The Good Bye, Lenin Movie Relation to Historic Facts

At the film's opening, we learn of the first East German shot into space, surely an apotheosis of what a state can achieve, its grasp extending to the stars. But behind the curtain of this vast achievement we can see how it is brought about through the utter bending of citizens to the states will. Alex's mother Christiane, who we first assume the innocent of the piece, is interrogated by the Stasi for her husband has fled the country. We learn he was unable to live with a state he detested, the ordeal of the interrogation so testing for Christiane it sends her into a coma. Her husband and the children?s father absent, she finds a kinship with the state, now one of its most vociferous supporters. The absence of the father is particularly imbued with purpose. Later, Becker seeks to equate the death of communism with the return of the father for the two are so inextricably connected. Only when the German Democratic Republic (GDR) is laid to rest can this dark chapter

Set at the end of the Cold War in East Germany, the movie Goodbye Lenin is the story of a young man, Alex, trying to protect his mother, Christiane, who just spent the last eight months in a coma. Christiane is a personification of the values and ideology of socialism. She carries them out in her interactions with society, and is very hopeful towards the success of the regime. During her absence, the fall of the Berlin Wall and of the German Democratic Republic leads to a radical and turbulent change in society: the fall of socialism and the triumph of capitalism. Because of the shocking effect of such information and the danger of another heart attack, Alex creates for Christiane an ideological form of socialism. Fundamental themes in the movie are the difference between ideal and reality of socialism, as well as the positive and negative aspects of the transition to free market capitalism. Such themes are carried out through a juxtaposition of an ideal society and its reality in the form of a constructed reality of socialism. This idealized version of socialism served as an oasis from the chaotic transition from a problematic socialist regime to free market capitalism.

Limitations exist amongst her interpretation of East Germany narrowing the audience that Funder attempts to permeate with obscure knowledge stored in the minds of endless victims. The subjective thoughts presented put a taint on the knowledge received, one can only consider her truth with a level of exactness if they too were raised in similar conditions as Funder. Therefore it provides the ability to compare the lifestyle you consider worthy of human activity with the occurrences in East Germany, whilst allowing perspective to be manipulated by experience in the environment Funder observes. The inclusion of judgements and conclusions provides us to interpret the situation further, due to her acknowledgement that we should not necessarily believe her – “You know they want to stop thinking about the past. They want to pretend it all didn’t happen”. Funder’s lack of experience prior to her journey makes her understanding of the past narrow. She is intent on the idea that revealing and using your past to create a future is necessary. The GDR controls the associated people to this day, without an appropriate explanation of the happenings it has left them with the inability to piece together the numerous aspects embedded in their thoughts. The missing parts dominate these

Overall, the film did exactly what any good dramatic film would do and that is make the audience feel something. The tragedy of the Holocaust has never been fictionally depicted from a German child’s view until this movie. The depiction of how a child who is protected from certain elements war might have thought in that era makes this film unique. The unbelievable conclusion is what makes this film unforgettable. The most important scene in the film is the ending, when Bruno

Compared to our own class textbook, I feel as if the movie covered the change of East Germany well with emotional family love and a touch of comedy.

Anna Funder’s investigative account of the traumas experienced during the totalitarian governance of the GDR (German Democratic Republic), Stasiland, presents an historical account of life under the communist regime and behind the Berlin Wall, an historical account which manifests in the personal stories, descriptions of the remnants of the East German government. Funder presents interviews of victims of the GDR to create a tangible account of the power held by the government. She further conveys the historical importance of the former Stasi operatives to be powerful in presenting a complete depiction of East German society. However, it is also through Funder’s presentation of the former East Germany to be permeated by its history that creates her powerful portrayal of East Germany.

Ronald Reagan’s transcript of his “tear down this wall” speech has gone done in history as one of the more influential speeches. In regards to importance, some people compare Reagan’s speech in West Berlin as being just as influential as other speeches, such as Martin Luther King’s famous speech. Within the transcript, there are some common themes. Some of the themes within the transcript are freedom, prosperity, and union. The purpose of this short paper is to discuss the significant of Reagan’s speech, and possibly discuss some contradictions within the transcript. In America, Reagan’s speech was well received, but in the Soviet Union, it was seen as a treat to all they believed in.

Ronald Reagan, in his speech, (“Berlin Wall”, 1987), the former governor and President of the United States and at the time of the Cold War, “ the most magnetic public figure in the nation”(encyclopedia.com) elucidates to his audience the consequences of residing under the influence of the Soviet Union. Reagan supports his assertion through the use of various rhetorical devices to generate logos, ethos, and pathos. His purpose is to incite a feeling of an injustice done to the people of Berlin and Soviet Allies and to bring down the Berlin Wall as “the most visible symbol of the decades-long Cold War”(History.com) between the Americans and the Soviets during the Cold War. Reagan writes in perfervid tone generated toward the people of Berlin and other Soviet allies in hopes of bringing the Cold War to an end and it is reported by CBS News that he successfully “bolstered the morale of the pro-democracy movement in East Germany”(Brinkley).

Were it a testimony to the rigors and cruelness of human nature, it would be crushing. As it is, it shatters our perception of man and ourselves as no other book, besides perhaps Anne Franke`s diary and the testimony of Elie Wiesl, could ever have done. The prisoners of the labor camp, as in Shukhov?s predicament, were required to behave as Soviets or face severe punishment. In an almost satirical tone Buinovsky exclaims to the squadron that ?You?re not behaving like Soviet People,? and went on saying, ?You?re not behaving like communist.? (28) This type of internal monologue clearly persuades a tone of aggravation and sarcasm directly associated to the oppression?s of communism.

Komar and Melamid’s painting titled “Lenin Lived, Lenin Lives, Lenin Will Live! (1982)” shows the embalmed body of Vladimir Lenin lying at the top of the podium in the Lenin Mausoleum in Moscow and a kneeling female figure in mourning in the lower right corner. The painting bears resemblances to the Soviet and French Revolutionary and Christian models (Hillings 49). Lenin’s corpse and the other-worldly female figure show an artificial disconnect that resembles how various Soviet regimes used

Movies created in Soviet Russia were prominently used as a tool for propaganda, “The Fall of Berlin,” used contrast to idealize Soviet Russia by downplaying Germany and Hitler. “The Fall of Berlin” was released in 1950, right after World War II ended. The film is Soviet propaganda that was thought to insure faith within the Russian population, as Stalin wanted Soviet Russia to believe in him. The movie characterized Stalin with such gratitude and admiration, even I believed he was a good leader.

First, the proletariat is responsible for tearing down the statue of Alexander III. Thus, the revolutionary body of the working class itself is responsible for the first step towards socialism rather than being directed by a revolutionary leader. Secondly, the Provisional Government, appears counter revolutionary and comparable to the tsar. According to Eisenstein, the Provisional Government’s resemblance to the autocracy is simply the inevitable result of an incomplete revolution. Thus, montage is used to convey political ideology, but also forms the content of the film. Eisenstein’s use of montage lets the statue become more than a simple symbol representative of the tsarist rule, but rather as a means of expressing the need for complete revolution. Without the use of montage, the statue’s meaning would have been far more limited, and thus far less prominent within the film. In this case, Eisenstein’s use of montage influences the film’s visible content as well as its meaning in a way that political ideology alone would not

I think it tells the story of a Berlin society caught up in hysteria over a series of child murders, and of the massive mobilization by police and criminals alike to catch the killer. It shows the dark side effects of mass murders and also makes everyone scared. At the end the movie shows that the baggers and criminal’s works together to find the murderer and when the murderer was in court the mother of a lost child speak herself that “now there is nothing to do and she won’t get her child back”. It shows the deepest scream of a helpless mother where she can’t get her daughter back. In my opinion the murderer should be killed because if he is sick but still he is committing crime by killing innocent

In contrast to the desolate picture life in East Berlin painted, the economy of West Germany, which also included West Berlin, was rebounding and becoming quite strong. West Berlin’s businesses were booming, and their industry products were readily and rapidly bought by its resident who were eager to obtain the products and goods they had so long been deprived of previously, as a result of World War II.10 This new and heightening demand for goods pushed wages up quickly, and many new jobs were created with the development of new housing units and other construction enterprises.11 Movies, plays, and concerts were also available for West Berlin residents to enjoy, and overall life in West Berlin was good. However, life on the West side wasn’t all fun and games. Their city was still divided, and families were still separated. To the children of West Berlin residents, East Berlin was hidden from view and shrouded in mystery, their only knowledge of the other side coming through school or some form of media. It seemed they constantly asked themselves the question, “ Will the lives of East and West Germans forever be so vastly different and separate?”

The widely acclaimed film, Good Bye, Lenin! (2003), is a tragicomedy set in the immediate period preceding and succeeding the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. Directed and co-written by Wolfgang Becker, the film was a critical success. It attracted 6 million viewers in Germany alone, was sold to more than 60 countries and won multiple domestic as well as international film awards including six from the European Film Academy (IMDb). Two prominent and intersecting narratives underline Becker’s cinematic representation of the fall of the Berlin Wall. Firstly (and more conspicuously), the film relates a wry and often unspoken tale of German reunification through an Eastern perspective. Concurrently, a second narrative traces a private story of familial deception, tragedy and ultimately, kinship. Examining Good Bye, Lenin! under the lens of two German cultural phenomenons - Ostalgia and Mauer im Kopf - this essay contends that the film’s political significance exists primarily in its nuanced understanding and unique presentation of Germany’s journey towards national reunification. In this endeavor, Becker’s film succeeds in both reflecting and invigorating a wave of greater cultural as well as political dialogue within Germany. As such, one may view the film as a valuable socio-political instrument contributing to the country’s ongoing process of national reconciliation.