There has not been a director I've wanted to like more than Michael Haneke. I've heard so much praise for him and his work, that I just knew this was the type of filmmaker I would fall in love with. However, it was just the opposite. I cannot stand the guy.
The first movie I saw of his was his shot-by-shot remake of his 1997 film, Funny Games. It starred two of my favorite actors in Michael Pitt and Naomi Watts, and also had Brady Corbet and Tim Roth, two other actors I'm also a fan of. The trailer for the film I thought was absolutely spectacular. After viewing it, I immediately purchased the DVD. That hardly ever happens.
Going into Funny Games, I had high expectations, I must admit. After viewing it, I liked it. It wasn't as good as I hoped, but I still thought the film was beautifully shot, had some tremendous dialogue, and great, great, GREAT performances from Michael Pitt and Naomi Watts, who like I mentioned earlier, are two of my favorite actors. I even didn't mind the "breaking the forth wall" stuff and the rewind scene because I thought it meant one of two things: Either the entire film took place in Paul's head, or here was a new, creative villain that knew what was going on was a film, and did whatever he pleased, thus being literally impossible to ever be defeated by anyone, whether it be some random lady or Superman himself; as long as a villain knows he's in a movie, but the heroes don't, there's no way any hero could ever defeat that. However, that wasn't the case, at all.
After I watch a film, most of the time I like to read reviews from Rotten Tomatoes and IMDB, and also watch interviews regarding it and what not. And when I came across what Haneke's intentions were with this film, it infuriated me. Let me explain what he wanted to accomplish with Funny Games for those who aren't familiar with the film: He, as a director, wanted to toy with the audience. He wanted us to feel ashamed for watching a film with a plot such as this all the way through. But instead of finding a creative, useful way of doing so, he has Michael talk to us and rewind the scene where Watts kills Corbet. That doesn't make anyone ashamed for watching this film; it makes us feel patronized. There was not one point to that scene taking place, and the same case for the 'breaking the forth wall' stuff as well. Not one. All it did was make the movie not a movie, but a Director's way of saying 'Fuck you' to anyone who bought a ticket to see his film. What kind of shit is that?
What makes it even worse is that so much great stuff from the film gets tarnished because of Haneke's horseshit. Michael Pitt's performance, which should have ended up being one of my favorite performances in the history of film, get flushed down the toilet because of Haneke. Why? Because Funny Games really isn't a film; it's an hour and thirty minute statement saying the American cinema audience are nothing but ******s and bad people. That's all it is. Nothing more.
Now, even with that being the case, it's still the most watchable piece of work he has released. I mean, at least there are some entertaining qualities in it. The same, however, cannot be said for the pieces of shit that are The Piano Teacher and Cache.
I watched the Piano Teacher Saturday, going into it with a complete open mind. I didn't let my hatred for Funny Games' message affect my opinion of this film at all. However, after viewing the movie, I felt that I just wasted two hours of my life, and that Haneke is one of the biggest hypocrites walking the face of the Earth. Why so? Well, I'll tell you why. He hates us the American audience for liking violence in film. That's clear in Funny Games. Some people will tell you that he hates the typical endings most American horror movies have, but no... I disagree. Watching/reading his interviews, he hates us, the audience, period, for liking violence in American films. But yet, he still makes a film like The Piano Teacher, which has a very violent rape scene, and actually glorifies masochism. That is completely hypocritical, if you ask me.
Other than that, I just found The Piano Teacher boring as hell. For some reason, Haneke loves long takes of nothing happening. He had them in Funny Games, and he had them here. Why? I don't know. The guy, while obviously talented as a director, is a shit writer and an even worse editor. And because of that, potentially great films like The Piano Teacher and Funny Games get ruined.
The writing in The Piano Teacher was just horrible. Fucking HORRIBLE. I don't know how closely it stuck to the book, but the film's dialogue is pathetic, nothing makes sense, and the actions of each character is never explained, even though none of it like I said makes any sense. Seriously, what was the point of this movie? I didn't see one, and I'd love someone to explain it to me, because right now... as far as I'm concerned, this film did not have a point, at all, yet it gets praised as one of the best movies this decade. I just don't understand it.
The Piano Teacher, like Funny Games, though had some absolutely fantastic acting, I must admit. I'm not too familiar with either Isabelle Huppert or Benoît Magimel, but man oh man did they impress me in this film. I plan on looking into other films they've done in which their performances are actually given justice by the film's quality, rather than getting ruined. But yes... once again, great performances gets tarnished, in my mind, because of Haneke's inability to swallow his pretentiousness and ego.
And even with my hatred for The Piano Teacher and the message Haneke sent out with Funny Games, I still wanted to like Cache. However, once again... I thought it was just terrible.
Just like with The Piano Teacher and Funny Games, there are some amounts of brilliance shattered throughout this film that tells me if Haneke wanted to be, then he truly could be one of the best filmmakers alive, at least in my book anyway. For example, the opening credits, and the way the tapes are shot and shown are awesome, creative, and original. However, that's the only compliment I have for this movie.
The entire film, you're wondering who sent Georges the tapes (a concept, by the way, stolen from Lost Highway, which was directed by David Lynch, who from what I understand is one of Haneke's favorite filmmakers, which again shows his hypocrisy in Funny Games by mocking the American audience), and not only do we not get an answer at the end of the film, but after watching Michael Haneke's interview on the Special Features feature on the DVD afterwards, the film isn't even about the tapes. And I don't understand why if the tapes weren't the main focus of the film, then why was there so much emphasis put on it? That makes zero sense and shows Haneke's ******ation as a writer.
Besides that, like The Piano Teacher, the movie is just plain boring. Really, really, really boring. There are countless long takes, where NOTHING happens. The acting in the film is mediocre compared to the performances in the two films I mentioned prior, and the dialogue is nothing special, outside of a great punchline story at the beginning of the film.
However, when it comes to Cache and The Piano Teacher, my opinions on both film are in the minority. So Haneke is doing something to convince many respected critics and people in the movie industry that he is indeed one of the best filmmakers this decade. But I just don't see the appeal to him and his work. His direction style is very nice and original, and he has some awesome cinematography in his films. However, as I mentioned earlier, his writing and editing style drags the film along and he refuses to ever settle conflict or at the very least give us some sort of an answer of why the things that are happening are.
I really believe Michael Haneke is the Andy Kaufman of filmmaking. He has said so himself, that he loves to manipulate his audience. And that's what I can't stand about him. Instead of giving us good films, he gives us stupid ass messages and films that trick you into thinking one thing, just to go another way, and then give no explanation why the film went the way it went. I'm all for being tricked, and I'm all for leaving us the audience for making our own decisions about a movie (hell, Bret Easton Ellis is my favorite author, after all), but the way Haneke does it just doesn't sit right for me. All three films of his I watched, instead of provoking real thought, it made me mad that I wasted my time with it. To me, each film served zero purpose, other than Haneke wanting to manipulate his audience. And for this man and his films to receive the awards and praise they have, is a true travesty in my book.
Tdigs, I respect the fact that he's one of your favorite filmmakers, but I just don't see it, man. I tried, but the guy just isn't for me, and has become one of my least favorite filmmakers of all time. Maybe... MAYBE, Benny's Video, The Seventh Continent and The White Ribbon could change my opinion on the man, at least to a certain degree, but it'll be some time before I give those movies a try. Michael Haneke has just left a real bad taste in my mouth with the films that I have watched from him, and I'm not so sure anything he's done or will do will ever change that.
