can someone PLEASE explain this film to me
>>69831937
Michael Haneke makes a film about a home invasion of a rich family.
>>69832085
I know that, but people say this is so deep and apparently a masterpiece. It was a very good film by all means but... I just don't get it.
It's about two guys invading a family's home.
>>69831937
It's a film made to make you angry. It does everything in it's power to piss off the audience, because the director thinks it is disturbing people find thrillers/violent films entertaining at all.
>remake
no you didn't
>>69832175
This.
>>69831937
Le make fun of people for using violence as entertainment meme
Does anyone actually say it's a masterpiece?
are there other remakes like this that are literally done 1:1 just with other actors?
It's hilarious. It switches things around so you're rooting for the two kids against this snobby couple and then just as you're immersed in all the torture and violence it forces you to accept that it's just a movie with the whole rewind scene.
>>69832127
It is a play on the tropes of violence in movies. People are obsessed by violence and violent movies are an outlet for that obsession. We tell ourselfes it is ok to be thrilled by it, as long as its a clear that the 'good guys' win in the end. So whenthe killers are shot down by the wifewe are happy: all is good. Theremote control scenetakes away that gratification and leaves the viewer in a very awkward position.
Great movie, one of his best.
>>69832179
it's better than the original in every way - and it's the film Michael Haneke wanted to make originally so...
>>69832417
This. Subverts horror by making explicit how the viewer is an accomplice to the violence.
>>69832417
Thank you, that actually makes sense. I feel like I'm missing something from the remote control scene
>>69832413
That's weird, I rooted for the family from the very start and until the end (the ending didn't piss me off, I thought it was clever but I don't know WHY)
>>69831937
there's a mid-credits scene where you see naomi watts coming out of the water, and then there's a post-credits scene where you see the two dude shackled, sitting in a paddywagon.
Absolutely loved it. Who would have thought that torture would be so funny?
>>69832598
You're joking, right? When I first watched the film I didn't take out the DVD until the credits ended, and there was nothing...
I watched the older version, and I think I watched it wrong because I thought the torture was funny.
I was rooting for the two guys the entire movie and got mad when the one guy died, it was great that the remote control scene was there.
>>69831937
>/tv/
>SPLAIN THIS TO ME
pick both
>>69832175
>because the director thinks it is disturbing people find thrillers/violent films entertaining at all.
LOLNO
>>69832611
>>69832783
>Strangers torturing a family is funny
>>69832175
>>69832911
Both of you, please elaborate
>>69831937
The point is that you're sick for enjoying violence.I'd like him to make a movie about what kind of person makes violent movies for people to enjoy.
>it's a Haneke pranks the audience movie
Absolute madman
>>69833165
oh my god PLEASE explain Caché too for me, and why that screenshot does the placement of the camera actually have any significance and why are the opening titles the way they are just WHY
>>69833254The audience is complicit in the surveillance
>>69833279
and? What purpose does that serve? I feel like I'm retarded - I love Haneke's films but I don't actually understand them
>>69833395
It's Haneke's indictment of the audience for being voyeurs themselves in a self-reflexive way and to accuse the mostly European audience of their complicity in how Western civilization has treated people from other races and cultures.Haneke is a cuck
>>69833552
My mind is being blown right now, what about Funny Games can you analyse that for me please? Thank you by the way.
>>69832179
I've watched both, and I prefer the first because I liked the actors more but the second isn't any worst, it's the same exact thing.
>>69833041
But violence is ingrained in our nature. That's kind of my problem with his message. He's saying it's sick to accept something that comes naturally.
It was just another "you're bad for being human" message.
I LOVE THESE THREADS BECAUSE I LOVE ANALYSING FILMS, HERE WE GO
Haneke is an overrated hack.
DUDE GROUNDBREAKING TECHNIQUES LMAO
>>69834168
None of his techniques are groundbreaking.
>>69834187
That's the point.
>>69834168
I too hate originality in movies. You seen the new X-Men yet?
>watches Michael Haneke film
>lets out a really loud fucking FART
>gets cucked
>>69834205
So you post a meme that implies he does something but then say he doesn't?
>>69834214
Nah, I don't keep up with american popular-cinema since I was like 15.
>>69832127
Neither of those things are true, but it's still bretty gud
>>69834247
Have you ever read some *actual* review or analysis of his films?
Some critics are on his dick just because he is contrarian.
>>69834329
How is he contrarian?
Not OP but I do want to read an analysis of this too, come on guys.
>>69834346
That foray into the scene in Funny Games.
Breaking the 180-degree rule.
His discontinuity of cutting.
>>69834442
I don't think critics like the movie for those things.
>>69831937
It's about the construct of civility and social rules that we try to hold, and that is shattered by the outsider. The original was about the Austian people's tendency to isolate themselves, both socially and physically.
>>69834346
He's not contrarian, but he's pretentious as fuck.
>"Anyone who leaves the cinema doesn't need the film, and anybody who stays does."
>>69834517
How is that pretentious? Seems like a simple concept.
>>69834500
>Some critics
Anyway his stories are dull as well. Though the Piano Teacher is decent film.
>>69834558
He made a torture porn movie making fun of the viewers who watch torture porn. How is that not pretentious?
I like the American one more cause I want to fuck Micheal Pitt.
He sort looks like a sexier Liam McPoyce
>>69834590
Is satire pretentious now?
>>69834755
It's not a satire.
>>69834039
This. People think this film is 'deep' because it's just an indict of the audience for coming to see the movie. Michael Haneke not only manages to make a violent horror flick, he manages to do so while putting ALL culpability for the film's existence on the audience and shirking all of it himself. It's an exercise in sadism on his part, and masochism on the part of idiots who mistake suffering for depth.
It's fucking trash.
>>69834903
A movie that makes fun of a group of people or mindset is not satire?
>>69834755
nice dubs baby boi
/thread
I like analysis thread but there's no paragraphs here so I'm disappointed
>>69835148
it's about dem two white boiz cucking a family lol
>>69835148
Google it, i'm too lazy to look up the meaning just to copy/paste it here.
>>69835310
Please do that... I couldn't find anything on Google ;-;
>>69835148
>needing paragraphs of explanation for a film that actively blares its message in your face the whole running time
>>69835493
I actually do though
>>69835310
>>69835493
PLEASE HELP
>>69835609
>>69835644
Violence is bad. This movie has violence in it and you're watching it anyways, ergo you're bad.
There, I just saved you paragraphs of reading, bro.
>>69834509
>The original was about the Austian people's tendency to isolate themselves, both socially and physically.
That's interesting. I haven't seen the original version, but I'd say that's something that is pervasive to most western countries today. I hate to use a comedian as an example for this, but there's this one guy with this New York or New Jersey accent who explained the differences between the doorbell ringing today, vs 40-50 years ago. If the doorbell rang back in the day, you'd be excited at the prospect of company. You'd invite 'em in, shoot the shit, eat, whatever. If the doorbell rings today, it's more "who the fuck could that be I didn't invite anyone did you invite anyone?"
>>69835746
I don't like watered down analysis, I wanna get into the details, I want someone to maybe tell me what this shot means or if the cinematography has any significance anywhere, because I really liked this film, I want to know more about it and its themes/meanings.
>>69835918
I always wandered about that shot and what it meant
>makes fun of people for enjoying his own movie
>remakes it so he can make fun of americans who watch it also
What a pretentious asswad.
>>69835918
Looks like a lazy metaphor for violence and American entertainment.
>>69836168
Thank you! Could you please elaborate a little bit on that?
>>69836298
Entertainment is on the TV
TV is splattered in blood
Violence = Entertainment
>>69836393
>A movie either has to make you feel good
That is not true at all.
>>69836393
>Horror movies have to make you feel good and teach a valuable lesson
Do you only watch horror movies made on The Lifetime channel?
>>69836421
Oh I thought there'd be more to it, sorry haha. Do you know if there were any other visual metaphors like that throughout the film? What about this family? Why were they even in the film and is there a message to the fact they're the next victims?
>>69836514
>Did you miss the OR?
Huh?
Not OP but I wanna know what the fuck was the significance of the eggs and that one close-up shots of the knife - was it to suggest that they'll have a chance of winning or something? I didn't get it.
>>69831937
You will get better answers if you ask in reddit, not even baiting or joking.
This is just the forced meme board not the movies board.
>>69836666
Where do I go? Can you link me please? I never used reddit lol
>>69836640
>what the fuck was the significance of the eggs
The outsiders mocking, exploiting and taking social niceties to the extreme in order to break them.
>>69836640
The close up for the knife was to set up the ending. The savvy viewer will see that close up and know that the knife will come into play later. At the end of the movie, the mom tries to get the knife, and then one of the guys throws it away. It's just to mess with conventions. You think that knife's going to be important, but it isn't.
>>69836737
>>69836768
Thank you both so much, I now understand the knife (thank you) but I still don't really understand the egg thing
Jesus Christ, OP, what a fucking baby you are through this whole thread.
>EXPLAIN THIS
>COULD YOU ELABORATE ON THAT
>I NEED LONG PARAGRAPHS SO I CAN UNDERSTAND
Fucking annoying faggot
>>69836719
https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/
https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueFilm
>>69836839
He's a man-baby.
>>69832318
Psycho is the only one I can think of. The Omen remake was also very similar to the original.
>>69836885
Thank you
(now I'm gonna let out a silent fart
>>69831937
I watched this film a few years back on a streaming site with a chat full of /b/tards, I'm pretty sure that's the way it's intended to be viewed.
>>69836885
I can't do this, the layout is so shit, and I actually have to sign up - what kind of bullshit is that? I'm staying on 4chan, I believe there are some analytical geniuses here that can satisfy me. But thanks for providing the links anyway man.
>>69837197
> I believe there are some analytical geniuses here that can satisfy me
Are we what, a cow? Go fuck yourself. You're literally made for ledit. There they take great pleasure in guiding retards holding hands going all the way
>>69837280
No need to be a fucking asshole, I believe everyone can benefit from some good ol' analysis.
>>69837313
There's all need to be an asshole, unfortunately there's not enough of them around here lately.
>>69837487
Not the guy you're replying to, but yeah, you are an asshole. It just looks like you're too dumb to discuss this film and let others learn. You probably have a lot of pent-up anger do to your miserable life or something, but you don't need to take it out on curious people, fuck off to /r9k/ or /b/ if you wanna be an asshole.
this thread is fucking hilarious
>>69837609
Ah, a white-knight for the retard. Of course I'm an asshole, which is what this place deeply needs so that the cutesy types like you and OP don't contaminate the board even further. Your kind is the cancer, shown by your posture and writing, and this pathetic disguise of le polite film discussion should mean nothing considering the damage that such presences represent. Fucking babies.
Sorry I couldn't answer before :)
>>69835918
haneke really is sophomoric
his earlier work, The Seventh Continent, is basic as fuck. Pretentious, lazy, obvious, and worst of all, preachy
>>69838584
DSK isn't any of these things. But as with all Haneke, it affects whoever watches strongly, and if you feel too offended it's understable that a collection of words like yours should appear.
>>69832598
>>69832691
Please address this. I need to know this.
>dem jelly rolls
>>69832971
Not everyone who isn't a raging moralfag is a fedora wearing autismo, you fucking spastic. It's fiction, grow up.
>>69833605
Jesus Christ man
>>69836585
Calling it.
TITS OR GTFO.
ITT: Yahoo!Answers (Now even simpler for your needs xd)
>>69839431
That could explain. Only a woman or a 11-year old( mental too) could be this needy and stupid
>>69839315
>man
Anon, isn't it obvious?
>>69839472
DAS SEXISSS
>>69839522
It's also true.
>>69833254
The very end scene basically shows thatthe son of the lead and the son of the Arab immigrant who worked at the mansion were both sending the tapes
>>69834903
Its not as direct satire of people's fascination with murders and serial killers like Natural Born Killers.
How could anyone dislike the original?
it's made by a deluded person trying to greatly simplify human's viewing of spectacles.
>>69832971
... it was purposefully morbidly funny, though. Are you suggesting Haneke is a fedora?
>>69841883
Nah man I'm just, I'm just saying is all
>>69835757
damn i heard this comedian's bit too but his name escapes me.
>>69832237
>Le
you have to go back
>>69834921
>and shirking all of it himself
Artists who think they're better than those who keep them wealthy should be denied their primary sensory organ
>>69832127
no one has ever called this movie deep
stop being an idiot with your idiot thread
Am I pleb if I hate Haneke's other movies? I watch lots of european art-films, I usually love that type of stuff but could never get into his.
>>69834509
I agree. Saw it once, 100 years ago. The scene where the dad didn't just flip the fuck out when they were first in the house and crossing sort of a social border, is where everything goes downhill. I was praying, begging, for the father to just grab a knife and punch that fucker in the lung. He didn't and they lost everything.
>>69842737
Which version should I watch first? I'll watch both, and I'm not asking which is better, just what the recommended viewing order is
>>69842919
Depends on if you don't mind subtitles or need everything in english for you.
>>69831937
this movie is genuinely fucked up, but I am a lightweight when it comes to movies I admit
Apart from being a critique of violence in film as a form of entertainment, do you guys see anything else hidden in there?
I think the scene in which the killers cover the kid's face with a bag is kind of an insult to the MPAA and similar institutions.
What else is in this film, /tv/? I feel like I'm missing more subtext here.
>>69843658
Damn, that observation is pretty interesting, thanks fot sharing! I feel like I'm also missing a lot of subtext, there's probably a ton of metaphors flying over my head
