La ruleta china

The setup to this film is straightforward: a married couple cheating on each other are tricked into showing up at their mansion in the country with their lovers at the same time, a maneuver orchestrated by their daughter and her nanny, who show up to watch what happens. Initially the two sets of lovers laugh it off and appear to take what's going on in a very mature way, but gradually we begin to see repressed discomfort and fractured relationships. The housekeeper and her adult son at the mansion play an active role as well, including in the titular parlor game which reveals the cruel way in which one of the people is perceived.

Despite the simple premise, a lot of the history and relationships between these characters remains frustratingly vague and out of reach. It's clear the girl harbors a lot of bitterness towards her parents, seeing the connection of her disability to her parents' infidelities. It's clear that the husband and wife have the most in common at the dinner table, where they do all the talking, but when it comes to an emotional connection and the power of touch afterwards, it's with their lovers. And, I have to say, between the liars, those who are vindictive, and the pseudo-intellectuals, it's pretty damn clear that all of these characters are pretty unlikeable. Beyond that, it's open to interpretation for what Fassbinder was trying to say here.

There are references to Katowice, fascism, and the question of what role a person from today would play during the Third Reich, which along with the cinematography of Michael Ballhaus centering on reflections and mirrors we see made me wonder if a part of this was dealing with Germans of the 1970's coming to terms with their country's Nazi past. There are also aspects that are simply unexplained, such as the line the husband says to the housekeeper, "Ali Ben Basset was murdered in Paris last week. We're the last two left now," the housekeeper inexplicably calling for assistance at the Traunitz manor (which is the nanny's name), and that final gunshot. I liked how it wasn't clear-cut and made me think, but these felt too vague and therefore lost a good portion of their power, at least to me. I also hated the morality tale like ending, with the narration of the traditional marriage vows.

I liked the setup, the visuals, and how the film was constrained to 86 minutes, but I didn't care for these characters, the cold way they were treated, or the script. It just felt like the film was more pretense than substance, which left me disappointed by the time it ended.

Believing that her parents' longtime extramarital affairs caused her physical ailments, a teenage cripple arranges for both sets of adulterers to unexpectedly meet at a country home in this Rainer Werner Fassbinder thriller. The film is gloriously photographed by Michael Ballhaus, with the camera giddily spinning around to reflect nervousness when the four adulterers first meet, and the very deliberate framing (some actors turned to faced the camera; others not) throughout adds tension. The juice of the film comes from both the girl's initially elusive motives and the sense of emotions about to explode; at one point, her own mother almost shoots her through an open window. Oddly, the film never explores why the daughter has more hostility towards her mother (and vice versa) than her father, but this aside, the only significantly underwhelming aspect of the film is the title game. Nowhere near as dangerous as Russian roulette on the surface, Chinese roulette -- a game that seems to only exist in the film's universe -- is merely a guessing game of sorts, albeit one in which deep resentment is able to surface. Whatever the case, the film is a surprisingly tense ride considering the minimal sets and small cast. It also offers food for thought in terms of who is to blame and whether indeed the girl's parents brought the situation upon themselves through emotionally (if maybe not physically) injuring their daughter.

Chinese Roulette is about a marriage. An upper class couple split up for the weekend, each has told lies to the other regarding their destination, however both end up at the same destination with lovers in tow, the schloss in the countryside. This has been carefully machinated by their young disabled daughter who has known of the affairs of her parents for many years.

The scene where Herr Christ and lover walk in on Madame Christ and lover is pretty good, there's initial shock, then they manage to dissociate from their roles and have a good chuckle about it together. Thus begins the weekend.

The daughter arrives and insists on a game of Chinese Roulette, this is an interesting little game. You get two teams of four people, the first team picks a person from the other in a secret conclave. The second team then has to guess who is the person in their team who has been chosen by asking nine questions, of the form, "if this person was a magazine, which magazine would they be?". Anyway the game gets pretty cruel if you want to play it that way, "Which would be the most fitting method of execution for the person in question" for example. You could find titillation in the game by praising someone without them knowing who you are referring to or dark joy in deeply insulting them.

The daughter has arranged it all to grind the adults down. I suppose if there is one message of the film it's that if you breed adders you shouldn't be surprised if they grow up and eat you. The couple have clearly not provided for their daughter (other than materially speaking - she has whatever she wants, chocolates dolls, pretty dresses &c).

The game is an exercise in cruelty, a couple of the answers being pretty good. However there is a lot of insecurity, everyone is wondering if the person who is being described as an apple with a worm inside it is them, furthermore the person answering the question is often blatantly prejudiced and is not understanding the person they are speaking about.

There are some pretty bizarre things going on, the butler-type Gabriel writes unsound doggerel and reads it aloud to the couples (previously only one couple at a time). There are references to a character we never see, strange complicities, unexplained relationships.

One thing you can say though is that the movie is shot brilliantly, there are some wonderful circular shots (trademark of Scorsese and Fassbinder regular collaborator Michael Ballhaus) where the camera orbits the characters, lots of shots of people reflected off glass or cut in two by doorways, some exquisite framing. Perhaps the most exquisite movie I've seen in visual terms. The score too is of a very high calibre.

I take it as a pretty mystical film, one scene that is great is the daughter sat in her bed talking to Gabriel, the camera is at floor level just behind a row of the dolls which she has arranged as a kind of adoring audience for her. You feel like one of the dolls really, it's quite strange. Certainly Fassbinder is railing against certain bourgeois modes here. The characters are isolated by their feelings of self-worth, their deceptions, their victim status, and their sharp tongues, there's no love anywhere. In every relationship in the movie I felt as if it were one possessing the other, as if a trinket.

It's nastiness all around, almost an exercise in misanthropy, another reviewer referred to it as an exercise in deception as a survival tactic. I recently titled a review of mine, "A manual on how to live", well this really is "A manual on how not to live". It's as disparaging to victims as to victimisers. One of Fassbinder's other movies was called Satan's Brew and I really think this one could have been as well .

This film is intense. I found it quite entertaining as a psychological thriller. You wonder how far will these people go into the game. Will anyone break? Will the violence become physical? It kept my interest to the very ending, which was a good one.

With this film, director Rainer Werner Fassbinder delivered a verdict on the entire established German society of that time. Using the example of a rich married couple and their lovers, the director, in his unique manner, showed the moral principles and stereotypes of the bourgeoisie.

The picture is quite difficult to understand, it is made in a sluggish manner and everything interesting in it comes right at the end. Gravitating towards art-house and intimacy, the film nevertheless makes a lasting impression and provokes reflection after viewing. This topic will probably always be relevant. The new cannot be built without the merciless eradication of the old, as is the main conclusion of the picture.