I too was struck by the surprisingly viewer-friendly aesthetic of the buildings and locations in the film, so I am not surprised to hear that the film-makers had admitted their difficulties in depicting the contemporary environment.
The impact was to diminish the film's message: a film-maker like Ken Loach would not make that mistake.
Very interesting post.
L
Lottip,
I've also wondered on the same question regarding the 'beauty' of the film and whether that diminished its message. The key is that such a stylized approach made the film an enjoyable experience, and provoked an emotional response that allowed me to better understand the characters and their motives. Without this stylization the film would have been obviously harder to watch, and I would have probably responded with a sense that it was a completely unknowable reality and thus the characters unrelatable as well.
The tonal richness of the film makes more sense if one perceives that the message isn't purely political, but one that examines the significance of art in an environment filled with suspicion. There is a sort of abstract portrayal of fundamental ideas in spite of the filmmaker's efforts in trying to accurately portray the GDR.
If you ever rent the DVD, be sure to watch the special features provided. Von Donnersmark is remarkably candid about the making of the story, its themes, and his relationship with the actors. Considering his youth (he's 33 or so) and what he was able to achieve with such meager resources and experience and one can't help but really admire the man. He come off as very cultivated, his English is flawless and yet he doesn't seem to take himself all too seriously. He has really set a standard that young directors and screenwriters should try to emulate.
O my god looks like, then I would never live.
Commenting by HaloScan
