Benny's Video

'Benny's Video' is a genuinely unsettling film whose premise concerns a scene that is particularly disturbing and visceral. The film concentrates on Benny, a seemingly sociopathic teenager, and his regimented, staid parents known simply as 'Mother' and 'Father'. Benny lives a materially charmed life, having an array of electronics bought for him by his affluent middle class parents. This technology allows him to indulge in his interest, or rather obsession, with videos, both watching and recording them.

The film's message is a relevant one, it suggests that the media has a detrimental, and in this case fatal, desensitising effect. However, it suggests this in a rather hyperbolic fashion. The film loses its credibility through how explicitly and rather insularly it conveys its message. In my opinion, it's clear that Benny is a warped individual with an innate lack of remorse, no film or news report can rid someone of their senses to the point of sociopathy. Benny is a contemptible person, and he's purposely constructed that way, but he isn't someone who's the product of desensitisation; his cold, empathy devoid persona is that of a genealogically tarnished mind.

Narratively speaking, the film's first hour or so engrosses you with its unpleasantness and realism. The film places the viewer in a 'what if?' situation that's somewhat reminiscent of films such as 'Deliverance', but it isn't as resonant owing to the abhorrence of the film's events, the psychopathy of Benny and the steely reserve of his parents. During the last 40 minutes of the film, there is something of a pacing problem, I felt the film lost the edge and tension it had created; this isn't a particularly pressing issue, but the film certainly felt longer than 105 minutes.

I found 'Benny's Video' to be a fundamentally flawed film; it would've worked if it had a more balanced, rational message at its core. Some lobbyists, in the haze of their ignorance and typically political agendas, would vehemently agree with this film. I am of the opinion that there is a substantial difference between watching something and doing something. Violent media can, at the very most, be a mere substitutional factor amongst many factors that could somewhat exacerbate the pace of an unhinged, unwell mind.

In his second film of the "glaciation trilogy", Haneke once more hauntingly draws a torpid affluent society where the people live at cross purposes, where conservations are rare and toilsome, where communication is alienated to a technical process. Accordingly to that, the emotional life of the protagonists became stunted: Benny, after his "act", shows concernment only through surrogate actions, just like letting his hair cropped. The father immediately slyly pushes to damage mitigation, whereas only the mother indicates rudiments of emotion, though somehow tense. In a confusing blend of film and video images, Haneke creates a second level of reality, so to speak, where Benny's senseless "act" perfectly integrates in the horror pictures of the evening news and makes it open for question. At the same time, Haneke commits himself to no specific answer and denies any absolution. That is what makes this film so horrifying - there simply is no telling argument that makes a murderer out of a young boy.

Benny's Video is a slow methodical drama circling around the psyche of character decisions made through the movie. It has a strong start, and one that puts you into it right away with some disturbing footage. But then after 30 minutes or so it becomes a uneventful, both in events and character. Leading to a very slow end.

Directing is static, impactful and methodical. It's not afraid to sway from the norm, long takes that last forever. Enabling the viewer to be sucked in in certain moments. That is when it works, but there's also long lasting scenes on simply a TV. Now the I get it, the violence shown in the news and movie is supposed to be interesting and the 'story'' behind the actions. But it's dull and repeated too often. That said the directing in general managed to mostly keep me engaged and curious.

Sadly that curiosity is not rewarded. As a story it fits the notion of ''art house'' film, without a proper message to end with. But with a message as a whole. Perhaps back then it was more relevant, surely. But it makes for a weaker film now.

Acting is a standout, great work from all involved. Music, non existent. Sound design, maybe I'm weird but the eating and subtle sounds made this movie more uncomfortable than the disturbing stuff. Or maybe it was a mix of both. Just odd.

Decent but not as effective as I'd hoped.

What makes BENNY'S VIDEO so disturbing is threefold:

#1- Benny (Arno Frisch) himself. We get the definite impression that something isn't quite right about him from the beginning. Mr. Frisch plays Benny with cold, lifeless ease. He is just going through the motions of everyday existence. When the unthinkable occurs, it's very matter-of-fact, like brushing crumbs off a table.

#2- Benny's parents (Angela Winkler and Ulrich Muhe). They are almost as mindless as their son. After watching the video, their reaction is, while not altogether unexpected, jaw-dropping nonetheless.

#3- Director Michael Heneke, who keeps everything clinical and icy. He shows us a psychopath in a "normal" environment, just doing the daily routines. The shocking parts are presented as mere interruptions in the daily grind. The motives of all concerned are what bring out the true terror. There are no masked maniacs here, only upper class people forced to deal with an "unfortunate" problem.

A classic film about the horror of indifference and self-preservation...

It's all about shock value. Haneke's intro for this one is to desensitize you for the rest. What happened with the teenagers is nothing compared to what we see first because the first one is real (and we know it's real), what happened with the teenagers is fake and off-camera.

The discussion happens from this point. Why aren't we more shocked? Why is Benny so insensitive to what he did? It's because of his hobby. He doesn't see it as real, it's all from his camera point of view, like everything he saw before. It's just digital or analog information put on screen. He sees himself as a viewer and a camera at the same time. He is dehumanized, he is a machine, that gun was part of him as well. And like all Haneke, it's shocking.