Unconditional love

Amour (2012)

I guess I wasn't in the right mood for this one as I found it utterly boring and thought the otherwise good story could have been told in 30 minutes instead of the two hours. As the movie starts with a scene from the end you basically wait 2 hours for these old people to die, that in it self isn't really exciting and as the pace is very slow in true Haneke style it does get tedious. Now I'm being too harsh as it's not a bad movie, the story is actually one of the better love stories I've seen and even though I didn't like the slow pace I can see it fitting the story very well. It's a movie about two elderly people offering each other total commitment, there's no candle lit dinners, no fun trips abroad, no sex or any of the cliches you'd expect from a romantic movie. It's just unconditional love. I don't know why Emmanuelle Riva got the Oscar nomination and not Jean-Louis Trintignant as even though Riva is great, it's Trintignant who really carries this movie, kind of literally and figuratively. Would have gladly given him the nomination as well as he's quite brilliant. This movie reminded me of Haneke's first film The Seventh Continent (1989), following the seemingly boring every day life of a family while waiting for something to happen. That something in The Seventh Continent was absolutely devastating, but in this one the shock moment is actually not a shock at all and it's even somewhat of a beautiful moment in it's weird way. With a different mood this movie would have most likely been absolutely brilliant, but now it just dragged on way too long to make a point.

70%

Video is the key to hidden secrets

Hidden (2005)

I seem to be revisiting Haneke's movies quite a bit lately. This time I gave this thriller a second viewing to see if it would open up a bit more on the second time. Well unfortunately it didn't. I really get the feeling about this that the whole purpose of the movie is to make quite simple topics feel like grand scale emotional events. Nothing wrong with that if it would be the case, but the movie is built in a way where the audience is left to solve the mystery and the real point is a trip down the memory lane of this character. The basic idea is quite ok how little things can have huge consequences, but yet it all seems a bit too simple. Unfortunately the second viewing didn't bring any new details that I could have missed on the first time. So the story was surprisingly simple and common. Rest of the movie on the other hand worked quite great, cast is very strong and the mood is as alienating as ever in Haneke's movies. The tension is building very nicely as it should be in a good thriller, but the payoff in the end is quite poor.
70%

A different kind of way for going to Australia

The Seventh Continent (1989)

A family gets bored of their monotonic isolated life and decides to do something quite out of the ordinary. And as it's Haneke's film you're sure to be in for a hard tale. This was Haneke's first theatrical release and even though it has some flaws it's quite brilliant for a first one. Again the start is quite alienating, we follow the family in their dull day to day activities. Nothing much going on, but that's the point, their life is dull and they thrive for a change. Can't really tell much about it as less you know the better it works and because of that can't go into details what didn't really work and what did. It's an above average drama with a bit of flaws but yet very striking as it is.
74%

Fragments of this movie were good

71 Fragments of a Chronology of Chance (1994)

Can't blame Michael Haneke for making too easy movies, and this was no exception. You are given the event wich will happen later on as a text right from the start. Then the movie starts showing seemingly meaningless fragments from the lives of random people who at start don't seem to bind together in any way. As the movie progresses you are more and more confused what's the point in here, until towards the end they start to come together. I have to say the idea is great and surely interesting but there is a big problem with the way it's told. Some of the fragments give you absolutely nothing and most of the characters are very distant. Way too distant for the dramatic ending, which loses most of it's power just because you don't feel anything for the people involved in it. So in the end you are left with a quite pointless movie which had so much more potential than what was used. It wasn't bad in any means, but it surely wasn't great either.
58%

Benny shooting home movies

Benny's Video (1992)

Another challenging movie from Michael Haneke. This time with a boy called Benny whose wealthy parents ignore him so he spends his time watching violent movies and video footage he has shot himself. The reality looks different through the lens and it alters the boys world view. When the boy murders a girl and shoots it all on video things get really messed up. Don't want to spoil much from the movie so it's hard to comment on it without going to individual scenes. Anyway the story opens so many relevant questions that it's quite clear not all of them can be dealt with in one movie. The ones Haneke picks are quite good nevertheless. It's shot very nicely with a lot of mix from a gritty video camera and film. Some scenes felt a bit unnecessary as they didn't bring anything into the movie, but mostly it was a very well crafted work. Especially after the middle of the movie it really kicks in as the parents get in. All in all not the best from Haneke and definitely not a masterpiece, but still a very good movie.
80%

Twice the funny games

Well I just watched Funny Games U.S. and for an obvious reason I have to put both versions up here, so lets start with the original.



Funny Games (1997)

This is Michael Haneke's crown jewel so to say, at least by his own words. A movie that is closest to the themes of A Clockwork Orange out of all the movies that try to capture it's feel. It's a story of an upper class family's nightmare when two young men take the family hostage and put them through a sadistical, violent ordeal. This movie is disturbing, brutal, freaky and not in the entertaining way. It's a statement against the violence in entertainment and how it blurs the viewers mind. When people are offered everything, nothing is enough. Just for the basic message it's a movie worth watching. But there's a bit more to it than that, it's also quite brilliantly made. The cast is superb and hadle their hard roles really well. Especially the mother played by Susanne Lothar makes a striking performance. Some scenes are pure perfection with long uncomfortable takes without release. Also the idea of not showing the violence but letting the viewer hear what's happening is so brutal it's scary. Again proves the point what you can't see is worse than what you can. This is a kind of movie you watch once and never go back to it as it's going to loose it's effect after the first viewing.
85%



Funny Games U.S. (2007)
Haneke did a remake of the original for the American market. And I have to wonder why? It's the same movie from scene to scene only the actors are English and American and the dog is a different breed. He didn't change anything from the original. In a way I understand it, if the original is perfect what's there to improve and since it's the same director of course he's not going to change anything as he himsef has said it's his best work. That raises the question why make a remake then if it's going to be exactly the same movie? Only thing I can think of is to take the money from the average illiterate American. And that is not a good thing. Don't get me wrong it's not worse than the original, it's the same with pretty much every detail. It's still as effective, shocking and brutal, with the same statement. Also the cast, especially Naomi Watts, make stellar performances. But there's just no need for this remake and even if Haneke had the good intentions to bring his work to a broader audience, it feels like he's pissing in the eye of the original fans. I honestly can't decide how to rate this one, easiest would be to give it 0 since it's completely unnecessary movie for me personally and it has that "let's take the money away from people" feeling. But as it is in the end the same as the original, meaning a very good movie, I should go for 85 percent here too. Oh well I guess I won't let commercialism win. If you're American and can't read subtitles, watch this movie, everyone else watch the original.
0%