DAILY FILM DOSE: A Daily Film Appreciation and Review Blog: Michael Haneke
[go: up one dir, main page]

Showing posts with label Michael Haneke. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Haneke. Show all posts

Saturday, 26 June 2010

The White Ribbon

The White Ribbon (2009) dir. by Michael Haneke
Starring Christian Friedel, Ulrich Tukur and Ursina Lardi

****

By Blair Stewart

In the traditional German kids collection 'Der Struwwelpeter' a thumb-sucking child has his digits cut off by giant scissors to learn a lesson, and another won't eat his soup until he starves to death. If you don't abide by the rules the rules will be taught sharply. In hindsight the subtitle of "A German Children's Story" for the Cannes-winning "The White Ribbon" is most appropriate for this film.

The village of Eichwald sits under a heavy silence as it experiences a fit of 'incidents' in 1913-1914. Tripwire is laid for the local Doctor on horseback; a peasant dies in a grain silo accident, children are found in the nearby forest savagely beaten. As is standard in a Michael Haneke film the threat(s) won't be fully revealed, but the private skeletons of the locals and a few clues will come tumbling out.

Looming behind the tension in the community is Europe's Great War holding its breath. The young schoolteacher is our protagonist (Christian Friedel), who also acts as an uncertain old narrator looking for reason in the madness within and beyond the village during his lifetime.

His fortunes in the town will rise and fall over the seasons along with the strict Priest, the Doctor, a twittering pack of young and the darkly muttering peasants toiling under the Landbaron(Ulrich Tukur from "Seraphine"). This would make for a standard thriller with a sadistic bent if it weren't for a number of factors coming together superbly, none more so than the fantastic performances of children in several roles vital to the story.

Featuring an awkward and surprisingly sweet romance unusual for his work ("Benny's Video" and "Funny Games" would make for terrible family viewings unless your parents are humourless psychoanalysts), Haneke otherwise uses his talent for hidden menace where the most violent on-screen action is a cabbage fields destruction. Stating his intention for "The White Ribbon" as an exploration of terrorism in its many forms and consequences, the Austrian director's black-and-white setting has elements of Clouzot's classic "Le Corbeau" and Miller's "The Crucible", all containing similar themes of secrecy and retribution.

While well over two hours long the story never dragged for me, with a script of over twenty characters carrying a story that could have been adapted from an unknown classic novel. A work of repression made with the confidence of a director in command of his form, "The White Ribbon" joins Haneke's "Hidden" as the best film of his career, and one of the finest of the past decade.

'The White Ribbon' is available on DVD and Blu-Ray from Sony Pictures Home Entertainment

Monday, 8 February 2010

The White Ribbon

The White Ribbon (2009) dir. Michael Haneke
Starring: Christian Friedel, Burghart Klaussner, Maria-Victoria Dragus, Leonard Praxouf, Leonie Benesch, Rainer Bock, Susanne Lothar, Ulrich Tukur

**1/2

By Alan Bacchus

Fuck you too Michael Haneke. There you go. You insult me I insult back. Your concerted effort not to pay off the drama and mystery you teased me with for two hours and twenty minutes felt like a slap in the face and is thus deserving of this long distance insult and this 2 1/2 star review.

It'll be of no consequence though as the film has already been lauded for almost a year from Cannes, to Toronto, to the Golden Globes and very soon, the Oscars. Is it too greedy to want more from this story? More people like me should be throwing popcorn at the screen demanding their money back, or at the very least asking management if there's another reel in the back which didn't get projected. For those who don't ejaculate from Haneke's arty, obtuse and rather sudden ending will likely be left with this feeling.

It's frustrating because for two hours and twenty minutes Michael Haneke is on fire, mesmerizing us with a small scale yet rich, muted horror film, shot with stunning and Black and White compositions. It's Germany circa 1913-4 a quaint little one horse town with an Agatha Christie-like cast of characters, the baron, the doctor, the farmer, the midwife, the teacher, the pastor, their wives and their children. It’s an orthodox village, a culture of tradition and obedience, a hierachal class system which dictates the rules of authority. At the top of each household is the man, who in each home rules with absolute power, unspoken, unquestioned. In many ways the set up felt a lot like Lars Von Trier’s sound stage village in Dogville – except with real buildings as opposed to white lines on the floor.

Haneke starts off by telling us of an accident involving the doctor falling off his horse, sending him to the hospital. But it’s no innocent accident however, but a trap set with fishing wire, by some unknown assailant. Who would want to harm the doctor?

With patience and skill Haneke strips back the veils of secrecy revealing other despicable acts of malevolence within each of the homes. As we discover the cause of each of the acts, the assumed rights of man of the women and children in their lives, whether its corporal punishment with a stick, or heinous sexual assault on a child, or as small as being overbearing and dispassionate, the children of the village take their revenge.

Sounds exciting, doesn't it? A village of the damned, Michael Haneke style. Though most of everything takes place off camera, behind closed doors, in the darkness, or simply off told to us by the narrator, Haneke's ratchets up the tension to high levels of discomfort. The violence which simmers clandestinely underneath the idyllic but isolated setting evokes the same moodiness and sense of dread of a Grimm’s Fairytale. Keeping us moving forward are the words of the narrator in the future, and the actions of the teacher in the present trying to make sense of it all.

Though never characterized as a Sherlock Holmes or even a Hardy Boy, by framing the film around the teacher a revelation is implied to be seen through the eyes of that character. In the final moments, we appear to get that moment, when the midwife claims to know who has been committing these acts. It’s a red herring perhaps meant to disguise an even more despicable act, which Haneke never really pays off, only implies.

So just at the moment when the film has my utmost attention, sitting on the edge of my proverbial seat, waiting to know what comes next, practically salivating at the cinematic tension, Haneke slowly fades out on nothing. Agony!

This is not my first Michael Haneke film, so maybe I should expected the unexpected. The unexpected being, to be left hanging at the moment of greatest interest and attachment to the story. Though I didn’t much care for Dogville, at least Von Trier was conscious enough of his audience to pay off his setups with a cathartic blood bath execution at the end. Unfortunately the biggest moment of violence is his painful fade out, like a dagger in my heart.

It's a shame I'm forced to concentrate so much on the final moments of the lengthy, complex and rich film. Because all the praise that has been heaped on this film is actually well deserved. Haneke masterfully aims his microscopic look at this small village with a spectre of a century of future atrocities which will likely befall these people even more. Perhaps the most profound moment is when the father of the teacher's pined-after girlfriend tells him to wait a year before asking her hand in marriage. It's only a year, 'not much can happen in a year' - a great propetically ironic line. And so my extreme reaction to the very end is a testament to the power of the director to dictate the emotion of the audience, even up till the last frame.

Monday, 17 March 2008

FUNNY GAMES


Funny Games (2008) dir. Michael Haneke
Starring: Naomi Watts, Tim Roth, Michael Pitt, Brady Corbet

****

“Funny Games” is a simple story of a husband, wife and their young boy who become victims of a home invasion by a pair of bourgeois psychopaths. Haneke skewers the slasher/horror film genre by avoiding all salacious aspects of these other films, instead building suspense to excruciating levels, before letting it out with shocking force. Putting aside the debate about whether his original 1997 film needed to be remade at all, Haneke has redelivered one of the most frightening film experiences you’ll ever see.

Having seen the original and knowing his other work, I was completely confident in Michael Haneke’s ability to deliver the goods. Michael Haneke is no sell-out, that’s for sure. Haneke has a sick mind, and as one of cinema's 'Enfant Terribles', my only curiosity is how far he would go. Haneke has created essentially a shot-for-shot remake of his original. The only difference being the different actors playing the roles. It’s still a sick and twisted experience with very little lost in the translation.

The film begins so innocently. Ann (Watts) and George (Roth) arrive at their serene country home for a weekend of relaxation. Ann hears a knock on her door and she meets Peter (Brady Corbet), a polite young man dressed in Wimbledon white, who kindly asks for some eggs. Ann obliges, but the simple request becomes an awkward and soon annoying lengthy game of words. Peter is then joined by Paul (Michael Pitt), Peter’s equally polite friend and accomplice. Ann senses some pushiness and she asks the pair to leave. When George arrives the argument turns violent, George is hit on the knee, handicapping him for the rest of the film.

The pair of psychopaths hold the family hostage for the evening. Violence is rarely threatened, as their insincere faux politeness clearly masks their hidden agenda of torture and humiliation. It will take Ann’s strength of will to find her way out of the situation and save her family.

Haneke is hyper aware of his audience and their expectations for such a film. And so “Funny Games” is as much about torturing the audience as the characters. Haneke can do shock and awe as good as anyone – remember the gruesome throat-slash in “Cache”? Or the room destruction scene in “Seventh Continent”? And there are some shock and awe moments in “Funny Games” – specifically the long take showing us the aftermath of one of the violent acts. But it’s Haneke’s skills in building terror and suspense and agonizing discomfort in the audience that is the marvel. Paul and Peter’s games are sick, but watch the effect of Haneke’s subtle shot selection and camerawork. He doesn’t waste a shot and cuts away only when necessary. The opening moments before Peter knocks on the door are made agonizing by Haneke’s placement of the camera. Haneke uses an old Polanski movie trick by shooting Watts against an open door in the background. The horror comes from the anticipation of the filling the space behind it.

Haneke breaks the fourth wall on numerous occasions. This is an old cinema trick as well, but Haneke maximizes its effect when he, at one crucial point, cruelly rewinds the film in front of our eyes and replays the scene again with less satisfying results for the characters and, thus, the audience. It’s Haneke at his cockiest, showing us his manipulation of the audience up front and in our faces.

“Funny Games U.S.” could never top his original film. Having familiar faces in the lead roles and the fact it's the second time around certainly lessens the impact. But at the very least he will also expose new audiences to one of the most disturbing and sick films ever made. I also get satisfaction knowing that some people, going by the title, will see the film by accident, thinking its a comedy. I'd watch it over and over again just to see people's reactions after leaving the theatre.