Opiniones de usuarios

Trace of Stones is a film about Socialism in GDR or East Germany which is compared to a construction site in Schkona in the early 60's. It tackled sensitive and serious issues at that time without losing its touch of creativeness both technically (on how shots were developed) and script wise. The film was made through series of flashbacks yet it wasn't boring at all, actually it made you stick on the film by craving more information that will lead to the present.

The clash of personalities of the three main characters in the film, namely Balla, Kati and Horrath is very entertaining to watch. They played their roles efficiently thus creating a world full of emotions, from rivalry, love, anger, humor, etc. The theme of the film may be serious yet it won't fail to make the audience laugh at some scenes. The brevity invested by the filmmaker in doing this film is worth it, even though it was banned for two decades due to the issues it tackled about the GDR Party and Socialism, the re-opening of the film in 1990 made it an art-house hit in Germany and most of importantly its message was clearly conveyed to the audience especially to the German people.

A delightful film that is far more truthful about life in GDR than one might expect from DEFA--understandably but unfortunately banned by the government for how thoughtfully and ambivalently it portrays the party. Rather straightforward style, with some wonderful shots but altogether rather conservative and uneventful in terms of camera shots. All the better for the characters and the plots, though, which are compelling enough. Not a trivial love story, though with its cliched moments, it is more poignant and ambiguous and unpredictable than similar DEFA films. Balla is great to watch, and nicely tempers the potential melodrama of Kati and Werner. None of the characters is simpleminded or heroic, all are fleshed out well.

Trace of Stones is a genuine surprise, a mid-sixties East German film which openly mocks the hypocrisies and inefficiencies of the East German economic system. The mood is set during an opening scene in which a construction site is being blown up, and when someone asks a worker what is happening he laconically responds, "The plan was wrong." The only workers who are able to get anything done are an anti-social gang led by Manfred Krug, doing an excellent Brando imitation, that systematically abuses their bosses. The craziness of the system is summarized in a lengthy Christmas gift-giving scene; I won't give away the details here-let's just say it's circular...

Not surprisingly, the film was quickly suppressed though not before the East German censor demanded numerous cuts that make some aspects of the plot nearly unintelligible. But what remains is still powerful, effective, and well worth watching.

When i studied the visual style of the film, the first thing i noticed was that it was set in a widescreen format. In order to fill the screen, the film has many scenes with crowds of people. It can be also observed that the Ballas are always in a firing-squad position resembling the Western Magnificent Seven.

Camera movements and shots are very conservative and minimal that it almost looks a documentary. It used a lot of panning and close-up shots. Over-the-shoulder shots are very rare.Flashbacks were not properly executed and the black and white format adds to the ambiguity. Overall, the film doesn't have the aesthetic appeal we often see in Hollywood films yet it remains one of the best German Films for its story and historical value.

Yes, I am well aware of the fact this movie was in some way "seminal" and was banned in the former GDR for a very long time. Nonetheless it is a quite sluggish and dull film, as dull and boring as the stuffy East German state with its peculiar preachy economy of scarcity in general. Besides, it is at least half an hour too long in its runtime, with many irrelevant scenes and - let's be outright - a couple of characters you don't really care about. Manfred Krug is as good as always, a true professional actor, but the story is not at all captivating. So let's not interpret too many cinematic ideas into this movie. It's simply a fairly dull piece of art that had the chance of being politically adverse to socialist mainstream back in 1966. Otherwise nobody would be discussing it any more today.