Review: The Reader
by John NolteAs a general rule, the trend these last fifteen years in the genre of the adult drama has been towards films with run-times increasingly longer, plots more convoluted, and the characters and their relationships simpler to the point of cliche. This, of course, is the reverse recipe for good storytelling. The plot should be simple, the pace quick, and the characters and their relationships complicated. These long, messy plots are supposed to act as a substitute for intelligence, but the result is almost always boredom borne of confusion and so today the adult drama is all but dead at the box office.
Recently, a new ingredient’s been added to the effort of fooling us into believing that what we’re watching is intelligent, and that’s The Immoral – with the normalization of sex with young children leading the charge. ”Notes on a Scandal,” “Birth” and “Towelhead” [links to my review] actually portray a physical intimacy with children as liberating, while “The Woodsman,” “Little Children,” and “L.I.E.” offer up those who molest our children as alternately sympathetic, wise and the protector. [some spoilers coming]
“The Reader” is so desperate to be perceived as intelligent that it creates an entirely new recipe: the sympathetic Nazi child molester and former S.S. concentration camp guard responsible for the mass murder of 300 Jews who with the help of the young boy she once raped triumphs over her reading disability.
The reason you keep thinking Hollywood’s finally hit bottom is because you forget how well they dig.
Set in post-WWII Germany, “The Reader” wastes no time in getting to “it.” Within twenty-minutes, thirty-six year old Hanna Schmitz (Kate Winslet) has seduced fifteen year-old Michael, played by eighteen year-old David Kross, into her bed. Their steamy sexual affair, broken up only by his reading novels to her, will last the summer of 1958 and affect Michael in ways he can’t imagine for the rest of his life.
She’s a quiet and moody ticket puncher on the local trolley car and he’s a bright, ambitious student from a well to do family. Even without the age difference, this would be a difficult relationship to sustain and soon she moves on, leaving him devastated. When he sees her again nearly ten years later he’s a law student and she’s on trial for war crimes. But she’s also his first love and even later in his life as an adult with a career and grown daughter, Michael (played by Ralph Fiennes) can’t cut his emotional ties to her completely.
With a mix of the Holocaust, a reading disability, artistically lit full frontal nudity, illicit romance, a European setting and a little courtroom drama, the Academy just couldn’t help themselves from nominating this for a Best Picture Oscar, which only serves to further prove that The Oscar Contender has become a genre all its own, because “The Reader” simply isn’t a very good film.
Thanks largely to David Kross’ sympathetic performance as young Michael, the first hour is the most compelling. Michael’s truly in love with Hanna, and you feel for him because you’re watching a film produced by a Weinstein Company in desperate need of Oscar-cred, so you know the poor kid’s in for some real heartbreak. And throughout the story the only effective moments will come when the perspective is on Michael. Watching him affected by what’s become of his first love creates the film’s few tender moments.
Unfortunately, most of the narrative involves Hanna and so we find ourselves stuck with a protagonist who seduces a child (perversely, her nickname for him is “Kid”), breaks his heart, and then confesses to mass murder. Which might be okay if “The Reader” was a tale of redemption, but it’s not, it’s the tale of a monster of a human being triumphing over illiteracy. Morality aside, the absurdity of this approach doesn’t allow you to lose yourself in the story. Again and again, the absurdity breaks the spell.
The Academy seems determined to give Winslet a Best Actress Oscar this year and they do deserve credit for not nominating her for a truly awful performance in “Revolutionary Road,” and she is quite good as Hanna, though her old age make up is distracting and you do catch her acting more than once. At times all that nudity feels calculated, as in: “See what a brave actress female actor I am, Academy?”
There are other story flaws, as well. A subplot involving Michael and his estranged daughter never makes sense or fits well into the overall narrative, and when the film ends on a final grace note involving this under-developed relationship, you can only shake your head at the choice as the credits roll. But this is the least of the film’s choices that has you scratching your head as the credits roll.
Give the filmmakers credit. Except for the use of intelligence and thoughtfulness, everything that could be done to make ”The Reader” appear as though it were intelligent and thoughtful was.







Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
40 Comments
Beh. Saw "Taken" this past weekend and LOVED it. Finally, an American movie showing a guy doing whatever is necessary — and what most fathers would do, if they could — to save his daughter.
I'll just get "Titanic" and and use the super slo-mo button on my remote to get my Winslet boobie fix.
…or any other movie she's been in. I like the goods, but is she ever not naked in a movie?
My big problem with this film was Winslet's embarrasing make-up in the prison reunion scene – she looked like a pretty girl playing granny in a high school play, a gray wig slapped on her head, powder all over her face. I was actually kind of shocked how phony it looked. Especially after the expert aging effects in Bejamin Button. I love Winslet, but she seemed like she was playing dress-up in the last third or so of the film. Lame.
The reason you keep thinking Hollywood’s finally hit bottom is because you forget how well they dig.
That's a quote for the ages.
You should do another post about the movies you're most anticipating. I think Taken (which was excellent) took us all by surprise, but I like to have an idea of what I want to watch before it hits the theater. I know Watchmen is high on my list, but do you think Knowing will be any good? What movies are you excited about?
Spiro: Ah yes, the infamous "pause and toss" sequences. Face it, that's all some of these actresses are good for.
Excellent review. Thanks.
So, in about 60 years can we expect to start seeing challenging, sympathetic films about illiterate members of the Bush administration?
Winslet needs to get it right. Seduce a 15-year-old GIRL, then it's a no-doubter when they call your name off, the music plays and you get to say thanks to your agent, Barack Obama and your personal assistant.
Good questions! Taken and Watchmen might actually get me out of my house to see a movie this month.
Sense and Sensibility, Heavenly Creatures, The Holiday, Finding Neverland, Revolutionary Road
I was WONDERING when someone else besides me was going to recognize the underlying inappropriateness with this movie: the woman was sleeping with a child! I recently saw Kate Winslet on TV talking about how much she loved this movie along with Revolutionary Road, and nobody brought up the fact of this morally wrong thing. Imagine if a movie had been made about a male Nazi SS guard having an affair with a 15-year-old GIRL, what would people say then? I know there's a lot of people who would say "well, a 15-year-old boy would LOVE to have sex with an adult woman," but what does that tell us about our society? Do we have double standards for both genders?And more importantly SHOULD we have double standards for both genders?
I suppose some things will never change; especially since Hollywood is involved.
Sounds like a complete train wreck. This one will be out of the theater within a week.
Who thinks up this garbage? Why would anyone even try to make something this ridiculous up. The Holocaust is something to be treated with delicacy and seriousness. So is child abuse. Why make them into trite "post modern" cliches'? UGH! And I used to like Fiennes. He played a heck of a bad guy in Schindler's List. I think he must be mad now.
And if you dare say that you think this type of movie is crap, you're accused of not understanding "art." I could count on one hand how many movies I've actually enjoyed in the last 15 years.
http://the100mostannoyingthings.blogspot.com/
[...] John Nolte holds forth on the movie, The Reader. [...]
Hey, that is the problem with ART. You can't really define it, right? If you imply that something is just plain crap, well, you are simply admitting you are a dolt, right wing boob head.
See, life is easy when you are a lib and an artist. Oh, and don't forget, artists should get govt grants so that they are free to pursue their art.
BTW-How does one actually become an ARTIST?
Oh, what a night.
Late December back in ‘43.
Quite the Nazi death camp time for me,
‘Cause I remember what a night.
Oh, what a night.
You know, I didn’t even know their names,
But they were slated to go up in flames.
Dirty semites. What a night.
Oh, I. I got a funny feeling when they walked
In the room and I,
Closed the door that sealed those suckers’ doom.
Oh, what a night,
Fortunately I soon learned to read.
My redemption by the lefty creed.
Sweet surrender, what a night!
I felt a rush like some menopausal flashes
As flames consumed their bodies turning them into ashes.
Oh, what a night!
Oh, I. I got a funny feeling when they walked
In the room and I,
Recall them as the cast of Brigadoon.
Oh, what a night.
Why’d it take so long to see the light?
Seemed so wrong, but now it seems so right.
Sweet cremation, what a night!
I felt a rush like a roiling ball of fire
As flames consumed them all caressing their bones to cinders.
Oh, what a night!
(Do, do, do, do, do. Do, do, do, do, do, do.)
Oh, what a night!
(Do, do, do, do, do. Do, do, do, do, do, do.)
Oh, what a night!
(Do, do, do, do, do. Do, do, do, do, do, do.)
Oh, what a night!
(Do, do, do, do, do. Do, do, do, do, do, do.)
Oh, what a night!
(Do, do, do, do, do. Do, do, do, do, do, do.)
Oh, what a night!
(Do, do, do, do, do. Do, do, do, do, do, do.)
Easy. Convince the NEA to give you money.
I thought The Reader could be considered a conservative movie by Hollywood standards. Isn't the Kate Winslet character suppose to be based on George W Bush both of whom are illiterate war criminals. Since the movie treats Hanna sympathetically, maybe Hollywood is finally softening up on Bush.
I think this movie shows how liberal Hollywood really thinks. Hanna's biggest problem isn't that she is a war criminal it is that she can't read. Wasn't that the biggest attack on Bush that he was some kind of idiot
I love the tag "Sympathetic child molestor," John. Classic.
"Finally, an American movie [...]"
Taken is a French movie. It isn't even a co-production.
Winslett's roles are approaching self-parody status for me. The brittleness, the archness, the tragic martyrdom. It's hard for me to think of a worst performance in a "major" film than hers in Revolutionary Road. She certainly has the acting talent and tools, but she needs a director or someone who can reconfigure her settings.
"Michael’s truly in love with Hanna, and you feel for him because you’re watching a film produced by a Weinstein Company in desperate need of Oscar-cred, so you know the poor kid’s in for some real heartbreak."
That was funny
I don't know which is more disgusting – Hollywood trying to make a child molester sympathetic or a Nazi camp guard. Whatever. Either still has me bending over the toilet and upchucking.
But what disgusts me more is what John reveals – i.e., that a film must kick decency, shame and morality in the teeth before it can have 'cred' in Hollywood. This is what really makes me bend over the toilet bowl.
Hollywood has had a lot of success steering the culture in the direction they want it to go. But Hollywood finally has gone too far, glorifying murderers ("Che"), tearing down the country and conservatism (any film with Clooney in it), celebrating the sexualization of children ("The Reader" ), even subtle anti-Semitism ("The Reader" might very well fit in here, too) degrading middle America ("Revolutionary Road"). Hollywood has always had its Bohemians but now they're in charge of the asylum. Interestingly, the viewing public appear to be turning away. The box office of all the Academy Award nominees together probably don't match "The Dark Knight" (a movie I disliked, by the way). The "stars" have become boring. I just saw "Troy" on TV the other night, and I was actually laughing when Brad Pitt (Achilles) did a scene. Eric Bana wasn't any better. He made for a very dumb looking Hector. Sean Bean as Ulysses claimed the screen and he hardly had any credits. Television has far more interesting actors — Laurie as "House" (though I don't watch it anymore), Fox and the rest of the interesting players in "Lost", "Bones" and her partner Sealey Booth. Last night I was watching "The Eleventh Hour" starring Rufus Sewell. A very interesting actor, but what was more interesting was the excellent story line (about cloning and its effects). It had a moral and a theme. I kept wondering when I was going to get sucker punched with some liberal screed or lecture. It never came. When the credits rolled, I saw Bruckheimer's name.
If you think back to the people you knew in high school that were in the "Drama Club" this all makes sense. In my HS, these folks were mostly what I would label perverts. They were obsessed with anything abnormal. Also, totally self-absorbed.
Luc Besson pwns face for action movies.
Watchmen won't be out this month. But I already saw Taken and Gran Torino. They are worth getting out for.
The Hannah character was mentally-handicapped. It's something that doesn't get discussed and many of my friends came to a similar conclusion. While it doesn't excuse her actions, it explains a great deal. I'm befuddled that people think the film condoned the relationship between Hannah and the boy. Everyone on this thread, including myself and the reviewer don't agree with the relationship. How is it that we're seeing two different films? Is the film condoning the relationship because we don't see Hannah seek redemption from a higher authority? That wouldn't have made sense, because I she had a few screws missing. It wouldn't have been aligned with her character.
(*SPOILERS* … but, who am I kidding? Most of the people on this thread won't see the film anyway).
Consider the courtroom scenes. Hannah's responses were so slow and clueless. She had such a regimented life and way of going about things. She had limited social skills, a routine job and life, living by herself without friends. I think her parents knew of her handicap and equipped her early on with basic survival skills for when they weren't around to take care of her.
And when it came to her actions during the Holocaust, she just didn't get that what she was doing was wrong. Her moral barometer was compromised by her inability to deviate from her "responsibilities" and do the right thing. I don't believe the film excuses her on this front, either. If it did, it would have ended differently.
Because this was not even mentioned in the film doesn't been it wasn't there. It was just something that I inferred. If I'm unintelligent and can't think for myself because I found this film moving and thought-provoking, so be it. I'm glad you all can be so self-congratulatory for being so smart, because you have the ability to pass judgment on films you haven't seen.
Additionally, this film doesn't diminish what the Holocaust did. It was a disgusting period in world history and this film does nothing to change that.
RE: Woodsman/Little Children/Hollywood sympathization of child molestors. More of that black/white thinking again. So, basically, examination of child molestation in film is simply unacceptable unless the child molestors are all bad guys getting castrated and/or thrown in jail. Let's ignore the problem and maybe it will go away! Boy, would I love to live in your head, John. Yeah, I wish life was that simple.
Please name me something awful that Hollywood has "normalized" through its mere depiction on film? How long has prostitution been depicted on film? Has it been "normalized" into our culture? What about heroine use? Has that been "normalized" into our culture? What makes pedophilia and child molestation anything different? These are things that are in no way normal, but they happen, they exist. They are in our society and they are not going to go away, ESPECIALLY if we sweep them under the rug. The only way we get to answers and solutions is to clearly inspect the problem. Why is this so friggin' taboo? When are we going to pull our heads down from above the smog?
It's been in the cinema for over a month.
Vince, you are working very hard to be an intelligent liberal (oxymoron?). You are so erudite! I love that word.
Yes, Hollywood always tries to show us the REAL reason that folks behave very very badly. Somehow, they always seem to come down to making it pretty cool or sympathetic to live these peverted lifestyles. At the same time, there is an invariable swipe at the other side: corporations, white men, the South, conservatives, the South, the government, esp, in the South. Face it, HW has its vision for the rest of us to adopt.
And they keep chipping away, one bad movie at a time. Poor Lady, she had limited social skills. Could not tell that gassing people might be a bad idea?
Hmmn, Richard. We've never met and you know me so well. According to you, I'm a pervert, totally self-aborbed, obsessed with anything abnormal and I try really hard at being an intelligent liberbal, all because I did Drama Club in high school and I liked "The Reader." The most I can say about you is that you generalize and are a little quick to judge.
I will say one thing Vince, you do not read very well. I did say that you were working at being an intelligent liberal. I think I said the rest of those things about HOLLYWOOD. So, unless your name is Hollywood, this was not directed at you.
If you did do Drama Club in High School, well, I ask you to look at that experience. You be the judge. I was talking about the kids in my HS.
Specific to the Reader, I have no opinion save the subject matter. I tutor adults who cannot read. On balance they are a good bunch. To my knowledge, none of them are mass murders nor do they seduce children, but hey, you never know.
Winslet's character was mentally-handicapped. And, no, I'm not talking about her illiteracy. I gave my explanation in an earlier post.
You say I don't read well. This is what you wrote: "If you think back to the people you knew in high school that were in the "Drama Club" this all makes sense. In my HS, these folks were mostly what I would label perverts. They were obsessed with anything abnormal. Also, totally self-absorbed." So, I'm confused. Where are you talking about Hollywood in this passage? say you tutor adults you cannot read. Do you tutor adults who cannot read well? If I misread this, than I may require your tutoring services!
One thing we do have in common is that we're both tutors!
Yes, There is one thing we can agree on. Hat's off to you on the tutoring.
Its French.
"Who thinks up this garbage?"
Hollywood.
You must be logged in to post a comment.