Amour (Michael Haneke)

[Bosco B Thug]

imdb

[Bosco B Thug]

A teensy bit underwhelming. Haneke takes the subject matter utterly seriously and respectfully, and so here is a Haneke film - believe it or not - with no surprises.

Beyond the inherent merit of Haneke tackling this deeply moving subject of aging with his unsentimental sense of humanity, the script he's written is a bit of a wash.

[eternity]

I'm actually afraid to watch this for some reason.

[Bosco B Thug]

I'm actually afraid to watch this for some reason.

I was actually not emotional devastated, but then I did feel at a general emotional reserve yesterday. Or the film was just too along the beaten track to really shake me.

This was pretty disappointing. It's good, though, you all will appreciate it. But it doesn't go anywhere and it's so simple... platitudinous.

[Boner M]

I was actually not emotional devastated, but then I did feel at a general emotional reserve yesterday. Or the film was just too along the beaten track to really shake me.

This was pretty disappointing. It's good, though, you all will appreciate it. But it doesn't go anywhere and it's so simple... platitudinous.

Your grades confuse me...

Also, "platitudinous"? Where/how?

[Bosco B Thug]

Your grades confuse me...

Also, "platitudinous"? Where/how?

I liked the film more than I'm letting on. But, I expected to love it, and I'm in cautionary mode for Haneke fans: it's rather un-Haneke-like.

There's a comment at the bottom of Fernando F. Croce's (who was even more unmoved) write-up at MUBI that pretty much mirrors my feelings:

Very much agreed on “Amour.” I found it utterly predictable, and more suited to a director with some sensitivity for human feeling. I really like Haneke’s recent films (“Cache” and “The White Ribbon”) with their metaphysical and ever-expanding mysteries, so I suppose this film’s setback, in the context of Haneke, is its straightforwardness.

It's just such a simple chronicle of this woman's decline, and the final scenes left me shrugging. Funnily enough, I disagree with both Croce and the commenter in that I find the problem is not Haneke's style, which I think is full of humanity - particularly in this film. But I agree that he's failed to make this story equipped or inspiring to him. I read your comment in the old Amour thread and I agree the

[

Show Spoiler

dream sequence

]

is quite a misstep. I'll even say that his two metaphors here - that sequence and the pigeon - work to sink the film.

As for "platitudinous," when I'm futilely waiting for the film to shake things up a little beyond "Loving husband attends to the steady decline of his ailing wife," even Haneke's prickly social interactions are going to start seeming a little "stripped from the pages of the screenplay to Away From Her."

[ledfloyd]

I'm actually afraid to watch this for some reason.

me too, even though haneke's films never seem to affect me as much as he seems to wish they would.

[Ezee E]

Haneke sure manages to pull out the rugged feelings that occur on the final days of someone. Predictable, sure, but that's understandable considering the opening shot of the movie. To watch the inevitable occur is still brutal.

Not for the faint of heart. The final scenes are probably more affective then anything in a long time, and it's never overplayed.

[

Show Spoiler

The deathbed scene... Yeesh. Surely, Georges was hoping that she'd die listening to his story, to which I thought she had. Only for that pain to still go on and continue for them both. This scene was quite shocking to me in its result. Didn't see it coming.

]

Ends in a very Haneke way to me.

[Spinal]

Huge Haneke fan, but this movie scares me. Not sure when I'll be up for it.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Yeah, I'm kind of with Bosco here as well, though perhaps slightly more positive. A surprising lack of visceral impact as the story progressed. The moments that did tear me up only magnified how seldom those moments were occurring. And maybe that's part of the exercise here. This moment in life is about endurance, not emotional breakdown. Brilliant performances from all involved, especially Riva, whose quiet rage as her health fails her gave the film its pathos. Her life as a spectacle gave the film something of a voyeuristic feel, strengthened by the opening and closing shots. Probably my least favorite of Haneke's recent output, but still well worth experiencing.

[The Bad Guy]

This movie is gr8 u guyz must b terruns malek fans lol

[Bosco B Thug]

This movie is gr8 u guyz must b terruns malek fans lol

A surprising lack of visceral impact as the story progressed.

^ The immediately above is so true, though.

Not that I think people shouldn't be scared, it being about what it's about, but this just went down so smoothly that I was shocked when it ended. It's certainly not a Von Trierian wringer (goes without saying, of course... Haneke and Von Trier are two very opposed filmmakers).

[Ivan Drago]

This is coming to the indie theater in town at the end of the month. Its Best Picture nomination caught my interest, but I'm not sure if it'd be my thing.

[Derek]

this just went down so smoothly

:|

[number8]

I found this movie hypocritical, just like Funny Games.

Meh.

[Pop Trash]

I found this movie hypocritical, just like Funny Games.

Meh.

How so? I'm with you on Funny Games, but this is pretty straight forward. Not a lot of po-mo cheekiness.

[number8]

Not sure if I can justify that gut reaction, but it definitely rubbed me the wrong way in how it seemed to flip-flop between wanting to be an impartial observer and a sympathizing storyteller. There is a scene where Anne asks Georges to leave the room instead of gawking to find out how she reads a book with one hand, implying that she wants a semblance of dignity and not be made an object of curiosity, but the camera stays and does show us the very thing she asks not to. This alone wouldn't have soured me, but it does when it's combined with latter scenes where Haneke would start to show a humiliating moment where Georges is helping Anne do everyday stuff, but cuts away before showing their full struggle, before the tediousness and time consumption of having to do things like carrying her out of the toilet really sinks in. It makes it seem like the film is showing these moments just to hit those notes. That felt exploitative to me, which I think is counter to what the film is trying to say about the alienation of old age.

It's a common problem I have with Haneke. I always find that his directing ultimately betrays and sabotages his intentions.

[Boner M]

There is a scene where Anne asks Georges to leave the room instead of gawking to find out how she reads a book with one hand, implying that she wants a semblance of dignity and not be made an object of curiosity, but the camera stays and does show us the very thing she asks not to.

Interesting point, but I don't see this as hypocritical so much as Haneke being conscious of the inherent exploitation of showing suffering onscreen. That said, I somewhat agree about the film not finding the right balance between impartiality and sentimentality; the use of diegetic music felt like a way of cheating his formal rigor more than anything.

[Pop Trash]

the use of diegetic music felt like a way of cheating his formal rigor more than anything.

Um...they're musicians.

[Boner M]

Um...they're musicians.

Right, making their characters musicians for seemingly no other reason than to incorporate music in the way that the film does.

[Pop Trash]

Right, making their characters musicians for seemingly no other reason than to incorporate music in the way that the film does.

That's a stretch. Maybe Haneke just likes music/musicians. Just like he likes the names Georges and Anne.

[Mysterious Dude]

Right, making their characters musicians for seemingly no other reason than to incorporate music in the way that the film does.

I think it also serves to demonstrate that Anne used to be an active member of society. I'm pretty sure the scene where Georges listens to a recording of Anne's playing is not just there for the music.

[number8]

By the way, was William Shimell supposed to playing Haneke? I read that Haneke made the film because this story actually happened in his family.

[Boner M]

did u kno that a gud day 2 die hard was the originul title of amour lol

:lol:

[number8]

I love that twitter account.