Whenever one goes to see a movie, it’s usually best to go in with as little knowledge as possible, that way there are no expectations and a lot more surprises. The problem with that is you have to know something about the movie in order to get you to go and see it, and sometimes that can cause us to predict an entire film even before it begins. For example, in the case of ‘The Reader’ I knew this was a British film about a romance set against the aftermath of World War II. From that, you can probably guess what kind of movie this is, a romantic drama with few to no surprises. Does that make it bad? No. Does that make it predictable? Yes. Does that make it worth recommending? Read on.

The film mostly takes place in the flashbacks of a successful German lawyer named Michael Berg (Ralph Fiennes). He looks back at when he was the age of 15 (played by David Kross) when he fell in love for the first time with a woman more than double his age named Hannah (Kate Winslet). The two lived in Berlin around the same streets, as Berg stumbles on to her doorstep trying to recover from having a nasty sickness. Hannah gets him some water and tries to help him regain his senses. His mother recommends that Berg go back to the woman and thank her for her hospitality. He does much more than thank her upon his arrival as he has an ongoing affair with the woman who obviously has an attraction to much, MUCH younger men.

One of their favorite pastimes is when Hannah has Berg read to her all the books he’s learning in his classes, such as ‘The Odyssey,’ ‘Huck Finn,’ and so on. As the two finally decide to break up they go about their separate ways. Berg goes to law school and is invited with the class to sit in on a court case for several Nazi guards who were charged with murder of several concentration camp prisoners. Low and behold he finds dear Hannah among those guards, as he is both shocked and heartbroken that his first love could commit such an act. He also holds, however, information that could be helpful in getting her a less threatening sentence, but debates whether or not it would be appropriate to do so as she seems almost welcoming of her punishment. So the choice is up to him whether or not to come forward with the information or let her suffer at the sentencing brought on by her own hand.

The film plays out as many foreign, art house dramas do, which makes it easy to guess and hard to get into. This isn’t because the story or the themes aren’t strong; we’ve just seen many films like it before, and often with more twists, power, and surprises. For a crowd that does not go to many art house films, this could be a very gripping movie. For a crowd that usually seeks them out, this might seem like the typical protocol: silent moments, dramatic stares, people crying, and moral dilemmas. Nothing in the film was unpleasant, but I don’t know if anything about it really stuck out to make it unique. Even art house films I don’t enjoy manage to give me something to remember, where this one seems visually dry and emotionally safe.

It doesn’t seem like many chances were taken in this film, nothing different or new is offered, but for what it is, it kept my interest. The themes of doing the right thing and what considered morally wrong are all brought up in stupor of memories and lost romances. The strongest scene is when Berg visits the concentration camps and looks inside a building filled with the shoes of the prisoners. The shoes seem to stretch out beyond what the eye can see, making us realize the size and scope of the humanity that was sacrificed. Scenes like that leave an impact, but they are few and far between. The movie is very “by the book,” doing little to leave a lasting impression, but there was nothing truly wrong about it. It’s only crime is that it was too safe, and with a subject like the Holocaust, a subject that has been tackled many times in film and still struggles to be understood even to this day, a lasting impression is certainly needed.

So who’ll like it? Art house fans who aren’t that picky. The performances are good and the story is good, but nothing really unique or too effective.

Who won’t like it? Picky art house fans. People who expect more from overseas, and would like to see something fresher and more original for American audiences.

My thoughts? I don’t personally enjoy not recommending a film that wasn’t bad, but I suppose it’s even harder for me to tell someone to leave a film that leaves so little an impression on me. Why see a film about such a subject matter when so many other films can talk about it better? Whether it be the romance, the Holocaust, or the court scenes, every single moment has better moments done in other films. Those films did it first, those films took risks, and those films had something to say in a totally different way. So if you’re not picky about your dramas you may enjoy this and find it rather gripping. If you have seen countless romances, dramas, courtroom films, you might find this film to be a little on the lighter side, shrugging to yourself “Been there, done that.”

Douglas Darien is a featured writer for Xomba.com. Read the rest of his work here or visit his website www.thatguywiththeglasses.com.