie.
DeleteI also disagree with this question and agree on what Amy (you) said. I disagree with this because throughout the film, I saw Christa as the sinner, as tying back to 'Dante's Inferno'. Christa is the sinner and not a "christ figure" because she did drugs and she got jailed for this drug abuse.
DeleteI agree that there were many flaws to Christa-Maria's character and actions. Her image may have been pure, but she was far from that with her betrayal and drug issues. She may have been a christ figure to Dreyman, but overall she was not a good depiction as a Christ figure.
DeleteI agree that Christa-Maria isn't exactly a Christ figure because she did act out of self-interest. However, I think that in a situation like that of East Germany, many people sinned by secretly reporting on their neighbors. Characters like the man who Weisler interrogated at the start of the movie didn't want to sin, but they were left with no other choice. Sieland relied on the state for medication and for her career, and she followed its wishes because of that. Dreyman did the same by writing pro-Communist works. Sieland may have been a sinner, but her actions should be viewed with tolerance.
DeleteThe moment Wiesler changed was when Jerska died and Dreyman plays the piece "The Sonata for a Good Man." The movie tries to show that this is a huge turning point when it showed Wiesler with a tear running down his face as he listened. The Sonata makes perfect sense to the context because the movie is about serving the state (even when it's the wrong thing to do) vs truth and being a good person. Wiesler knew that by spying and turning Dreyman in, it was morally wrong and would make him an evil person. This ties in with prompt number 4 that no matter what environment or rules there are in place, the human free-will will triumph. The movie made a perfect ending as Dreyman wrote a best selling book called "Sonata for a Good Man" and Wiesler finds it. By dedicating the book to Wiesler, Dreyman believes Wiesler was a good man and that he did the "good" thing back in the past when he didn't turn Dreyman in. The book is a way of thanking Wiesler for his good character.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the publication of the book really changed Wiesler's perspective on his life. His facial expression was almost like a sign of enlightenment. It showed that he knew he had done something for the greater good.
DeleteI agree with the sonata changing Weisler. For the longest time he jailed people solely to serve the state and not ever considering if his actions were "right" morally. I don't remember him showing emotion in the film outside this scene so it must signify his profound change to turn against the system he was once a devout member of.
Delete8) I think it's really interesting how in the beginning of the film, the corrupt minister says directly to Wiesler that people do not change. In my opinion this statement becomes the main focus of the film. As the movie progresses, Wiesler begins to change. He starts distancing himself from The Stasi and starts making conscious decisions to help Georg. This would not be a small change because in the beginning, Wiesler was a strict and skilled Stasi member who was committed to finding those against the GDR. At the end of the movie, Wiesler is a different man than he was before; he proved the minister wrong, and proved the fact that people can change.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point. I had forgotten about that comment that the minister had made in the beginning, but after finishing the film and looking back, it IS very relevant.
DeleteI never put that together that is a really good point Babak, The whole movie was about change and one of the opening lines was that people don't change, and his absolute commitment at the start of the film would leave the viewer to believe there was absolutely no way that Wiesler would be the one to change.
DeleteI think that what you said was really insightful and I had not thought of the film in that respect. I completely agree, however, that people with good intentions can change for trhe better.
Delete2. After Jerska's death, Dreyman opens the gift the gift that Jerska had given him on his birthday, a sheet music called "Sonata for a good man". Feeling emotional from the death of his good friend, Dreyman plays the melody while Wiesler listens over the bugs in the house. Overcome with the sadness of the song, Dreyman talks to his girlfriend Christa-Maria Sieland about how no one who listened to the song could possibly be a bad person. Hearing this, Wiesler sheds a tear clearly moved by the song and Dreyman's words and slowly becomes more committed in his plight to help the author even if it means throwing away his career.
ReplyDeleteI also think that this was the biggest changing point for Wiesler. Over time, as he spied on the couple, his appreciation for the work of Georg started to grow. Besides this scene, I think that being in the elevator with the kid showed his true kind emotions.
Delete2. What changes Wiesler is living the lives of Dreyman and Christa-Maria vicariously throughout his spying. Knowing every detail of their personal lives, and therefore their (mostly Christa-Maria’s) crushing personal troubles, likely inspired empathy in Wiesler, which stirred him to take action himself. It was as if he had been there (basically was), which might have resulted in a sort of one-sided, yet close relationship between him and Dreyman/Christa-Maria. Instead of just seeing Dreyman as a potential political enemy of the state like he did near the beginning, Wiesler got to see him (and Christa-Maria) as humans, as people, as individuals with personalities and traits beyond this “this guy is suspicious so we’re tailing him to see if he needs to be thrown in jail” role that Dreyman played in Wiesler’s life and from Wiesler’s perspective. Wiesler saw that there was more to him than that.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the fact that Wiesler changes due to learning the lives of others. When he learns that they have problems he reflects it on his own life and causes him to change.
DeleteI think that it is important for each of us to consider things from another person’s perspective because we need to understand what others are feeling in order to comprehend what they are doing and why they are doing that. When “ stepping into another person’s shoes” you may begin to realize that what you are doing may be considered evil and harmful to many others, so this may cause a change in that person for the better. As human beings we all need to understand each other to create a more peaceful environment. If the opposite happens and one group believes they are superior, this will create an unbalanced society, for example, The lives of others. In the film he begins to understand that what his group does to the other citizens is terrible. They invade their privacy. But by seeing everything about a normal citizen’s life, he begins to want that life where there are relationships and love. So, he begins to help these people because he is slowly convinced by this couple that the statsi group is not as great as he believed. Therefore, by understanding other people’s lives, you may be able to improve and change your way of living.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you because Wiesler starts stepping into the shoes of Christa Maria and Georg. They help him understand the views of those people, who are against the government. This is something Wiesler didn't understand before Operation Lazlo started. Wiesler was a professor, who taught lessons on how to interrogate people, but now he sympathizes with those against the East German government.
Delete8. React to any aspect of the film you want.
ReplyDeleteAt the end of the movie georg has his driver drive to where Wiesler was on his mail route after he finds out that he never reported any of his crimes and hid the typewriter and sacrificed his whole career, but he never gets out of the car to say anything just to look at him, I don't really understand why he doesn't though if someone just gave up everything, you would think they would want to befriend this person or give them gratitude. Georg does write a book for him but 2 years later, that Wiesler does see and read. But it really questions what Wiesler motive to save Georg really was. At some points in the movie it seem's like he too is in love with Christa-Maria but later on it just seems like he fell in love with the writing and the drama.
What Wiesler's motive really was? I think at first he did not have any motive different from his original mission. But as he listened in on the house, he is exposed to different lives and emotions that slowly build up on him. The same way, when we watch a movie or read a book, we react in some way or another. By experiencing feelings of love and protection, Wiesler slowly changes and goes against his job because he has discovered something more important and true. As for why Georg did not speak to Wiesler, like Mrs. Ene said, what really could he have said, say thank you and show gratitude? how? So I think the book is his biggest form of gratitude.
DeleteI feel like he was going to go talk to him but as he was getting out of the car he was at a loss for words. He didn't know what he could say to Weisler because he saved his life. He didn't think a thank you would suffice and decided to write a book instead.
Delete2. The question of what changed Weisler is interesting because at the start of the film, we see that he is an experienced and loyal spy. He has no moral objections to using techniques such as sleep deprivation in order to extract information from prisoners. I can assume that he has carried out surveillance missions similar to Operation Lazlo before. What exactly was it about this mission that changed him? I think that was deeply influenced by Georg because they were both going through the same crisis. Originally, Georg was a loyal Communist and promoted communist ideology through his writings. But the unfair treatment of Jerska makes him question his allegiance. Likewise, Wiesler had the same change of heart because he was able to witness the damage that his government does to people. Weisler changed because he was observing a reflection of himself.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that Wiesler changed because he could relate to Georg. Initially, the audience could guess that Georg and Wiesler are two very different men. But, we learn that Wiesler used to be just like Georg, a radical who just wants change. Wiesler changed because he was exposed to how the people are affected by the Stasi Party. I agree with you that spying on Georg was another way of him reflecting and going through his own life.
DeleteI didn't get to see much of the film, but from what I saw I couldn't figure out why the fact that some guy spying on other people because he doesn't have drama in his life is so significant.
ReplyDeleteDuring the era of the communist regime, the government was very oppressive towards its people to prevent members of society from speaking out against political figures or beliefs.
Delete2. When we first meet Wiesler, he is introduced as a strict and rule-following member of the Stasi. His lecture on interrogation makes him seem like a loyal and adamant man living in the GDR. As he begins Operation Lazlo and spies on Georg and Maria, his ideals and feelings start to differ. He intentionally leaves out information regarding their activities. Additionally, in the elevator scene, we see that Wiesler has changed and now sees the bigger picture. Instead of following normal protocols, he decides to ask the kid a different question. In the end, Wiesler saves the couple from the government because he realizes the beauty in art. The time he spent spying on the couple made him realize how much the government has impacted the society in a negative way. The GDR and it's intolerant structure has turned the world to gray. Thus, as Wiesler changed, his emotions and appreciation towards art came out.
ReplyDeleteIt's quite interesting and ironic that through communist actions, Wiesler was able to find out about free thinking and free will and able to accept it as a valid point of view in society
Delete1. It's important for all of us to respect one another's differing opinions and views and feel empathy for each other. In the film, Wiesler at first is a firm supporter of the totalitarian and communist regime of the GDR. However, after he is exposed to the other side of the political spectrum by Dreyman and Christa in which free thinking and creativity is valued, he starts to question his superiors and the government as to whether or not the totalitarian government that the GDR is implementing is morally correct. Wiesler develops as a character to eventually acknowledge that free thinking exists in a communist society and is willing to respect political views different from his. Like Wiesler, we must all have the ability to consider all opinions and views as we progress through the 21st century, as more and more groups of people with the same beliefs will emerge in society and everyone will need to have some sort of tolerance as they learn more about these different beliefs.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the idea that people need to understand and feel from the perspective of others. It was important that Wiesler was able to finally understand this point and break away from his cold hearted character. His change shows that everyone is human underneath, and that emotions should be used when making decisions.
Delete3.The primary intention of the Stasi was never about Dreyman, but about Christa. The man behind this entire uneasy investigation, Minister Bruno Hempf, is a bully driven by his sexual desires and by abusing his access to power and information, hired Wiesler to monitor Dreyman full 24 hours to get him out of the way. These men did not learn of Dreyman's story like Wiesler did, since Wiesler was the one listening to the surveillance, thus they would not understand to sympathize with him. However, even if they were provided the complete information about Dreyman, they would not have accepted or have had any concern of Dreyman's life besides their own. wiesler, as opposed to the rest of the men, shows compassion and understanding towards the couple, and goes to the point of disobeying orders and risking himself to spare them.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDelete4. Prompt
I agree, and I understand the reasons for this critique. The elements of this film, music, acting, setting and characters all attribute to the suspense. Each important character is unique in image and personality; this really helps to tell them apart. But what especially stood out to me was that the characters are burdened with free will in an oppressive society. This idea that having free will can be a burden is actually something that is common, although not commonly phrased this way. The biggest example in the movie is from the character Wiesler. By listening on Georg's house, he is exposed to a life different from his own; therefore, he experiences a build-up of new feelings of love and protection. Of course, where the suspense comes in is when the audience is unsure which side he is on. What choices will the characters make?
2. In the beginning of the movie, Wiesler was giving a lecture on how he interrogates people. The viewers see that his interrogation methods were very intense to the point where the man being questioned finally told Wiesler the truth. Wiesler's methods and his expressions show that he is very serious about his work. When he is asked to spy on Georg Dreyman and Christa Maria Sieland, Wiesler learns that the Minister Hempf was trying take advantage over Sieland and prevent her from being with Dreyman. This causes Wiesler to change and when he ran into Christa Maria at the bar, he even tries to prevent Christa Maria from going with the minister and be herself.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete7. Prior to watching this film, I only knew about the powerful influence that the Stasi Party had during the German Democratic Republic. I knew that they were capable of controlling politics and governing through fear. However, I did not know that their power seemed limitless. It was intriguing that the Stasi was able to keep surveillance on anyone that was possibly opposing the Communist thoughts. The way that they could infiltrate households and set up a whole system of equipment to monitor a target was a scary thing. Also, I did not know that the government officials were corrupt to the point that they can casually issue threats and orders. They were practically playing God in the GDR because the law simply did not apply to them. I learned a lot about how rebels were able to spread their ideas through a secret system of communications. It was interesting that they knew to prevent leaks even from the slightest detail of styles of print from a typewriter. Another thing that I learned was the Stasi method of interrogation. Their method can be compared to a torturing process. I found it interesting that repetitive questions and odor from the suspect's sweat could be a useful method.
ReplyDelete6. In the beginning of the movie, Wiesler and Dreyman are definitely portrayed as opposites. While Dreyman is a radical playwright, Wiesler is a member of the Stasi Party, who works to police and control the works of artists like Dreyman. By the end of the film, maybe even the middle, these two characters are not portrayed as so radically different and because of Wiesler's actions, these two men have an important connection. The more and more Wiesler gets invested in his surveillance, he becomes less and less of an observer, and more of an actor himself. We can even notice the transformation in his body language. It could even seem as though the relationship between Wiesler and Dreyman is reversed. Wiesler becomes like a creative figure, finding ways to "save" him subject and Dreyman assumes the role of the operator, another way of saying he is forced into secrecy and concealment. Through this transformation, Weisler ends up realizing that control is nothing but an illusion as the freedom people want will always find a way to succeed during oppression.Through observing Drayman's life and literally seeing things from someone else's perspective, Wiesler comes to realize that the ways of the Stasi are wrong.
ReplyDeleteAfter watching The Lives of Others, I learned how oppressive and corrupt the communist regime of the GDR was towards its people before the Cold War. This totalitarian regime revolved around espionage and other inhumane methods of intelligence gathering to imprison members of society that failed to follow the strict laws of the government. These laws mainly focused on preventing people from speaking out against the GDR, which is directly related to the film and how difficult it was for Georg Dreyman to obtain and safely use a typewriter for his plays. Overall, it is interesting to see how much the world has changed since the era of the communist regime and that people should not take for granted the freedoms given to them.
ReplyDelete2? 8. The Lives of Others (Das Leben der Anderen) is a 2006 movie that won "Best Foreign Language Film" for the Academy Awards. It talks about the issues known to exist in East Germany during the Cold War. I found the plot to be very symbolic and meaningful; the director did a fantastic job of imaging the corruption of Communism in East Germany (provided that he was from East Germany himself). The performances from the actors was also very well done. The character of Gerd Wiesler initially looked emotionless with strong loyalty to the Communist regime. As he monitored playwright Georg Dreyman, he begins to discover elements that were previously missing, such as the world of free will, passion, challenge, and diversity. The plot was very well paced and put together, but you need to pay close attention to understand why the ending was the way it is. The way how Wiesler was sitting in a quiet room listening to someone else's life would make people paranoid about government monitoring just because of how accurate it is. Near the end, Dreyman looks through the Stasi's records of his private life. Beginning with accurate information, it slowly becomes inaccurate (such as the "Lenin Play"). He soon realizes that Wiesler, the man who was monitoring him, was actually covering up for him, and was the one who removed the special typewriter from his house. I thought the ending was very touching, where Dreyman seeks Wiesler, now a mailman, and sees but doesn't approach him. 2 years later, Wiesler walks near a bookstore promoting Dreyman's new book, and goes in to see it. He is touched by the fact that the book was dedicated to him with gratitude, and buys one. This scene was my favorite, as I felt touched about how much they had went through and how much they changed. Overall, I thought the movie was a very well written and put together masterpiece that certainly deserves an Academy Award. It made me feel contrasting emotions such as happiness and sadness, and drew me in to the plot with a strong amount of symbolism.
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning, Wiesler is a member of the Stasi Party and doesn't think there are any moral issues with what he is doing. However, once he begins to observe Georg and Christa, he sympathises with them and helps Georg keep his secrets. I think he changes because the more he observers Georg, the more he wants to have a life Georg's, because he thinks Georg's life is better than his own. After Jerksa kills himself, Georg plays the Sonata for a Good Man which was gifted to him by Jerska, and this brings tears to Wiesler's eyes. Wiesler doesn't see Georg as someone of the opposing political party, and instead sees him as a normal person who is capable of bringing emotions for Wiesler.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Wiesler changes because he sees the life that Georg had and he saw how much more rich and fulfilling it was. Sympathizing with Geog's lifestyle allows Wiesler to see the injustice of the government towards normal people like him. It is evident that Wiesler wants a life similar to Georg's, having a wife and friends when he hires a prostitute and wishes for her to stay with him awhile afterwards.
DeleteIn the beginning of the movie, you can see Wiesler teaching a class the tips and tricks about how to interrogate people; he is a very knowledgeable man. Throughout most of the movie, it is easily seen that Wiesler doesn’t have many emotions -- that he doesn’t care about other people’s well-being. Wiesler doesn’t have any other occupation, so he spends most of his time observing Hauser’s drama. The more time Wiesler spends time watching Hauser, the more empathy he feels towards him, so that is why when he finds out about the illegal article, he tries to help Hauser not get in trouble. He also makes a realization about how bad the government is when he was in the elevator with the little boy. This is also the reason why he is surprised that Christa revealed the spot where Hauser hid the typewriter. He, then, has a sense of compassion and goes to Hauser’s house early to help hide the typewriter somewhere other than the space in between the doors so that when the search people come to Hauser’s house, they won’t be able to find it. To further talk about Christa Maria, I agree that Christa is made to be the Christ figure in the movie; however, I also disagree. Some reasons to support the fact that she was made to be the Christ figure are that in every scene, she is always in the color white. She is always so pure and seen as the ‘perfect’ woman for Hauser. In addition, she also died to make a point, so that the case would be dropped. She didn’t want Hauser to be in danger. However, before this all happened, we see Christa betraying Hauser by helping the minister find the author of an illegal article for her own good; she just wanted to be free from the 20 years in jail. All in all, The Lives of Others is an amazing movie and I would recommend it to others.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Christa Maria can be seen as a Christ figure in the way that she is always wearing white, and acting pure. I also agree that she has a downfall in giving up the location of the article, and the author. She betrays the man she loves, and in doing so falls from the location of a Christ figure.
DeleteI meant to type Dreyman, not Hauser XD
DeleteIt is important for people to step into others shoes because it allows them to make decisions while knowing how others will view them and how their decisions will affect them. Making decisions with another perceptions allows people to sympathize and make decisions seen as fair from all sides. Wiesler allowed himself to view the perspective of the people who did not support the country, which allowed himself to see the injustice which took place that he was blind to. Following Wiesler's example, it is important for people to see things from a different perspective before forcing them into their own views.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Aaron. I think stepping into other peoples shows is important. When Wiesler did his limited view was opened.
DeleteI agree that stepping in others' shoes is important because it allows you to empathize with that person. If Wiesler saw Georg and Christa-Maria as just another two people to arrest, he would have had them for their conspiracy, but instead he empathized with them and tried to help them. Wiesler regrets sending all those people he interrogated to prison because he did not see their perspective to begin with.
DeleteI agree that it is important to see event from others shoes to see the new perspective. Which for this case drastically changed Wiesler from being top-level Spy in the state to helping Dreyman, a writer who government say the "enemy of state".
Delete5. Would you agree or disagree that Christa-Maria is a Christ figure?
ReplyDeleteChrista-Maria is not a Christ figure because she betrayed Georg and almost ruined all the work Wiesler had done for them. All of her suffering made her seem very tortured, yet her later acts ruin all of the building Christ-like actions. If Christa-Maria had gone to jail rather than betray Georg, she would have been a Christ figure because she gave herself up for the greater good. Instead, she betrays him, making her death less meaningful because she died out of selfishness rather than dying as a symbol.
I agree in that Christa-Maria is not a Christ figure. She betrays Georg because her career was threatened by the Stasi. I agree that if she had gone to jail rather than betray Georg, she would more likely be a candidate of a Christ Figure. One idea I have is that Wiesler may be the Christ figure in that movie because he sacrifices his own career for the sake of Georg and Christa.
DeleteI agree with Ben. Christa-Maria's constant betrayals prevent her from being seen as a Christ figure. Her death was not because she was strong and remained true to her cause, but rather because she was too weak to handle the fact that she had betrayed the man she loved, and too weak to face him after.
DeleteI also agree that she is not a Christ figure. Her many obvious flaws, such as her drug abuse, insecurity, etc, make her less than morally sound. Although there is imagery and symbolism that could support this, I think her actions in the play make her more Judas than Jesus.
DeleteI also agree that Christa-Maria is not a Christ figure due to her betrayal of their relationship. If anything, she is more like Judas that betrayed Jesus. I also agree that if she decided to give up her career, then she would have been more of a Christ figure.
DeleteThrough watching this film, I learned more about the history of Berlin. I never knew that political advocates of the other parties were spied on by the government(stasi). It is amazing to see that writers such as Georg used their position as a writer to spread their political views in order to remove the soviet power. The movie shows that this event(writing of the article by Georg) ultimately aids in breaking down the Berlin Wall. I think this is a great film which shows the history of Germany, specifically Berlin.
ReplyDeletei disagree, i think you shouldve known already. This isn't even about the history of Germany smh. 12/10 would not watch
DeleteWhat changes Wiesler, the spy?
ReplyDeleteWiesler was changed through the actions and emotions of humans. He is moved by the relationship between the actor and writer. He begins to understand the hardships they have and that the group he is working for is not as perfect as he believed. As the movie progresses this is revealed to Wiesler and he begins to cover for the actor. His spying helps reveal the underlying corruption within the system and he hates it.
I agree with Kevin that Weisler changes when he learn more about who he is following. Weisler learns about the corruption inside his own group and finds it disturbing that they are trying to ruin a man's life for their own personal gain. Weisler is dedicated to his nation and does everything with the well being of the nation in mind. But, when he learns that not all the agents and leaders do the same, he begins to lose faith and it what he has been fighting for.
DeleteIn the beginning of the film, we see Weisler as a rule, following strict person, teaching a class. He does exactly as he is told, works for the Stasi. In the end of the film, Weisler is less polarized, and draws closer to reality. He shows very little emotion, and acts according to the rules. Towards the end of the film, Weisler shows a little more emotion. He is the expert spy, teaching others how to do it, and has done it himself countless times. He is the least likely person to turn and help. But in the end he changes. He goes and moves the typewriter, and articles. I believe he does this because has been changed by him, and now no longer believes in everything he had been teaching.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your idea that Wiesler grows a little more emotional as the movie progresses. The key word here is little, as he still is rather stoic and emotionless. Nonetheless, he still changes and becomes slightly more emotional. Additionally, I also thought that he was the least likely to betray and that his betrayal was a surprise.
DeleteI also agree with your point in saying Weisler becomes more emotional as the movie progresses. In the beginning of the film, he was very strict and followed all the rules but as he learns Georg's motivs, he "softens' and risks his work to help with Georg's plan
DeleteResponse to No.6.
ReplyDeleteArt is often categorized as a part of the humanities because it is seen as a human act. Art is something that often reflects our emotions our feelings, which is why artists are often seen as the most human of us all, and why they often protest so much under totalitarian and stifling regimes, a character represented by Georg in this film. Weisler, represents the Stasi, the epitome of a people who shut of their emotions and feelings and follow their orders. By showing that even the great Weisler can fall and become more human, the film shows that anyone is capable of change. Everyone, no matter what has happened in their lives still has a bit of humanity in them and that if this bit is nurtured, it can grow, as it did in Weisler's case. Weisler went from a cold, unfeeling spy to a compassionate person who risked his life for that of another.
I would say that it wasn't necessary any planned art that moved Wiesler. It was more of the fact that because he was listening to the artists "unfiltered" emotions by spying, he grew his human side. It was from the purity of the artist actions and what they believed in that changed him, not the calculated constructs that the artists create.
DeleteI agree with your idea of hidden humanity. I think that Drayman writing, Sieland's acting, and the moral struggles they faced represented and showed Weisler the idea of humanity, vibrancy in life, and choice. It is almost as he is awakening for the first time, and realizing what the Stasi are doing to individualism and free will. It is this that drives him to protect Drayman, his symbol/anchor to humanity.
Delete2. Wiesler, the spy changes in the film from a person working for the Stasi, to one who sympathizes with Georg Dreyman. At the beginning he had intentions of simply getting his job done and listening to his orders. It seemed to me like this was not one of his first investigations for the Stasi Party. After following Georg's life for a while, he realized what he was doing was wrong. Georg was a radical, against the Stasi Party and what they are doing to the GDR. When Wiesler is monitoring these two he realizes the evilness of the Stasi Party. From the eyes of the audience, he is the expert of spying on people. But, after his close examination and spying he realized how the citizens of the GDR were negatively affected by the Stasi. He changed because Georg exposed the underpinnings of the party, and Wiesler finally decided to stop what he was doing. He also seemed like a lonely man, Wiesler. Wiesler may have also cherished the relationship between Christa and Georg and supported them with their journey as a couple. As the movie went on, Wiesler simply became more sympathetic of the people and the wrongness of the Stasi Party.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you. I think the turning point for Wiesler was when he was secretly hearing Georg's conversations, he finds out about the corruption of the Stasi Party and how wrong things were. He begins to sympathize with the millions of citizens who have suffered under the faulted socialist regime.
DeleteI agree with you. I think there is other changes. For example, I think Wiesler knows what is love. Because he asks for a prostitute and asks her to stay, and he jealous at Georg and Christa, so he purposely let Georg sees Christa comes out from Minister's car.
DeleteI agree! Wiesler definitely seemed to support the relationship of Christa and Georg because we see him approach Christa to try to convince her she is making a bad decision when she is leaving Georg for the minister. He becomes a person with emotion instead of a spy.
Delete1. It's important to step into another person's shoes because it allows you to view situations from their point of view while avoiding misunderstandings. It helps you realize that people's situations can be entirely different from yours, and be seeing things in a different light your own opinions can change and conflict can be most likely avoided. In the film, Wiesler is portrayed as a strict member of the Stasi, but after secretly learning about Georg's life and how it isn't all that it seems he begins to break out of his mold. He changes, and because of this saves Georg's life. In this way, it was important for Wiesler to step into Georg's shoes for a second to realize the faults of the socialist regime he was following. Years later, the two men are able to sympathize with each other and have a deep connection because they come to realize the situation each of them were in, and the sacrifices that were made.
ReplyDelete3. The film reveals the nature of many humans in society, those who seek power to use it in corrupt ways. The minister uses his position to provide and take advantage of CMS's addiction to use her for sex, abusing his responsibilities and moral obligation as a man of power. The director, or Weisler's, boss, and Weisler himself, even takes on the task of surveilling CMS's lover, abusing their power and moral obligations as protecters or police of the Secret Police. Even though they know they are only surveilling the artist so the minister can knock out his love rival, they take on the task to make friends and get promotions. Weisler, an intially cold hearted spy who is dedicated to the cause of the secret police, begins to change completely throughout the film. The life of the subject he spys on, the compassion, love, and free though they have, compels him to undergo a character change that makes him risk his whole career that he has been working on for what is right, instead of what will benefit him. Weisler changes into a person who is okay with doing manual labor, just for his free actions in a controlling totalatarian society. Even after the Wall is taken down and the opression lifted, Weisler continues doing menial labor jobs as he is content not rising up in power, as he has seen the damage of that greed has caused.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point that the regime was extremely corrupt and that it was nice to see the way Wiesler changed throughout the movie. I like how you stated that Wiesler was the one who understands the most and sees that power leads to corruption.
Delete3. We the the corruption that is present in many of the higher up officials. One uses his power and influence to sleep with Christa-Maria, and another is clearly using the expertise of Wiesler to continue his career. Both of these menhave been corrupted by their power, and that is shown throughout the film. However because Wiesler is not obviously corrupt does not mean that he is not self serving, His actions in choosing to save George is just as much an abuse of his power, although for someone other than himself as the other two men. Ultimately the only difference between the two ministers and Wiesler is ambition, and it is that they have ambition and Wiesler does not that they make the choices that they make. None of them are good people (including Wiesler), it is only the traits that they have that set them apart.
ReplyDelete3. Wiesler is different from the other members of the Stasi Party as he doesn't yearn for power. At the beginning it is revealed that his classmate has rose through the ranks while Wiesler stayed doing the actual dirty work. 20 years after graduating from his class, he still does the job he first learned. Others like the Minister uses his power to sabotage party members plans and for sexual pleasures. Wiesler, while doing immoral things such as interrogation, he does so strictly because it is the job he has to do. He is a diligent worker who takes pride in his services while other party members are more focused on playing politics to gain power. Because Wiesler's goal isn't to gain power, it allows him to be the one that flip-flops and helps the artists as he is the only one willing to throw away his career to do the work that needs to be done - to do a job that he can take pride in.
ReplyDeleteNice points Richard. Although they weren't explicitly shown I believe your conclusions were well thought out and I agree wholeheartedly! More specifically I think that the fact that he doesn't desire power leads to all the other qualities that make him differ just like you said.
DeleteI think that it is important to step into other people's shoes because it brings a bigger picture into consideration and may change decisions people make in life. Being able to view things from different points-of-view allows a person to see things fairly from different sides. Wiesler at first is someone who does not sympathize with anyone who is not supporting the country. But after spying on Georg, he was able to see the injustice the country had developed over time. When a problem occurs, it is important for people to be able to look at the big picture before making a decision.
ReplyDeleteI agree Alicia, it is very important for us to consider the other person's situation because we never know what they may be going through. Often, seeing the other perspective allows people to change their own views, similar to what happened in the movie with Wiesler.
DeleteI completely agree with you since most of the times the start of a fight is choosing not to think about other perspectives. Many of the small misunderstandings that occur between relationships is due to this failure of stepping into their point of view.
DeleteI think Wiesler changed because he was able to see the flaws in the people and the world he had always believed in. He sees the corruption that was taking place in East Germany and it allowed him to see how Georg was not a bad person even though he went against a lot of the things that Weisler believed in. Weisler continues to change as he learns about Georg and how he isn't trying to hurt anybody, but teach people about the struggles that take place in East Berlin. I think Weisler connects the with the book Georg is writing about suicide. It is obvious from the movie that Weisler is a lonely man and that he is not very happy about what he is doing. I think he believes Georg is doing a good thing by writing the article, and that changes his views on the the author.
ReplyDeleteThat's true, wiesler was able to see the flaws in the world and he tried is best to not be part of the problem, but instead try to fix it by helping others. this relates back to how we should always try to put ourselves in others positions and ask "What would I do in that situation?"
Delete4. I agree with O' Scott because the plot itself is unexpected. In the beginning Weisler gives a lecture about how to tell if a person is lying or not and giving lots of insight into his method of figuring things out. He's portrayed as a devout Stasi member so his lying is unexpected. He's also an expert in monitoring others, so he knows how to cover his tracks more than most people, but to reach that level of skill meant that he was very loyal to his party. Most of the film is set in grey or dull colors to show how oppressive the atmosphere is. Dreyman's house is composed of dull green and blue walls lending to the bleakness of the film though he and the other writers are the most creative and "free" in the film. But as O' Scott notes, they're not exactly free because the Stasi are monitoring everyone's moves. Dreyman is the "exception" because though he does many incriminating things such as writing the article, Weisler doesn't report it. CMS's actions are also unexpected because she's supposedly in love with Dreyman, but betrays him in the end to save her career. She had the free will to ignore his actions or not give up the information, but in the end self preservation won because she believed that working with the system to earn her "free will" was a better option than pursuing what she truly loved.
ReplyDeleteIt seems like in the beginning, Wiesler was only working for the government and everything he does is to prove his loyalty. The scenes in the beginning are used to show his loyalty to the government. Wiesler change begins when he starts to monitor Georg and I think this occurs because his job is focused on understanding the life of Georg and through this, he starts to understand free will. In the beginning, Wiesler never did anything for self interest but near the end, he did listen to himself and chose to help Georg. This is interesting because the process of saving others, in Wiesler's case, is to betray his government and do the "wrong" thing. This shows that in an oppressive regime, free will is harder to achieve and when it is, it is usually "wrong" but it produces positive results.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your point and like your idea about what is 'wrong' is actually right in an oppressive government like the GDR. It is interesting that Wiesler learned through empathizing with an outsider on how corrupt the group he worked for was.
DeleteI agree too. I think it was hard and confusing for Wiesler to make the decision to betray his loyalty to the government and instead do what he thinks is right. At a time when doing such a thing is considered dangerous, he changed by finding a way to look past simply serving the government and instead to support the truth.
DeleteI agree with your analysis as well. At first, Wiesler seemed to be just doing his duty as state security, and investigate Dreyman. However as he started to know more of Dreyman's character and background, he started to become interested in him and show empathy. He can be seen letting Dreyman off the hook for one of the scene, and persuades his loved one(Christa) to go back to where Dreyman was. In the end, he also hides the typewriter to save Dreyman, which was a "wrong-doing" as a state security investigator. However, he is portrayed as the hero of the story by the end, as Dreyman publishes a sonato for him as well. His brave actions to save a "betrayer" and betray the corrupt government shows the risk and consequences of free will.
Delete6. Georg and Wiesler are introduced into the film as rivals in the film. From the beginning, Wiesler has distrust and is suspicious of Georg without any information about them. Wiesler is the quintessential Stasi member that distrusts all, unless they have a reason to trust another person. However, by watching Dreyman he starts to see all the things that are wrong with the group he works for, the Stasi. He starts to empathize with Christa-Marie and Georg by learning how thoroughly the Stasi oppress creative artists. Through Christa-Marie having to sleep with the Minister in order to work, and Dreyman not being able to work with Jerska, he sees how corrupt the minister is with the power he has. He takes these lessons to allow Dreyman to publish his article about suicide in order to break down the opaqueness of the GDR's republic and allow others to see what life is like in East Germany. Wiesler starts to side and help Dreyman because he knows how important his work is in order to start the overthrow the GDR government. The film makers show no matter what one's background is or where they start, if two people are united on a specific cause, then they have an issue to connect together on and have a mutual goal. The message of the movie is to always check where you are; Wiesler was so deep into the Stasi's regiment that was not able to see how corrupt it actually was, and had to learn vicariously that the group he worked was oppressing and detrimental not just to artists, but to society as well.
ReplyDelete5. I disagree that Christa-Maria is a Christ figure. Considering all the sins that she committed in the course of the film, I don't think she would classify as a Christ figure. When we begin to see more of her character in the movie, we see that she is addicted to drugs and cheats on Dreyman with the Minister. One main reason why she isn't a Christ figure is because of her betrayal at the end of the film. When she is interrogated about Dreyman, she reveals that he wrote the article in order to escape punishment. Through the film we see how strong the bond between Christa-Maria and Dreyman is. To see that she was so selfish in her decision at the end shows that she does not deserve to be showcased as a Christ figure.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you and also don't think Christa can be considered a Christ figure due to her betrayal of telling them Dreyman is guilty and where the typewriter was.
DeleteI agree with your point that Christa's addiction to drugs does not classify her as a Christ figure. However, her relationship with the Minister and her betrayal of Dreyman was out of her control. She was forced to cheat on Dreyman with the Minister because she relied on the Minister to keep her job as an actress. At the end of the movie, when she betrays Dreyman, she is forced to save her life at the expense of his. Her suicide at the end of the film shows that she feels really guilty about her actions. Although I agree with you that she cannot be classified as a Christ figure, she cannot be completely condemned as selfish either.
DeleteWiesler the spy is first introduced in the movie as the strict officer. He interrogates the "criminal" with various tactics. Then, we are brought to the scene where Wiesler is teaching the class about the different tricks he had used. We can relate Wiesler to someone who is emotionless, and pretty empty. He wears only grey colors, walks robot-like, and doesn't have anyone to call friends or family. His life is pretty much surrounded by work and making sure no one with different opinions is out in the country. During the play, Wiesler is the one who suggests to keep an eye on George. From now onward is when Wiesler changes. Once he begins his spy works, the insights which Wiesler hears from Greg slowly changes his mind. For example, he feels lonely after hearing the love between CMS and Dreymond, and chooses to have some kind of an affair. Next, Wiesler is intrigued by the material George writes, so takes the book from George and enjoys reading the novel. It is one of the first times we notice a little smile on Wiesler's face. Next, the old Wiesler used to find out the names of those whose opinions differ about the way the country is run. But when he met the little boy in the elevator, he chooses not to ask the name, and allows people to have their own opinions. Furthermore, Wiesler permits the idea of Paul illegally entering the other side, and advices CMS to continue her acting career. Near the end, Wiesler chooses not to release the info about the suicide novel they were writing to publish, and at the end, hides the typewriter with himself. Wiesler knew that this would cause him consequences, yet, the more he listened to George, the more he changed himself.
ReplyDeleteWhat changes Weisler the spy?
ReplyDeleteI think Weisler starts to understand and see things from Dreyman's point of view. He starts to see why Dreyman and his comrades are writing an expose and eventually starts to agree with their ideology. His view on the government and its control starts to shift the more he listens to Dreyman. Weisler changes through Dreyman's unintentional teachings.
Towards the end of the film he starts to help Dreyman and the writers by hiding the truth and lying in his reports. He was in a way, Dreyman's guardian angel.
His change throughout the film was a very long process. He started off the film with a very narrowed mindset and had the sole intention of furthering his career. As the movie went on, he opened his mind more and decided that helping Dreyman was what was best for West Berlin.
I think that's a good point; part of Wiesler's compassion comes from him trying to see things from Dreyman's perspective. Even though I do not necessarily think his views on the government change completely, I agree that Wiesler indirectly learns a lot from Dreyman.
Delete2) Wiesler changes a lot from the beginning to the end of the movie. At the beginning of the movie, I think he does not believe in love, therefore he did not married. As he sees how Georg and Christa's life, he wants to love people and makes other to love him. So, in the middle of the film, he asks a prostitute, and asks her to stay in his house until morning. I think he wants to experience Georg and Christa's normal life. Not only envy, but Wiesler also jealous of their love for each other. Wiesler purposely let Georg sees Christa comes out from Minister's car. I think the greatest change for Wiesler is he knows what is love.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you and I feel like because Wiesler had the chance to watch the life of someone opposite as him like Georg, he gets the chance to learn about passion and humanness, and improves as a person himself.
DeleteI think what changed Wiesler was the fact that he was heavily invested in Dreyman's personal life. All the drama Dreyman went through, Wiesler in way went through all of that with him, from the cheating to the typewriter. Wiesler began to empathize with Dreyman's situation and he grew more fondly of him. Wiesler also started to see how corruption under any circumstances can not come above the truth which is also why he began to support Dreyman's actions and secretly help him. As he sees that Dreyman could get in trouble he secretly helps him by not notifying guards of his suspicious actions and also by hiding the typewriter for him.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. I think Wiesler's connection with Dreyman was one factor that helped him change, but if that was the case, it would be likely that he would've empathized with other people before and changed his mind. i think that, as you said, his own ability to see through the Stasi's corruption was the key to his transformation. Tracking Dreyman helped him to understand Dreyman's perspective and I think over a period of time, he found that his role in helping the Stasi was useless. He really wasn't doing anything beneficial, and that's what changed him.
Delete2. Of all the characters in The Lives of Others, Wiesler was the least expected to have turned against the government. He's initially very stoic, and seems to make working as a spy his main priority. However, as he takes on the task of observing Dreyman, he begins to change. He begins to show sympathy towards Dreyman, and wants to get involved in some of the drama and problems he Dreyman faces. For example, when Christa leaves after Dreyman tries to convince her to not go to the minister, Wiesler ends his shift looking devastated, having to go to the bar to drink some vodka. By chance, he meets Christa there and convinces her to go back to Dreyman. He finds out the results of his actions in the following report, in which it notes how Christa came back and the two got back together. Furthermore, Wiesler later takes all of the responsibility for the mission in order to protect Dreyman. He fakes the reports in order to hide the fact that Dreyman was writing an article that would later cause the wall to come down. Had it not been for Wiesler, Dreyman would have been caught by the Stasi. It's clear at this point that Wiesler really cares for Dreyman, as he tries to keep them safe all the time. Even to the end when Christa dies, he takes out the typewriter so that the two would be safe, but unfortunately his plans are ruined when Christa dies. In the end, Wiesler is still rather stoic, but he changes throughout the movie and shows that he is capable of understanding the feelings of others.
ReplyDelete8. React to any aspect of the film you want.
ReplyDeleteI think it was incredibly interesting that Wiesler was a well experienced spy who had spied on many people prior to this mission. There was even a scene at the beginning of the movie that showed him teaching a class how to interrogate a suspect and the different signs of guilt/innocence. Wiesler originally started the mission with no intention of saving Georg, and is truly looking for something suspicious about him. Once he does find something, he picks up the phone and dials a number to inform people about what he found, but hangs up once someone picks up. Wiesler went far out of his way to save Georg and went against the corrupt system he had been working for all this time. Wiesler knew saving Georg was the right thing, and proved himself as a truly good man. Since he was such a high level spy and there was obviously something fishy about Georg, Wiesler does lose his job as a spy, but gains an incredible amount of respect from Georg.
I think this movie shows just how important it is to see a situation from another person's point of view through the drastic change in Wiesler. At the start, he is introduced as a Stasi spy and he analyzes an interrogation for his class, showing the best techniques to help break a person for information. When a student mentions mentions how inhumane the treatment, Wiesler doesn't seem to agree and even notes the person's name down for sympathizing with their enemies. After spying on Dreyman and Christa-Maria, he quickly starts to become more invested in their lives, and seems to notice how even though these people are his enemies, they're still human. For this reason, he not only tries to protect them from the government, but also keep the two together, such as when he stopped Christa-Marie from continuing her affairs with the minister. This shows how Wiesler went from his emotionless self to almost the guardian angel for his previous enemies. I think that change shows how when someone steps into someone else's shoes and truly understand their story, their point of view can completely change.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, I think that stepping into someone else's shoes can change your views of others. Everyone has different circumstances and motivations, and by developing empathy for others I think one become's more in touch with their humanity.
DeleteI completely agree, especially what you said about how someone can change their point of view. Oftentimes, people are so caught up in their own emotions that they overlook any opposing opinions. But actually a lot of the time, the opposition can have very reasonable opinions. By trying to understand others, you allow yourself to grow as an individual and become more compassionate.
DeleteI personally believe that CMS, Christa Maria is not very fit to be in a Christ figure, although she mainly wore white clothing, which represents puerility. I would agree that she is somewhat kind as she had relation with the minister to allow Dreyman's play to be as free from regulation as possibly be, but at the end she turned her back to save her own life during interrogation by signing up as informer for the state security, being Verräter to Dreyman. If HGW 17, Wiesler did not remove the typewriter before the State Security arrived, she would have indirectly tortured and killed him as enemy of the state by the government. Adding this sin to using prohibited drugs illegally, even though she "self-murdered" herself she can not be portrayed as Christ like figure as such figure should not be filled with multiple sins.
ReplyDeleteI believe that it is important for us to step in another person's shoes and try to understand their perspective because sometimes our perception of what things maybe might not be right. In The Lives of Others, this can be seen with Wiesler. Wiesler is a man of so much knowledge and experience of how to interrogate people, but we learn in the movie that he does not do that for Georg Dreyman and Christa Maria Sieland. Instead, he covers for the couple as he is able to sympathize with them and their emotions. Before "Operation Lazlo", Wiesler's job was to make sure that all the people conspiring against the country, where put in prison. But, as soon as "Operation Lazlo" starts you can see Wiesler's transformation taking place. He turns from a ridgid man to a more understanding and sympathetic man. He sees how Christa Maria Sieland offers herself to the Minister so that Georg and her stay free. Wiesler starts understanding the corruption and politics that has been present in East Germany, which wasn't apparent to him before.
ReplyDeleteIt is true that he started to understand what his government was doing, however, he was understanding and sympathetic before, but until he gets to be on constant surveillance only then does he realize the corruption and restrictions put in place by the post war communist government.
DeleteI thought Wiesler's gradual change throughout the movie was extremely interesting to look at. He starts off as a loyal member of the Stasi, serves as an expert spy, and even teaches other people how to spy. Wiesler enters Dreyman's house when he is not home, and inserts several listening devices. When Dreyman's neighbor sees Wiesler leaving the room, Wiesler threatens her in order to remain undetected. The main idea is that Wiesler began as a loyal spy for the Stasi. However, as Wiesler listens to Dreyman and Christa-Maria Sieland, he develops compassion for the couple. I think the entire process caused Wiesler to rethink where his loyalty lies. One demonstration of Wiesler's change occurred during the elevator scene, in which Wiesler meets a boy who talks about his dad's negative views of the Stasi. Wiesler begins to ask the boy what his father's name is, but stops himself before finishing the question. This eventually leads up to Wiesler allowing the border patrol conversation to go unreported. Wiesler continues to save Dreyman on different occasions, since he starts to care for him.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with this. The whole situation really helped Wiesler analyze what was going on in the Stasi party and what was the right thing to do. It was a very risky thing for Wiesler to do because there was no way to guarantee that he would not get caught, resulting in him being severely punished by his superiors. It is an amazing change for him to go from being so pro Stasi to working against the Stasi.
Delete2. At the beginning of the movie, Wiesler is a seasoned spy, having monitored,interrogated, and "broken" many people without feeling any remorse. Even when starting his surveillance of Dreyman and Sieland, he has a firm belief in in his mission and the Stasi purpose (clearly stating that his actions are because of his belief, rather than the possibility of promotion). As Wiesler sees Drayman, he begins to empathize with him--he understands his fear of isolation (Drayman's fear of ending up like Jerska and losing Sieland), and finds vibrancy in Dreyman's work (that is missing from Wiesler's life). Drayman gives Wiesler a sense of companionship and completion, and it is due to this that he encourages Sieland to return to Drayman, and hides Drayman's disobedience. Watching the "others" awakens Wiesler, and opens his eyes to freedom of choice, and the oppression of the Stasi.
ReplyDeleteYou are making an interesting point that I hadn't thought of when you say that by watching the "others" Weisler has his eyes opened. I had not thought of it this way previously but I completely agree. The question of why Weisler changed his goals and went against the Stasi party can definitely be debated, but I think it relates to a much bigger question of what influences all human's actions and how innate or acquired human nature is. In the movie, I think that Weisler is innately a good person who ended up in a bad situation and became someone who did cruel things just because that was the role that was given to him. By watching George's more carefree and happy life and mindset, Weisler realized that his current situation was not right for him. To me, this could suggest that many of the so called "evil" people in our world may just be a result of the world's pressures, and with the right environment, a lot of criminals and bad situations could be avoided.
DeleteStepping in other people's shoes and understanding the lives of others is important to us because doing so allows us to improve and learn things we do not know about ourselves. At the beginning of the movie, Wiesler was a man without feelings, just another one of the many Stasi police. Wiesler's role as a police contrasts against Georg Dreyman and Christa Maria's role as artists. Artists typically represent feelings, passion, and creativity, while Stasi polices are typically cold and heartless. By watching the life of Dreyman, Wiesler learns from a couple that is the complete opposite of him, who are against their country. By doing so, he sees clearly of all the wrong things that the Stasi does, and how it affects the life of others. He learns to have feelings and see from a perception that he had never considered. At the end of the movie, Wiesler becomes completely reasonable all because he had the chance to watch the lives of others who are not the same as him. The moral of the story is that no matter what side an individual is on, or what he or she works for, one thing that makes us all humans are feelings. Feelings of empathy, kindness, and giving connects us together. As long as we have feelings, by stepping into each other's shoes, even polar opposites can learn from each other.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you; I think stepping into other people's shoes is very important because it allows us to view things from a different perspective. When Wiesler stepped into the shoes of Dreyman, he began to understand more and more why Dreyman did the things he did. I think if he didn't step into his shoes, he wouldn't have helped Dreyman in the end by removing the typewriter from his house.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think that O. Scott's critique is very accurate. Although the society of the German Democratic Republic is very strict and oppressive, the characters are shown to be individuals instead of machine parts of a system. All of their actions are deliberate and reflect their character growth. Especially in the case of Wiesler, his free will is evident. He starts off a strong supporter of the regime and unquestioning of its intentions, but gradually, after watching Dreyman and Christa's humanity, he starts to question his actions and the orders that he's following. Although in the beginning he seems like the perfect citizen, he never lost his free will. At the climax of the film, he finally uses it to make his own decisions. The suspense comes with seeing the struggle that Wiesler feels, between his government and his morals. He chooses to sacrifice his job and his reputation, by sabotaging the investigation because he feels empathetic towards Dreyman. Whether it was meeting Christa at the bar to convince her to go home, or risking everything to take the typewriter, you never know if Wiesler's free will prevail over the pressure he faces from society. In the end, one realizes that even the most oppressive regimes can't stamp out the humanity and free will in people.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Wiesler changed because he started connecting to Dreyman after following his life. Listening in on his problems with his girlfriend lead him to feel for Dreyman and made it harder for him to turn him in. When Dreyman however mocked the State Security and he was about to turn him in the terrible isolation punishment that his superior described was another major reason that he changed. His supervisor described how if he was caught he would be destroyed and never write again. The connection plus the terrible outcome that would occur if he was caught changed him and allowed him to help Dreyman.
ReplyDeleteI agree with a lot of what you said. I really think Wiesler, putting himself into the shoes of Dreyman, changed him and allowed him to open a new perspective. Wiesler, unlike the other officers, didn't allow his ignorance from stopping him from learning about how the people felt. I feel like other officers took advantage of their dominant power, and used it to take advantage of people.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete2. I think it's extremely important for people to step into someone else's shoes before making a judgement simply because you don't know that person's options or scenario. It's hard to come up with a conclusion when you aren't given the full picture. Wiesler himself put him into the shoes of the artists and saw that they were stuck into a system that they couldn't escape from. After he saw what was going on in their side, he was able to sympathize with them. I think it's extremely important for us to learn this lesson too, because we're going to meet a lot of new people that come from different backgrounds in the future. It's hard to judge someone for anything when you don't understand the set circumstances that shaped their lives. You see that in Wiesler when he started to connect with Dreyman once he started opening himself up to the problems him and his girlfriend were facing. It's extremely similar to what we could experience in the future.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this, especially the point about meeting other people in life. For the rest of our lives we're going to meet people who don't agree with us, are argumentative, or just flat out annoying. What can change a situation fundamentally is having empathy - understanding where other people come from and what their values are, and not turning every disagreement into a reason for mistrust or hatred. Instead, we should celebrate our differences in a communal effort to see past surface level details, and we can only achieve this by stepping into another person's shoes.
Delete2. The realization of how intrusive and corrupt the government definitely changed Weisler. Listening to all the censorship and restrictions that the artists had to go through made Weisler betray his organization to assist in the publication of the criticism about the eastern communist shortcomings. He learned more about how his government was treating the common man.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Weisler may not have really comprehended the extent to which the government controls everything, but I wonder if that's really what caused him to change. I think he may have been OK with knowing sort of in abstract everything that the government was doing "for the good of the people," but he had to see how it affected on individual before he really understood how bad it was.
DeleteI think the change in perspective was what led Wiesler to help Georg Dreyman in the end. In the beginning of the movie, Wiesler was very set on his beliefs and interrogated people relentlessly. When he was assigned to spy on Dreyman, he did so with the intention of finding something and reporting him afterwards. However, the more he looks into their lives the more sympathetic he becomes towards them. He dedicates all of his day listening into their days, that it was almost like he was living through them. He heard the plan and how they were getting a new typewriter yet he did not type into his report. I think he was getting curious as to what they were doing so he wanted to let the plan go through. Occasionally, he almost reports them, like when he picks up the phone to tell the guards that someone is going to cross the border with illegal material, but then he stops himself. Slowly, he became more understanding and accepting of the views of Dreyman. When Christa-Maria got brought in to be questioned, it felt like he was not trying as hard when he interrogated her. After she revealed the location of the typewriter, he goes and removes it before the officials come in. The act of him saving Dreyman shows how he changed from being a strong supporter of the totalitarian regime to a more understanding, sympathetic man. Dreyman and Christa Maria's life showed Wiesler the joy of freedom. Overall, the change in Wiesler was caused by Dreyman and Christa Maria and it was an interesting process to watch and follow.
ReplyDeleteI think Wiesler, observing and listening to every part of Dreyfer and Christa's lives, changes to become more empathetic and understanding towards the other side of the fence - a perspective that he discovers through the artistic and expressive side of Dreyfer.
ReplyDeleteAt the beginning of the film, we see a cut-throat, strict professor who displays no compassion when interrogating a suspect, refusing him sleep until he finally gives in after over 40 hours. Yet as the film progresses, he begins to change, as we saw in the elevator scene with the ball and the boy. After learning the boy has been badmouthing the minister, he almost asks for the father's name, and then changes his mind mid-sentence. A scene that had a large impact on him was the death of Jerska, and how Dreyfer responded with a musical piece and expression to his wife. Through times like this, music and art were able to connect the two together. Even though they never interacted, Wiesler was able to understand Dreyfer's emotions - feeling so attached that he lied and reported false information about "Lazlo" to top executives when they asked about it / he was writing about it.
Wiesler breaks away from the system and is able to find his own individual voice by helping save Dreyfer; that's whats so powerful and compelling about his character.
I agree with what you wrote, and you also pointed out an example I didn't think of with the boy and the ball. I thought maybe he didn't ask the father's name because he thought it would be a waste of time, but there definitely was a bigger reason for that scene that I didn't get while watching.
DeleteWiesler at first was determined to be loyal to the Stasi party. He blindly followed what he was told to do and believed in what he was doing but after spying on Georg for some time, he thought otherwise. Dreyman and Christa-Maria changed Wiesler's mind because it gave him the perspective of the other side and the spy actually had some good in him but he was just misled. You could notice that he progressively became more and more against the Stasi party as he learned more about Dreyman. The first sign was when he went and approached Christa-Maria at the shop and convinced her to go back home to Georg. He still however planned on turning Georg in because he wrote the report about him and brought it to the leader, but hearing his boss on the phone that was the real turning point for Weisler, he crumpled up the report and suggested to no longer do a full surveillance on Dreyman. After that he worked hard to help Dreyman succeed and did not care if it would ruin his career. I think he took a big part in helping the wall come down.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt is definitely important to be able to step into “another person’s shoes”, or consider things from another person’s perspective because of miscommunication and unnecessary conflicts. As humans, it is natural for us to think only about ourselves, and how we should act and think in order to benefit ourselves. If a person has a set of beliefs that contradict another person’s beliefs, usually it is because of a result of each person’s situation, and how one belief positively affects the person. By stepping into another person’s shoes, one is able to see things from another perspective and realize why the person believes what they believe to be able to compromise on beliefs. It also allows a person to check themselves as well, to see if his/her actions are harmful to the other party. For example, in the movie, Wiesler slowly realizes that the Stasi party was the evil side, and that he had a true appreciation of art, and what Dreyman was a part of. Because Wiesler had immersed himself into another person’s life, he had changed sides, something he had never done as a respected investigator for the Stasi. If two people are ignorant, refusing to consider things from another person’s perspective, there will likely be no end to an argument, which is why it is important for us as humans to be able to think like the other person and come to a conclusion to an argument that has a higher chance of benefiting both sides.
ReplyDelete2. Weisler is first introduced as a ruthless spy who rattles people without feeling an emotion. When Weisler is assigned to monitor Sieland and Dreyman, he begins to question his loyalty to the Stasi. An example of Wiesler's change in beliefs starts with the elevator scene where he meets a boy who talks about his parents views against the Stasi. Weisler also leaves the conversation about border patrol to go unreported. Weisler becomes a guardian angel type figure to Dreyman as he helps Dreyman complete the article without being detected.
ReplyDelete5. Would you agree or disagree that Christa- Maria is a Christ figure?
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the statement that Christa-Maria is a Christ figure. If anyone, it is Georg who is like Christ or God. Though both Christa and Georg both share moments of goodness (as in their mutual appreciation with self-identity when Christa refuses to rendezvous with the corrupt politician) and holy color associations (as both frequently wear white). However, it is Georg who, despite difficult choices, consistently chooses freedom over oppression. Christa, in the end, betrays Georg and, out of guilt, kills herself. If anything, Christa resembles a Judas-like character. Judas was one of Christs’ disciples (just as Christa was a follower among Paul Hauser, Albert Jerska, etc.), acted as an informant against Christ (just as Christa informed the Stasi of Georg’s hiding space), and killed himself out of grief (just as Christa did with the truck). Like Judas, Christa was convinced by another (Georg) to act as he did and lead enlightened lives afterwards until the end.
I agree, Christa-Maria is unlike a Christ figure, altough she was given a tough decision she ultimately chooses herself, instead of sacrificing herself for Georg. I think Wiesler is also a bit Christ like at the end of the movie because of how he sacrifices himself and his career for Georg.
DeleteWiesler is first portrayed as cold and distant and loyal to the Stasi. He oversees the mission and spies on Dreyman as instructed. However, Wiesler learns more about Dreyman, his thoughts and feelings as well as his relationship with Christa Maria. What changes him is that after spending so much time observing Dreyman's life, Wiesler starts sympathizing with Dreyman and his problems. Wiesler grows compassionate because he can see how the free artists acts and their struggles. This is why it is important to consider things from someone else's perspective, just like Atticus Finch had said. Once Wiesler did this, he was able to understand how Dreyman and different artists thought and realized they were not the enemy and maybe the Stasi was wrong. Though he struggled with these thoughts and emotions throughout most of the film, he eventually ended up switching sides and helped Dreyman. Having the power to imagine how others would feel or see things from their perspective can lead to people better understanding one another, just like Wiesler did with Dreyman.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree with Riya in that Wiesler does show some form of empathy which makes him different from the other Stasi/political members. It allows for a certain depth in trying to understand different perspectives as Wiesler does the right think in freeing Germany from strict government controls.
DeleteAtticus urges Scout to "try stepping into another person's shoes and consider things from their perspective". In the film Weisler does the same thing because he knows that Georg is using that typewriter because he had to and Weisler noticed that towards the end. That's why he took the typewriter before the Stasi got to Georg's house after Christa told Satsi where he had hidden the typewriter in his house. We will encounter many moments in life where we see something we don't like about someone or someone doing something we don't find to be "the right thing" and we don't take the time to find out why they are doing what they are doing, we just assume that the person is bad or that they are doing that because they want to. It's always nice to try and put yourself in someone else's shoe and imagine what you would have done if you were in that situation, or if you can't do that just keep your mouth shut and don't talk about how bad the other person is, because one day you will be in a situation in your life where you will have to do all you can to survive and you wouldn't want others thinking you're a "bad person".
ReplyDeleteI feel that stepping into other people’s shoes is very important as we can see other people's viewpoints. This can actually empower us because of the fact that we know more about the people around us and what they think. The book “How to Win Friends and Influence People” by Dale Carnegie, one of the best self improvement books in the world, was almost based on this principal. This is why this aspect of philosophy is very important.
DeleteI think what changes Wiesler is his long spying sessions of Dreyman. Through spying, he has become emotionally attached with Dreyman. Wiesler knows almost everything about his private life including his relationship issues with Christa, their physically intimate moments, and Dreyman's illegal activities. What I'm not completely sure about is Wiesler has spied and interrogated many other citizens before, so why does he change with the author? Maybe through spying on Dreyman, Weisler starts to have growing issues with the state. Since Dreyman is a big public figure, his actions have a lot more political weight to it than those of normal citizens. Whatever the reason is, the change is clear. In the beginning, we see Wiesler with a cold personality and no remorse for the suffering of others, but with Dreyman he becomes sympathetic to the point where he actually helps Dreyman's illegal activities.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Justin. By spying on Dreyman, Wiesler becomes emotionally attached with him. By living a day in his shoes, he becomes sympathetic to the point where he would betray the Stasi.
DeleteWhile I would say the initial turning point in Wiesler's thought processes is when he finds out that the minister ordered them to spy on Dreyman because of his lust of Christa-Marie, I would agree that ultimately, Wiesler walks out of the ordeal changed because of what he overheard and learned during his time spying on Dreyman. Before, he only viewed the people he was interrogating and watching as enemies of the state; after his experience with Dreyman, he is able to humanize them and empathize with their cause, and his eyes are opened to the unfair and unjust terror that the Stasi have caused in East Germany.
DeleteLooking and evaluating situations is very important for each of us to do and for society to do as a whole. Practicing empathy in this manner helps us make sense of why people would do something or feel a certain way. For example, many people cannot fathom why in the world someone would vote for Donald Trump, yet, nearly half the country supported him - they must have a reason for doing so, and it is in all of our best interests to figure out what that is. Wiesler is a Stasi agent who has whatever he needs in life - he has a good-paying job, the ability to climb the ranks, a home, and so on - but he lacks one thing: a family. He goes home to an empty home, and it leaves him feeling empty, so much so that he even hires a prostitute to give him company. This lack of a meaningful relationship makes him very empathetic toward the plight of Georg Dreyman and Christa-Maria Sieland, two people who live in a manner that is entirely different from his own. While he works for the government in spying on people to find out their stories, Dreyman and Sieland are artists, telling the stories of people and society. Yet, Wiesler is able to put this aside and does everything he can to preserve their relationship due to the lack of his own; his empathy is what prevents him from turning into a cold government worker, without empathy or purpose in his life. His ability to see the perspective of the people who he's spying on allows him to make the more humane and right decision.
ReplyDeleteI agree that Wiesler is motivated to save Georg because he wants the type of relationship that Dreyman has with Christa-Maria Sieland. I think that Wiesler is the type of person needed in government, because he is both good at his work while also having a strong moral compass. He realizes that the Stasi party is corrupt and does not stand for the ideals that they claim to, which is shown by the Minister's behavior. Wiesler seems to be deeply affected by CMS's betrayal of Georg with the minister, because that is the first time that Wiesler decides to turn on his superiors. Wiesler allows Georg to see CMS with the minister, because he wants Georg and CMS to be in a meaningful relationship instead of having to constantly worry about losing their jobs because of the Stasi.
DeleteI feel like the movie was really moving because of the change we see in Wiesler. We can see how his daily assignment of tracking Dreyman has turned him from a very bland personage into a complex and multidimensional character with many feelings and emotions. This movie is a clear indication of how those around us have a major impact in the change of our characteristics over time. This is why the name of the movie, “The Lives Of Others,” is very fitting. We can also see the changes in Christa-Maria over time as she is slowly sinks into a deeper layer of trouble, and Wiesler being troubled by this. Another major affected change in the movie is Dreyman’s outlook after seeing Jerska deterioration. The affect others can have on us is tremendous. I find that it is ironic that at the start of the movie, Wiesler is an interrogator who has to affect the suspect with his language and patience to get confessions. However, throughout listening to Dreyman in his surveillance, it is almost as if Wiesler is being interrogated and changed as the movie progresses. This is the major irony of the movie. This can also be seen in real life as well. When a growing teen is surrounded by friends who all partake in the consumption of drugs or alcohol, they will be that much more likely to do the same. However, in a more positive light, the vice versa of this scenario can be true as well. The final feelings of nostalgia in seeing the book dedicated to him also proved that both Dreyman and Wiesler’s lives changed because of both of their actions. Dreyman wrote and Wiesler covered it up.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of corruption as a catalyst towards fulfilling a goal of long-lasting power is a recurring theme when it comes to politics. "The Lives Of Others" is no such different story when it comes to power as it showcases the power of greed in a sublimely passionate manner as it introduces art into the picture. This story follows a couple's journey towards angst, trust, and love in not only trying to exist, but also trying to make Germany a better republic. It is no new idea that the minister acted with a strong contingent towards gaining power rather than looking towards the benefit of the people. However, the story becomes quite complex as characters such as Christa-Marie enters the scene. I think that Christa-Marie is quite a complex character in that she yearns for acceptance towards expanding her art, but she chooses to side with stronger officials rather than persevere through adversity. She does attempt to stray away from the norm by returning home that night, but fails to follow through when interrogated by officials. She thought about herself for that instance, rather than the freedom of Germany. Although her actions portray her to be a selfish character, she does understand her mistake during the last moments before her death, which shows her humility. Georg is one such character that had conviction and understanding in his ability to expose the suicidal horrors, and worked towards illustrating this to the public without fail. However, at times there have been mentioned that he did indeed had to change to appeal to the republic in order to keep his position, which makes him corrupt (but not as extensively as some of the other characters)
ReplyDeleteFinally, Wiesel's character has drastically changed from what it had been in the start of the movie, so it is hard to say definitely whether he is 100% corrupt or not. That being said, in the beginning of the movie he starts out with a strong belief in the secret police, and in their action. As soon as he realizes the reasoning behind the General's actions, he diverts towards following the couple. The humanity behind his actions in trying to appease the couple's relationship, and allowing the the news article to spread, is a byproduct of the negativities the minister/general have brought to the couple. Wiesel sees the happiness that exists within the couple, and the adversities that the government has strained in order for more power. Soon after he understands the implications, he resolves to an easier life. I do think that Wieseler is somewhat corrupt as he does believe in spying intelligence rather than privacy, but his actions have proven to do well in freeing the public from strict government control.
At the start of the movie Wiesler is shown to be interrogating a frightened and nervous man. When you seat a suspect in front of you in an interrogation room its harder to focus on anything else other than whether or not he is guilty. Every single one of the suspects actions is deeply analyzed to help you come up with a final decision. You only have one goal in mind, which is to decide if they are a criminal, and you know that they only have one goal in mind too, which is to convince you that they are not. In a situation like this its hard to realize that this suspect seated before you is a person with hobbies and passions. However if you are spying on somebody you can see what his hobbies are, how he interacts with people, and what kind of person they truly are. It's easier to relate to someone when they are moving in the comforts of their own home as opposed to sweating nervously in front of you You can hear and see them experience every emotion that you experience too, which makes it harder to remind yourself that they're criminals, or possible criminals. I think that's what changed Wiesler, he saw and realized that Georg was human like he is, revolting against the law doesn't make him an evil person being cruel.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning of the movie Dreyman and Wiesler are portrayed as polar opposites, Dreyman is a radical author and Wiesler is a loyal member to the Stasi Party. As the movie continues, Wiesler start to feel affection for Dreyman and the differences between their personalities begin to fade. Wiesler initially thought that Dreyman was secretly rebelling against the Stasi, but after spying on him for a couple of days, Wiesler could see that Dreyman was initially innocent, but certain events in life led him to release the paper to the West. By viewing life from Dreymans perspective, Wiesler subconsciously begins rooting for Dreyman’s happiness and success, eventually leading Wiesler to lie in the spy reports and betray the Stasi. The main message the film-makers tried to portray was that you shouldn't judge a person based on your first impressions of them, and you only have the right to judge a person once you live a day in their shoes.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI agree with what you said about Wiesler changing to become more understanding of Dreyman. Although he started off as Dreyman's polar opposite, he became more understanding of Dreyman as the movie progressed. Even though he was taught to be a stoic Stasi interrogator. he became more passionate, and sympathized with Dreyman, and eventually took on the job of protecting Dreyman from the Stasi.
DeleteWiesler, being a member of the Stasi Party, and Georg, a radical playwright, both had different views and motives. In the beginning of the movie, Wielser, a member of the stasi party was assigned to spy and listen in on Georg/s conversations in hopes of finding any valuable information that could be beneficial to the Stasi Party. At first, he seems like an emotionless robot, only to do what he is told: listen and record. But as he listens in on Georg’s plans and motives, he becomes “moved” and risks his position/job to do what was right. The events he sees as Georg’s plan progresses such as small talking with a little boy on the elevator, or Georg’s passion and determination in exposing the corrupted party makes him realize the corruption of the Stasi Party and what he should be doing for the greater good rather than for himself. Wiesler, seen as an “undercover hero” gained no recognition from saving Georg’s plan from being discovered.
ReplyDeleteWiesler was the character that was least expected to change his views, since he was portrayed as a dispassionate interrogator at the very beginning of the film. However, after starting his mission of spying on Dreyman (playwright), Wiesler quickly discovers Christa-Maria Sieland's external affair with the party minister, and therefore becomes wary of the minister's intentions. The uncertain intentions of the minister combined with the wrongdoings of the Stasi move Wiesler, and he begins to see things from the artist's point of view. For example, even when he knew about Dreyman's publication of an article in the West, he failed not notify the border guards, because he was moved by how much Dreyman was affected by Jerska's death. Wiesler is also moved during the elevator scene where the child describes the stasi as “bad men who put people in prisons.” Thus, Wiesler growing sympathy for Dreyman coupled with his enhanced understanding of the wrongdoings of the Stasi serve to change him for the good, and act as the guardian angel for Dreyman.
ReplyDelete5. I disagree that Christa-Maria is a Christ figure because she is a flawed character that is directly responsible for the Stasi search on Georg's home. CMS struggles with a drug addiction and sells herself out to protect her career. She carries on a relationship with the Minister behind Georg's back in order to make sure that the Stasi do not limit the type of plays she can act in, betraying both Georg and herself in the process. She also tells Wiesler where Georg hid his typewriter, betraying him once again despite the fact that he was trying to help her. For these reasons, CMS cannot be considered a Christ-like figure. She is too flawed and selfish to be compared to Christ.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. A Christ figure would likely be more self-sacrificing, willing to protect those she loves more than just herself and allow herself to be harmed in the process. CMS is basically the exact opposite, even selling out her lover to allow herself a more secure career, and is more of an ironic Christ or an anti-Christ figure. Like you said, I think that she is too selfish to represent Christ.
Delete7. One thing that I learned more about, or at least more powerfully, from this film was the impact that culture and art can have on the world. For example, in the movie there seems to be an underground network of writers who write for magazines like the Spiegel, and the main character's article about suicides in the GDR seemed to have a really big effect (even showing up in the news and leading to a lot of discontent among the Stasi officials). That was surprising because I thought that only things like armed rebellion or political conflict would lead to major changes, but art was a much more peaceful way of sparking that change. Additionally, learning that there were people in the government just dedicated to controlling art and culture in the GDR, and that artists and writers were continually monitored, shows how powerful they thought art could be.
ReplyDeleteIt can easily be seen that Georg and Wiesler are nearly polar opposites in the beginning of the film. They have different lifestyles and jobs which basically contrast each other. Georg is a free thinker, uninhibited by the state and its almost brainwashing teaching style. Wiesler, however, is the ideal product of the state, one who responds and works for the government, never questioning or opposing the ruling power. However, as Wiesler observes Georg, he realizes that there are more ways of living than just one. As he watches the playwright, he understands and relates to Georg, realizing that the other was not just an enemy of the state but a human with the same desires and thoughts as himself. The filmmakers show this change in Wiesler to show that in reality, different people with different ideals and thoughts are not nearly as different as they make themselves out to be, and if one takes the time to understand the other, they will be more likely to understand their beliefs and ideals. The film shows that people can change their beliefs and understand those that are different from them if they put in the effort.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that the film shows how people can change their beliefs through learning about others and how they think. I think that one of the reasons why the two characters think very differently at first is because they were taught differently. The school that Wiesler went to sort of brain-washed him into thinking that what the Stasi does is for the benefit of everyone. It is interesting how the rigid mindset of Wiesler becomes more flexible throughout the film as he begins to see the world through the lens of Georg.
DeleteI do not believe that Christa-Maria is a Christ figure. Her white clothing and death are aspects which may resemble Christ, however her overall character do not resemble Christ. The fact that she had sexual intercourse with a man who she is not married to makes it harder for me to see her as a Christ figure. She also had her hands on illegal drugs, and in the end, betrayed the man she loved. For her own sake, she told the state security who the author was and where the typewriter was hidden. Jesus was betrayed by Judias Iscariot, and Christa's action is the opposite to that of Jesus. Jesus sacrificed his life for others, but Christa would sacrifice her loved one for the sake of herself. To conclude, Christa may be shown as a Christ figure, however her character and actions do not.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your opinion, and I would like to add that instead of Christa representing Christ, she represents someone who is easily molded by her society. For example, she feels that she has to have an affair with the minister in order to stay safe, and she bows easily to pressure, such as when Wiesler was interrogating her, and she quickly babbles on her husband and his friends.
DeleteI agree that Christa-Maria is not a true Christ figure. In addition to having sexual intercourse with a man, she also struggles with drug problems. She sells out Dreyman for the sake of keeping herself safe, and has a secret relationship behind the Minister's back, a further betrayal of her lover's trust. Additionally, by telling Weisler where the typewriter was hidden, she betrays Dreyman's trust. In conclusion, I agree that Christa-Maria is not a Christ figure, because she is the betrayer rather than the betrayed.
DeleteOver the course of the film, George and Weisler both seem to change, but Weisler changes a lot more. He goes from loyal Stasi spy to an advocate for free speech that goes directly against the Stasi party and its censorship. George starts off as a happy and unconcerned playwright. He feels certain that his standing in the GDR is good and that the people around him are all trustworthy. By the end of the film, he realizes that the people around him actually did not trust him at all, and that even the woman closest to him had to betray him. This results in him becoming a lot more skeptical and less carefree than he was at the beginning of the film. The result is that George and Weisler are quite similar by the film's end. I think that the film makers did do this purposefully. Their main reason was to show how all people are connected and to emphasize a "goodness" in human nature. At first, Weisler seemed like a bad man who was completely against George. By the end, he has ruined his career and risked his life to protect George. By doing this, the film makers are trying to make the viewers feel and understand that not all people are all bad, even if they happen to be in a bad role or situation. People's innate drives and personalities can be different than what they seem on the surface.
ReplyDelete1. In To Kill A Mockingbird, Atticus urges Scout to "try stepping into another person's shoes and consider things from their perspective" to keep her from getting into fights. In the film, Wiesler does just that. In his case, he has gained a newfound appreciation for Dreyman and Christa-Maria, and starts seeing things from the artist's point of view. Wiesler is simultaneously moved by their story and harbors a desire to protect them as a result of listening to their lives. Stepping into others' shoes is important because it allows us to see things from a different perspective; for example, during an argument, putting yourself in their position helps you understand the other's sentiments, and allows you to empathize with them. Doing so can resolve many conflicts, as well as give insight into more than one perspective on them.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete7. Although I knew some of the historical details that were in the film, such as West/East Germany, and how Russia and the Communist party controlled East Germany, while the U.S. and the other allies controlled West Germany. What I learned from this film was how terrible East Germany was, and how the Stasi were in complete control of society, preventing anyone from speaking out and standing up to the Communist Party, and arresting anyone who did so. I think that this movie really showed the state that Germany was in after World War II, and that when something like what happened to East Germany happens again, other countries should step in a prevent such a terrible invasion of privacy and violation of rights to happen again.
ReplyDeleteWiesler is the only one who spends most of his time observing Georg Dreyman, and his interactions with both Christa-Maria Sieland and the rest of the world. Wiesler's change proves the point that you have to step into someone else's shoes before you are able to tell what they are truly going through. To everyone else in the Stasi, Dreyman and his girlfriend were criminals, and nothing more than that. However, Wiesler never really found any mistakes that the two of them were actually making. He also learned about the minister's affair with Christa, which changes his views on authority throughout the film. He realizes that authority figures are not as righteous as they seem, and he gains a lot of perspective by looking at things through Dreyman's shoes. Additionally, Wiesler is never seen having attachments or emotions of his own, and can focus on Dreyman completely. As a result, Wiesler becomes attached to him and his life. This is why he convinces Christa to go back to Dreyman in the bar, and steals the typewriter for Dreyman in order to make sure that no harm comes to him. Wiesler protects Dreyman more and more as he gains attachment to him.
ReplyDeleteAlthough this analysis was interesting, why did the other person who also observed the interactions between Dreyman and Christa not have a change in heart as well? Perhaps there is another aspect to Wiesler and some event that changes that makes him specifically different. I think your point about how he talks to Christa to go back to Dreyman may be a tipping point where he finally begins to feel attached to them. This slippery-slope attachment that you talk about with Wiesler protecting Dreyman more and more is seen throughout the movie, yet it is also intriguing why he does that. He was ready to report them when he went to the office of his commanding officer, but during that speech time he changes his opinion and doesn't report them.
DeleteI think one of the intentions of the writers was to demonstrate that despite our instinct to judge others based on first impressions, humans are (for the most part) capable of change. At the start of the film, we instinctively cast Wiesler in a negative light because he is portrayed as a part of the Stasi, who are clearly the antagonists of the film. However, as the film progresses, the audience begins to see Wiesler evolve and develop into someone who is no longer blinded by the messages of the Communist party (which is made very clear at the end, when he walks out of his workplace upon hearing about the fall of the Berlin Wall) and is sympathetic to those trying to fight against the corruption and terror rooted in the Stasi. The film is a lesson on how no matter what we are doing or what our role is in our society or the community, it is possible to turn over a new leaf and start doing what (you think) is right. Humans are not bound by the path they choose to take; instead, they can have changes of heart that lead them to different decisions and different futures.
ReplyDelete2. The film is a conflict of personality that affects the internal feelings of Wiesler. Wiesler represents a man without a heart, tailored to monitor actions for the State. Only through this lack of emotions and feelings can a police state maintain its power and regulation. However, throughout the movie he nurtures his feelings and begins to understand kindness and empathy, sacrificing his own well-being and position in society for the purpose of others. However, Wiesler also reveals the negative trade off of emotions when he is able to manipulate others. He is able to utilize language through threats and coercion to reveal the information that he needs. The writers have an intention of shifting the position of the story. In the beginning we empathize with the main characters Christa and Dreyman as we view their courageous and confident personalities.We see Wiesler as an antagonist, which hides his change in personality as he begins to see what Georg's plans and attempts are. He becomes emotionally attached to them, learning about their relationship, medicinal problems, and conflicts. Through this, Wiesler is the dark horse that most would not expect to arise to the occasion.
ReplyDeleteprompt 5: I do think that Christa-Maria is a Christ figure. Even her name has the word “Christ” in it. In the film, she is always wearing white, the symbol of pureness (Christ himself is always seen in white as well). During the film, she does many things to help Georg and others in the writing and film industry. In the film, Georg says that he was lonely and was scared of two things: being alone and not being able to write. However, he admits that after Christa and he started seeing each other, the only fear he has now is losing her. With her, he doesn’t feel alone in the world, and many christians believe that they are never alone as God is always with them. When Christa is in jail, she first hesitates mentioning anything about Georg and his actions. However, to save herself, she does mention that Georg was the writer of the article in West Berlin-- without telling the Stasi where Georg hid the typewriter (even though she knew clearly where it was hidden). After the unsuccessful house search, Christa is pressured into telling the Stasi where the printer is. But, thanks to Weiser, the printer is hidden in another place and Georg is saved. When Christa runs out and faces her ultimate death, she is dressed in a white robe with a red blood. It is this accident that ultimately ends the Operation “Lazlo.” As Christ’s death cleaned the people’s sins, Christa’s death cleaned Georg’s death as the operation ended. Therefore, Christa-Maria is a Christ figure.
ReplyDelete2. Wiesler is initially portrayed as a very strict man supportive of the Stasi regulation. Part of the reason he may have changed was due to his observation of Georg and Christa-Maria. He becomes more sympathetic, genuinely being able to step into their shoes. He identifies with Dreyman's values in little ways, such as both of their wants for love/warmth in the life. Wiesler even sheds a tear listening to Dreyman play the piano in honor of Jerska. For example, instead of asking for the name of a little boy's anti-Stasi parents, he reconsiders. But besides simply being empathetic, I think he also realizes that the assignment is made for the Minister. Thus, the role of the Stasi is not legitimate, and that makes him question what role he plays in the government in spying on genuinely nice people.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree that Wiesler changed due to his assignment to spy on Dreyman and Christa-Maria. Wiesler is probably used to being told what to do by the government. By observing these more artistic people (Dreyman is a writer and Christa-Maria is an actress), he is exposed to a life filled with passion and spirit, something that he learns he prefers.
Delete5. I disagree that Christa-Maria was a Christ figure because she acts based on her own self-interest. She sleeps with the minister and becomes an informant in order to further her career without thinking of her lover, Dreyman. In addition, her death had occurred because she was trying to escape the consequences of her actions and had not seen the car. This was not a selfless act but an entirely selfish one.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you. Her actions were far from pure. She commits many sins and I like your point about how she was running away from the consequences. However, I do understand how the directors wanted to make her a Christ figure, as she does guide Georg and influenced Wiesler to change. But I would not call her a Christ figure.
DeleteI agree that Christa-Maria is not a christ figure. If she was, she would be a very giving and loyal person, but instead, as you mentioned, she actions are very bad. Her actions only benefit herself. Although in the beginning, she tried to protect Dreyman, but in the end, she still betrayed him in order to further her career.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhen Atticus urges Scout to “try stepping into another person’s shoes,” he points out that considering the perspectives and motivations of others can help you connect with them and be more compassionate. Wiesler experiences this firsthand, as shown through his growth throughout the film. He starts out as a cold and unforgiving Stasi member, who completely accepts the oppressive nature of the organisation. He shows this by refusing any semblance of compassion, such as when he puts a mark on the student who questions his inhumane interrogation techniques. In the beginning, Wiesler is fully committed to his role of spying on Georg Dreyman. But as the film progresses, Wiesler is further exposed to Dreyman’s personal life and struggles. By being in such close proximity, Wiesler grows open-minded to Dreyman’s anti-Stasi position, and he even begins to do subtle acts that undermine the regime. Overall, Wiesler shows us how important it is to try to understand those around us. Despite the difficulties of listening to what may be an opposing opinion, the benefits of doing so are worth it. The opposing side often has valid and reasonable opinions, and at the very least you are reminded that, in the end, we are all human.
ReplyDelete"The Lives of Others" portrays the complex emotions that exist within many of the characters. In characters like Wiesler and Christa, the audience is introduced to the idea that good and bad can exist simultaneously within everybody. Wiesler, a member of the Stasi Party, is initially focused on finding information to incriminate Georg. As time progresses, however, he becomes conflicted on his mission, even to the point where he hides Georg's typewriter himself. Wiesler's point of view gradually changes, as he sympathizes with Georg more than with the Stasi party at the end of the movie. In this way, Wiesler transitions from bad to good. Christa shares this same conflict. Throughout the beginning of the movie, she is portrayed as innocent and pure. Her white attire serves to exaggerate her innocence. However, she later gives up Georg's secret in order to save herself. In this way, Christa is portrayed as being good only to later be portrayed as being bad, showing how good and bad can exist within everyone.
ReplyDelete5. I personally do not see Christa-Maria as a Christ figure. Although she is seen wearing white and “sacrifices” herself at the end, I do not think those points make her a Christ figure. In fact her actions are those a righteous person would not do. In the movie, she commits sins that go against the ten commandments in the bible. She was an adulterer and betrays Georg at one point for her own selfishness. Christa-Maria also felt guilt for wronging her boyfriend, but she had sins and betrayed Dreyman. However, I can see how the director of the tried to portray her as a Christ figure. Her name and the way how she dresses hints that she is meant to be the innocent and righteous character. She does help change Wiesler and her death did stop the “Lazzlo” project, but her actions shows that she not pure in any way. Christ is supposed to be a perfect person that bears the sins of humankind. Christa is no way perfect or pure, and she does act selfishly towards the end. The only thing similar about the two is that they were seen as sacrifices for the greater good.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this. In addition, Christa-Maria was not confident in her own talent and skill, afraid that without pleasing Hempf, she would lose her career. Out of this fear and desire for her own life and livelihood, she went against her own morals and betrayed Georg, who she loved. She didn't sacrifice herself, but mainly acted to save herself. At the end, her death wasn't an Christ-like death, but one based on her disappointment in betraying Georg and fear of the future.
DeleteWeisler is an idealist, someone who believed in the good of the party and was willing to commit some foul deeds like spying on people and root out traitors in any way he could however unlike Grubitz and Hempf he treated his power with respect and caution. Hempf thought that just because he was the Minister he could use Christa-Maria as he saw fit and Weisler disagreed with that. Thus, by seeing the suffering he and his organization inflicted on East German artists and how corrupt his higher ups were, Weisler decided to side with Dreyman and allow him to publish a condemning piece of the East German Regime. One way this is symbolized is that Wiesler often wears grey, Dreyman and Christa-Maria wear white, and Hempf and Grubitz usually wear black. This choice of clothing shows that Weisler is doing evil things for the right reasons while his superiors are drunk with power and do it to fulfill any desire they have. Weisler, thus, is far better than the men he serves which is why he sided with Dreyman instead of condemning him to death.
ReplyDeleteThe minister uses his power to try and have his way with Christa. He was using his power to try and persuade Christa to leave Dreyman because he doesn't satisfy him. He abuses his absolute power because he is out for self gain. He also uses his power and influence to keep tabs on Christa for no reason other than to know where hse is at all times. Weisler doesn't abuse his power in the same way because he looks out for Dreyman and tries to do what is right. He realizes that the corruption of the East Berlin government and tries to help. While this may be true, I also think that Weiser did abuse his power but instead of against the people, he used it against the government. He was able to use the resources that the government had to help Dreyman escape the blame. Weiser did not want to be responsible for screwing up Dreyman's life and dreams so he helped him to evade the government's plans to catch him. I think in a way this is using his power for personal purposes of feeling good about himself. Although it may have been the morally right thing to do he still abused his power.
ReplyDeleteIt was appalling to me that people, such as Wiesler from the beginning of the film, would firmly promote the tactics of the Stasi Party and see it as a good government. Although we see things differently and find the invasion of privacy and corrupt leadership horrible, the Stasi saw it as the best way to maintain their government and get rid of “bad guys.” They all saw themselves as the good people, the ones making their country a better place. 48 hour interrogations were simply ways to determine honesty and find the people trying to undermine their society. This mindset can so easily be drilled into people’s heads and the corrupt leadership and promotion process helped make people even more willing to rat others out or investigate people. Wiesler’s change in heart was a rarity and any other Stasi Party member would probably have exposed Georg, solely focused on his own interests and upward mobility. It was eye-opening to see the society of that time from this point of view and see how power affects people.
ReplyDelete1. It's really important for people to step into each other's shoes because it allows us to improve by expanding our minds to new ideas. Being able to experience something as someone else truly teaches you about sympathizing and understanding. Someone can simply tell you new ideas and facts, hoping you will accept them, but it really takes stepping into someone else's shoes for someone to wholeheartedly accept that new idea. In the movie, Wiesler starts off as a Stasi. However, as he continues to observe Dreyman's life, he starts to sympathize with him.
ReplyDeleteWiesler was shown as someone who only obeys the rules of the government in the beginning. I think that when he realized the intentions of the person who ordered the surveillance of George, he starts to be wary and used his own judgement when writing the reports. As he continues to spy on George, he starts to sympathize him and reports less and less to the government about him. In the end, Wiesler begins to help Dreyman because he believes that it's not right for the minister to use the system for his own personal issues. By the time Wiesler found out about their plan to trash the government, it was too late because he was already on Dreyman's side.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the idea of Christa-Maria as a Christ figure. It was eventually because of her that Dreyman and his comrades were saved from punishment, but her actions were not "Christ-like." I think she is more like Judas Iscariot, who betrays Jesus, and later kills himself because of it. I'm not sure if she purposely stepped in front of the truck, or if it was an accident (I think she killed herself) but it reflects the same qualities that Judas had. Also, for her wearing white, I think it signifies her inner self without all her actress facade, like at the bar when she has her jacket off, you can see how doubtful and worried she is over her choices and her life. However, when she puts the jacket on, she becomes a very confident actress who seeming looks like she has her life together. It’s like purity in a way but not really.
ReplyDeleteThis was a really nice movie, no small part due to Wiesler. He's a very compelling character. Despite being a member of the feared Stasi, he's still a human too wishing for a better life, just like those the government is oppressing and those he is spying on. And this is something that he himself comes to embrace after some time. The longer he spies on Dreyman, the more invested he becomes in his personal life and welfare, going so far as to take a role in influencing it for the better.
ReplyDeleteAt some point Wiesler also learns of the true reason why he was assigned to spy on Dreyman, that being Minister Hemphf searching for a reason to take Dreyman out of the picture so he could have Christa-Maria for himself. Wiesler probably originally believed that he was doing his job to protect his country, and seeing someone with a selfish and icky motive like that probably disillusioned him to no small degree.
When Dreyman and the others plan to sneak some of them across the border into West Germnay, we get our first glimpse at Wiesler's inner conflict. He calls the border guard to alert them, but ultimately hangs up without saying a word. It's his duty to report on Dreyman and his actions, but he simply cannot bring himself to do it. He grows to feel sympathy, and as such is unwilling to carry out what will harm others who have done nothing that's truly wrong.