Caché
Michael Haneke delivers a powerfull yet extremely deceiving film that will surely not sit well with most people because of its nature, but its definitely worth seeing since its refreshing approach to film making is like a breath of fresh air on the formulatic productions that abound everywhere.
The films opens up with a very long and static shoot that oddly enough sets the mood perfectly for this film. We see what it appears to be a couple go through pretty standart affairs, only to learn they were secretly being videotaped. The person responsible for this recording or his motives are a comlpete mistery that this family cannot figure out. As the movie goes on we continue to see this misterious tapes that now appear with strange, cartoon like images with what appears to be blood.
Is hard to continue giving any more details without giving away too much of the movie but one thing stands out: If you're thinking "Oh a Mystery Thriller" you couldnt be further away from the truth, but dont worry, thats intentional.
The reason this film is so effective its precisely that is deceiving, it appears to be a very standart movie and truth to be told most people will think it is until they literally see the credits roll, but as cliché as it might be this is not a movie that can easily be understood in a single view, at least if you're not expecting it.
To elaborate, Haneke uses the plot, the mood, the setting the dialog, cinematography, camera work, hell: Every single aspect of fimmaking to illustrate and study our responses when we're confronted with uncertain things in our lives. The entire film experience is used to replicate and offer a small window into the state of panic we enter when we're confronted by something unknown to us, and how our reactions to those situations can affect other people.
This is a very complex film that is working on many different layers, and while many are directly related by traditional film elements like plot, character study, camera work, etc. some of them are extremely relevant yet only implied at must. Things as socio-economical background, cultural and racial confrontation, many different seemly unrelated subplots that are none the less derivated from the tension build by the main one, even a particuary shocking event that seems to serve no real propose: everything in this movie serves its propose to portray the experience of confrontation with the unknown.
The deceiving part is that all of this conclusions one can only arrive to
afterthe film has ended and one evaluates the elements. Because for the duration of the film ( and probably long after, there is absolutely no shame in requiring second, third, or more viewings ) up until well into the final credits, this movie just feels like one unfinished mistery movie that is not properly resolved. The only "clue" the remarkably uncompromising director Haneke offers is the mere fact that the user
has to ask himself "Ok what the hell did I just saw" at the end of the movie.
But the beauty is that the question on itself, serves the movie's propose perfectly well, so its a weird feeling of being actually involved and part of the film making process, if there was ever a film which artistic value involved the audience reaction to it as much as the work itself this is certainly the perfect example.
All in all the movie is one of the most interesting experimental films in recent years, one that might be a little too obscure for many people not used to being confronted by a film, but a welcome experiment that for the most part succeeds in everything it sets out to acomplish.
8.5/10
