According to Film Comment, Michael Haneke has released details for his next film, called Flashmob. Described as a “multi-character drama on the fragile relationship between media and reality,” Flashmob is an idea Haneke has been noting for the past few years, and now may be coming to fruition.

Haneke has long had an interest in the media, with many of his films tangentially commenting on media and how we consume it (Caché, Funny Games), but this will be his first look into internet culture. Given the look into multiple characters who are all brought together to one event, this may have the largest scope of any Haneke film. And with a title like Flashmob, there is plenty of opportunity for psychological strain, violence and dark humor.

Flashmob is set to film this summer. No release time-frame has been set, but it will likely be among the most anticipated films in the year of its release.

After Michael Haneke’s Amour was awarded the prestigious Palme D’or (the highest prize awarded and his second career win) at Cannes Film Festival this year it was instantly considered to be the front-runner to win this year’s Best Foreign Language award at the Academy Awards. It may not be as thought provoking as his previous films but Amour is just as sincere and powerful, even if does contain more of a straight-forward approach that is not typical of his other work.

The opening scene begins with the fire department ramming down the locked door of Georges (Jean-Louis Trintignant) and Anne’s (Emmanuelle Riva) apartment – discovering Anne surrounded by flower petals as she lies dead in bed. There are no obvious signs as to what happened to Anne or how the flowers got there. Georges is not shown to be in the apartment and we know nothing about the couple yet. Haneke then works backward to show the lives of the elderly couple before the foregone conclusion.

The couple is first seen together as part of a large audience at a piano concert. The camera remains on the audience even after the concert begins to emphasize the importance of who is listening to the music, not who is playing it. Once the couple arrive home, Georges tells Anne how pretty she looks that night – perfectly showing the amount of love the two share for each other after spending half a century together.

Anne suddenly has a stroke that leaves her right side of her body paralyzed. She hates being a burden to Georges thus resents talking about her condition. The thought of ending her life has cross her mind several times but Georges refuses to allow that to happen. He loves her dearly and knows that if the tables were turned there would be no doubt she would take care of him. Her condition goes from bad to worse and soon loses the ability to speak clearly. But Georges does not give up. He continues to assist her every move; helping her out of bed, bathe her and even feeding her. He recites childhood memoirs to Anne that she has never heard before to grant her wish of taking her mind off her condition. Unlike death, which is inescapable, love can last forever.

For good reason, Haneke gets the inevitable death of Anne out of the way in the very opening seconds of the film. The reason is similar to when he showed the audience instead of the concert player, he wanted the focus to be on what matters the most, not on what was most obvious. What was important here was not the death of her, but the relationship she had with her life-long husband.

There are two separate scenes in which a pigeon flies in through an open window of the apartment. The first time this happens, Georges scares the bird back out the window. But when the pigeon re-enters the apartment later in the film, something interesting happens. Instead of forcing the bird back out from which it came, he catches the bird to cuddle it. This can be seen as Georges finally accepting the reality of Anne’s situation.

Amour would not have work worked without the incredible performances from both of the leads. Emmanuelle Riva is absolutely brilliant in her role as an elderly woman who suffers from multiple strokes, which renders her immobile and nearly speechless. Jean-Louis Trintignant’s character makes the situation even more devastating just by how much love he possess for his dying companion.

Amour demonstrations just how powerful love can be by showing how much torture one can endure for love. It is a certainly a grim film but what this coupe holds for each other is both moving and inspirational to say the least. Amour tugs at your heart by skillfully conveying not only the complications of love, but the crueler side as of it as well.

Michael Haneke’s Funny Games is a shot by shot and line by line remake of his own 1997 film of the same title only with a different cast and with English dialog instead of German. Even the set of the house had the exact same proportions as the original house did. You might ask why a director would choose to remake his own film? If I had to guess it would be that many Americans skipped the original version because we shamefully tend to avoid subtitles. It is a mentally exhausting art house thriller about strangers abusing a family but after watching it you feel like you are the one being abused.

Funny Games begins with a family taking a trip to their vacation home on Long Island. As George (Tim Roth) and Ann (Naomi Watts) and their son Georgie (Devon Gearhart) approached the house they stop by the neighbors place to see if they will lend a hand to launch their boat. They noticed that the neighbors were acting a bit out of the ordinary as they hesitated to help. Also the husband and wife did not recognize the other men dressed in white that accompanied the neighbors but it was only enough to notice and not be alarmed.

The neighbor comes over as promised but brings along a gentleman named Paul (Michael Pitt) who he claims is the son of a business associate of the neighbor. George still found the behavior of the neighbor to be a little off. As Ann is preparing dinner for the family the two men dressed in white show up at the door. Paul introduces himself as well as his friend Peter (Brady Corbet) even he keeps addressing him as Tom and eventually fatty.

Although the two men are very polite you get the sense that something is very off about them. This begins to show when they ask to test out one of George’s golf clubs. Ann is very put off by them and asks them to leave. That is when the games begin but none of them are funny.

Paul and Peter being to terrorize the family with ridiculous games such as making a bet with them that they will all be dead by morning as long as the family bets they will be alive. It is during this bet that something profound happens. Paul turns to the camera and begins to talk to us to see which side of the bet we are on. It is important because it blatantly tells the audience that this film is playing games with them as well.

Without giving away any more spoilers, I will try to be vague as possible on this topic. There is a scene near the end of the film that is very controversial that will have you either cheering or booing. By the end of the film you realize that the film tries to find out the difference between reality and non-reality.

Michael Haneke was quoted saying “Anyone who leaves the cinema doesn’t need the film, and anybody who stays does.” on his original version of Funny Games. The opening credits makes it clear that what you think you are in store for is not what you will find when the classical music is abruptly interrupted by loud death metal music. After finishing the film I can understand what Haneke was trying to say, it is definitely not for everyone. Drawing some comparisons to Stanley Kubrick’s A Clockwork Orange is easy to do based on the perverse violence that resides in both.

The performances from the whole cast were astounding. Naomi Watts is particularly good as the frantic wife whose family is being terrorized. Tim Roth compliments Watts well and lets her do most of the heavy lifting. One interesting note is that Roth said that his role abused him enough that he will never watch the film. Michael Pitt is downright creepy and unsettling as the main villain.

Funny Games is as unique as it is distributing, both which the film strived for and succeed in. I appreciated the film more than I enjoyed it. However, I am not sure if the film was even meant to be enjoyed but rather experienced instead. From the opening to closing credits the film plays games with you and eventually you realize that the actual villain is the director and you are the victim. You will not find one shred of comfort in Funny Games but that is the point.

A considerably better day at TIFF this time around thanks to the lack of delays and other logistical nightmares, but the festival’s troubles are starting to be felt. The comments today from people all around town were critical of the way things have been run so far. Hopefully the rest of TIFF will improve on its rocky start, but let’s get to the movies.

Tabu has been getting a reputation as a silent film (or just partly silent) since its Berlin premiere, but it isn’t true. The second half of the film has no dialogue (but sound effects are still present) but it’s dominated by a voice over running throughout the entire thing. Hopefully the second half won’t turn people off from watching Tabu since it’s a gorgeous piece of work and my favourite film at the festival so far. Miguel Gomes, shooting in black and white and 4×3, creates some truly beautiful moments. The first half, which follows a character obsessed with films and other people’s lives, is my favourite part of Tabu with Teresa Madruga doing an excellent job as Pilar. The well-known second half, shot on 16mm, operates as the kind of film Pilar would usually watch. The African landscapes in this half are beautiful to look at, and Gomes directs it with a huge level of enthusiasm. A romantic film about lost love and classic cinema, Tabu is definitely worth seeking out.

RATING: 7.5/10

Tabu

Next up was Amour, the big Palme D’or winner and front-runner for the Foreign Film Oscar. As a huge fan of Michael Haneke, Amour was a step down from his previous film The White Ribbon. This is definitely Haneke’s most ‘human’ film yet, but don’t expect him to soften up. We start out with an old couple living a happy life until the wife has a stroke. From then on it turns into scene after scene of degradation as the husband has to take care of his wife while she slowly dies. There are powerful moments throughout Amour, but Haneke’s cold, precise style doesn’t work well enough. This definitely feels like a mainstreaming on Haneke’s part, and there is little of the thought-provoking content that’s easy to find in his previous films. Amour is definitely a good film, but I’m judging this on the scale of Haneke’s previous films where it just doesn’t stand up.

RATING: 7/10

Amour

While I waited for my last film of the night I decided to rush 90 Minutes, a new Norwegian film. Things got off to a good start with some nice camerawork and its ominous introductions to the three storylines in the film, but the feeling quickly went away. 90 Minutes clearly wants to be a provocative movie, which we see when a sex scene covered by a doorway cuts to the bedroom to reveal (shock!) that the woman on the bed is tied up and badly beaten. But that’s not all, as the camera cuts back further to reveal (double shock!) a baby in the same room. And just to make sure the film’s message is understood, the scene dissolves to a shot of people walking in a busy intersection. If the director opted to just cut to a title card that said SOCIETY instead I’m sure it would have saved her some money while giving the same impact. The other two stories don’t leave anything worth looking back over. At one point in the film a character describes an art piece that’s pointless because it shows how the human mind is limitless. I’m sure the scene was meant to sum up what 90 Minutes is about, but probably not in the way the director wanted.

RATING: 5/10

90 Minutes

Finally I checked out the Midnight Madness film No One Lives. This is the return of Japanese director Ryuhei Kitamura who last made the underrated Midnight Meat Train. Unfortunately, this is not a triumphant return for Kitamura, as No One Lives is a pretty stupid movie. Most of the blame is on the writing, which is filled with such atrocious dialogue that no one could make it remotely passable (key example: someone sees their friend’s truck with the tires slashed and says ‘Something isn’t right!’). Luke Evans delivers most of his lines with the charisma of a 2×4, but luckily the awkward first act makes way for the carnage that makes up the rest of the film. Evans plays a psychopath who has his kidnapped victim unwittingly taken by a group of amateur robbers (they steal his car, not knowing that a girl is locked up in the trunk). It’s when these robbers realize exactly who they’re dealing with that No One Lives becomes a lot more entertaining. Kitamura directs some hilariously disgusting scenes, with one involving a hiding spot that’s too good to spoil. Unfortunately, that’s where the fun ends, as the eccentric violence can’t elevate this beyond the DTV (or should I say DTVOD) trash it truly is.

RATING: It would have been a 3 or 4, but the insanity bumps it to a 5/10

No One Lives

NEXT UP: I try to muster enough strength to finish the weekend with two 2+ hour epics. One being Cloud Atlas and the other Sion Sono’s Land of Hope.

Recap of some of my Tweets from today:

Follow @WayTooIndie for full coverage of the 2012 Toronto International Film Festival!

TABU is a well-done love story. Gorgeously shot and romantic. Excellent music as well. #TIFF12

— Way Too Indie (@WayTooIndie) September 8, 2012

Filling in for AMOUR #TIFF12 twitter.com/WayTooIndie/st…

— Way Too Indie (@WayTooIndie) September 8, 2012

AMOUR: Good, but far from Haneke’s best. Simple case of his style not matching the subject matter.

— Way Too Indie (@WayTooIndie) September 9, 2012

90 MINUTES: says nothing interesting at all because it has been done before. Bland.

— Way Too Indie (@WayTooIndie) September 9, 2012

NO ONE LIVES: A terrible script elevated by Kitamura’s insanity. There’s no reason why this guy had to stop making movies #TIFF12

— Way Too Indie (@WayTooIndie) September 9, 2012

The English title of the film is “Hidden” which accurately describes the film as a whole; there is a hidden camera that uncovers events in the main character’s past that are hidden from his wife. Michael Haneke’s Caché earned the Best Director award at the 2005 Cannes Film Festival as well as a nomination for the Palme d’Or and a nomination for an Oscar for Best Foreign Film. The pacing in the film is excellent and it will keep you guessing long after the credits roll.

The film begins with Georges Laurent (Daniel Auteuil) and Anne Laurent (Juliette Binoche) watching a video tape that someone left for them which contains what seems like pointless hours of video surveillance of their home. They are baffled at why anyone would be tapping them and why they would want them to know about it. Their first assumption is that it is a prank from their son Pierrot (Lester Makedonsky) and some of his friends. What an eerie feeling it must be to know that someone is watching you for no apparent reason.

They doubt their son or his friends had anything to do with it when another tape shows up. This time the footage is of the outside of their house at night. The only other clue they have to work with is that this second video came with a childish drawing of a person with blood coming from its mouth. Because there is no direct threat, the police cannot do much about it at this point. They are one their own to investigate.

We come to find out that Georges is a television host as they begin to wonder if it was perhaps from a fan turned stalker of his. But he receives a hunch to who might be making these videos after finding a clue in the next video. This time the video is of a person driving around in a car. Georges and Anne were able to spot a street name in that video, which ends up being close to where someone of his past lives.

He visits this person only for him to claim not to know anything about the video tapes. However, it does appear there was some heated history between these two. The strangest part is Georges lies to his wife when he denies the two meet up.

But the lie is short lived because the next video tape they receive is of that very meet up between Georges and the other man whose name is Majid (Maurice Benichou). It turns out that Majid was his adopted brother of Georges. But because he never got along with Majid, they only lived together for six months.

Anne watches that tape and of course is confused as to why Georges lied about talking to Majid. This results in a big argument between the two. You start to wonder if that is the intention of the tapes, to cause a rift between the husband and wife.

I believe Caché is about owning up to mistakes you have made in the past. Hidden guilt that you may have that you wish not to talk about. In this case, the tapes served to uncover the truths that were covered up. The film makes a relevant reference to a piece of French history when France police shot down Algerian immigrants protesting a government curfew on October 17th, 1961. As an attempt to cover up the truth, it was reported at the time that only two protesters were killed but we know today that about 400 were murdered.

My absolute favorite part of the film is the way it was shot. Haneke used shots that were mostly comprised of stationary cameras to imply hidden video surveillance. But he mixes them into other parts of the film to suggest that Caché itself could be a tape.

Many people will have problems with the ending of Caché because of the failure to solve the case. But the film’s ending was deliberately left open to the viewer to make their own conclusion. Sharing a common theme to other elements in the film, the mystery behind it remains hidden. The cryptic final scene is perfect because it raises more questions than it answers about two characters that may have had something to hide.

The jury announced the winners at the Lumiere Theater Sunday night for the 2012 Cannes Film Festival. Michael Haneke’s Amour was awarded the top prize of the Palme d’Or as many thought would happen for the Cannes veteran director. Some of the other awards seemed to be less obvious, Best Director went to Carlos Reygadas for Post Tenebras Lux and Reality won Grand Prix. Behn Zeitlin was awarded Camera d’Or for his first feature film Beasts of the Southern Wild.

See the full list of nominations.

The entire list of 2012 Cannes Film Festival Award Winners:

Amour, (director Michael Haneke)

Reality, (director Matteo Garrone)

Carlos Reygadas, Post Tenebras Lux

Cristian Mungiu, Beyond The Hills

Beasts Of The Southern Wild, (director Benh Zeitlin)

The Angels’ Share, (director Ken Loach)

Cosmina Straten, Beyond The Hills
Cristina Flutur, Beyond The Hills

Mads Mikkelsen, The Hunt