A Hidden Creepiness that allows you to endure it, not just let it pass by!

Top: Michael Haneke. Bottom: Danny Auteuil and Juliette Binoche.












Caught a Sneak peek of Michael Haneke's latest psychological
Terror!


Not as in "your face" as Haneke's previous films like "The Piano Teacher", "Time of the Wolf","Code Unknown" and the dubiously great "Funny Games". It still carries those tones that Haneke expresses in his films. While not as overt as those films are, it still isn't as subtle as other people say. I really shouldn't and couldn't compare this film to his others. Haneke doesn't consist of terror that is in your face or let alone visceral but really psychological. Other will just pass it off as being a spectacle and not really getting under your skin, but it really does! He doesn't play the numbers as a thriller where you know where it gonna go because you really don't know where it's gonna turn. It is a movie not told through a single narrative, not even a non-linear narrative but rather a loose narrative implied though random shots. It's a pure chapter in mise en scene. It's not a movie you wait for the jump moments and its not consistent of just having moments of pure shock. Even in its moments when it is displayed as "quiet" leaves you in suspension. Each scene and dialogue is not plot motivated because the film is not worried about plot, but their not wasted only to add more to the momentum to the film. It is not minimalistic, that's one thing for sure or buried in detail because it shows a grand picture throughout the whole movie. Nothing against minimalism, but it doesn't have the tone as Wim Wenders but one of Polanski!

Let's begin about the movie, let's start with the opening shot that instills the movie's display of physiological horror. Then we I will begin with the plot of the movie. The opening title card is a continuous shot on digital video, you see the a house and a street and you watch the title cards go in a row and afterwards its just goes on for about a while. This shot here is the fore front of what this movie represents and more...As our days of the French New Wave of Claude Chabrol, Jean-Luc Godard and Francois Truffaut heavily influenced the use of long takes for other directors to come like Scorsese. Others don't extend those point of views and instead tend to copy and imitate it for their use to be somewhat cocky and pretentious. Others use it to prolong a scene and add sense of quietness and not do anything with the long take. It's like when you watch a movie and you know when a director uses the "long take" and you know it. Here Haneke takes it to a another level, rather having the audience knowing you are using it the audience is somehow involved and doesn't notice! He also plays around with it and rather than the camera being the voyeur its the character's point of view looking at the tape that enables the film to have this "long take".

The other note to consider of this opening scene is that one of Haneke's favorite films is by Michelangelo Antonioni. The choice is eminent in his influence for this opening title card but not a mere imitation. It instills fear and creepiness but also beauty within its location. While it is not as minimalistic as Antonioni films are, this movie may have a slow preparation for scene to display visceral shock. But the movie is not all about that. Haneke uses the long takes after a scene of mutilation has happen to allow the actors breakdown! Now that I have talked a plethora about the opening shot let's get on with the movie! It unfolds into overt narration told from the characters point of view and their reaction to watching this tape that is taken in front of there house.

The story about a family getting mysterious videotapes sent to them via on there doorstep. They all appear nameless but are covered around a paper with a picture of weird images of a chicken or human being mutilated. Their all hand drawned like from a little kid and the couple can't seem to find where the camera is being placed and who is sending these tapes. The husband played by Danny Auteuil from the great "Girl on the Bridge", gives great performance same goes for the fine Juliette Binoche who also collaborated with Haneke on "The Code Unknown" and also gives a bleak performance as with that one. As that previous effort was use of the long take, here it gives to Binoche and Auteuil to just break down in front of the camera and it sometimes feels like it was improvised. As the movie progresses it digs deep into Georges(Auteuil's character) past and his growing up with a boy who is Algerian. A kid during his youth that he despised and starts thinking of him only when these tapes start appearing. Is it something that he regrets? It's not like I'm lazy and don't want to give the details into the plot, but I feel if the less you know the more it won't disrupt the experience. That is me being lazy and probably a lame excuse to not give a huge detailed explanation of a one note premise that unfolds into a realm of unpredictability. It's not a huge twist like in a M. Night Shymalan film that I'm giving away, but I feel better if you don't know what turns it takes. "Cache" gives no correct answer or a resolution but just more questions. Only leaving another last long take that leaves you to stay during the credits and engraves a creepy voyeur in your brain. I can see why Haneke won the best director award at the Cannes film festival, because his craft for macabre and keeping the audience suspended is something that has to be seen!
This Aliye Nyoka saying "PEACE OUT!"