Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Aug 4, 2007 23:47:16 GMT
Caché Hidden Michael Haneke 2004 France / Austria / Germany / Italy When a bourgeois couple start receiving video tapes of their home under surveillance, the husband relates to an incident from his childhood. A slow, riveting, austere work which explores cinematography to the point that the plot is almost irrelevant, though some might find it of interest as a reflection of Franco-Algerian relations, and the implications of guilt stemming from the Algerian War. Shooting in long-takes and without music, Haneke keeps his audience at arm's length throughout; the result is a cool, deeply ambiguous film which offers no (or many) solutions, ultimately as empty or as deep as you want it to be: it involves you insofar that you wish to be involved, and so many will no doubt walk away in confusion if not fury. Either way, to those interested in cinematic form, it will likely make you think about what Cinema is and how you watch it. In years to come, like some sort of Antonioni masterpiece, it'll likely be regarded as a masterpiece.
|
|
|
Post by The Ghost of LLC on Aug 24, 2007 19:16:56 GMT
Caché Hidden Michael Haneke 2005 France / Austria / Germany / Italy 1st time A television personality receives strange surveillance tapes and frightening drawings from an anonymous source.
A film comprising of several long, drawn-out single shots, it feels that Haneke's intention is to put the audience in the position of the voyeur. The film itself is slow paced and often runs in circles before momentarily stopping at depictions of shocking or surprising events; it's rather intriguing. The point seems not to resolve conflict, but merely present it. From there, Haneke hands the torch over to his audience and relies on their genuine reactions to keep the film on track.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Aug 24, 2007 20:41:58 GMT
Man, it must suck to be a television!
|
|
|
Post by The Ghost of LLC on Aug 25, 2007 1:48:31 GMT
Smart ass. Tomato, tomàto. You say "personality," I say "personally." But I suppose I'll edit it, just so we're clear. Jerk-face.
|
|
Capo
Administrator
Posts: 7,847
|
Post by Capo on Jul 13, 2009 22:04:13 GMT
To return to svsg's question in the Weekend thread... I love Caché. I think it's an effective, engaging horror film. Haneke's 'cold' aesthetic appeals to me greatly; that might be in large part because they can be deemed 'anti-psychological', in the sense they reveal character (though it's more the opposite) through action alone, with little other insight; the appeal, in turn, may be because films that attempt to give a psychologically coherent grounding to character are often superficial. So I can't decide whether I like Haneke's films in themselves or because they're the best I can currently think of. Whatever, his style is of much influence to me. I've been taken in by his comments and press releases in the past. But I find him mostly frustrating now, because the films are always well-crafted and thought-provoking, yet his intentions/self-interpretations (it's difficult to tell!) seem unwarranted and actually reductive. David Walsh seems to be criticising Haneke and Caché for drawing a parallel between one six-year-old's deed (and the resulting guilt felt by the same person in adulthood) and French imperialism, and he's right to do so. That's a tenuous political implication, and it's tenuous because there's no accounting for why Georges's character acted that way in the first place. There's a psychological gap there, and thus the analogy falls flat; it isn't thought through enough. I'd have to watch the film itself again, though, to offer a more sophisticated response. Maybe RNL can step in...
|
|