Thursday, December 26, 2013

Amour (2012) ***

amour-2012

So, so depressing—that is the best way I can describe director Michael Haneke’s Amour (2012).

For close to two hours I sat in abject misery watching Emmanuelle Riva’s character slowly descend into physical and mental incapacitation after suffering a series of strokes, while her husband (Jean-Louis Trintignant) helplessly watches.  I’m not actually sure what age group this film appeals to—most under-thirties probably would be bored, while everyone else probably endured the film with a complete sense of dread and depression. 

Without a doubt, the story is poignant and the performances are powerful, but I’ve come to a point in my life where watching emotionally draining films with no life-affirming momen4-13t or resolution just rub me the wrong way.  Facing immortality—yours or a loved one’s—is difficult enough in the realm of reality, why must it be faced so brutally in the fictional world as well.  Yes, art imitates life, and the best art touches on our humanity, but when there is no glimmer of hope at the end of anything, in this case a film, what really is the use?  It’s like reading Thomas Hobbes and Friedrich Nietzsche at the same time while swigging a bottle of gin and swallowing a bottle of sleeping pills. 

All of that said, the mere fact that Amour elicited such a strong emotional response from me tells me that Haneke and his cast did a spectacular job in telling one of the most emotionally raw stories about death that I have ever seen.  While I did not enjoy watching the film, I was mesmerized by it—yes, this IS possible.  I didn’t check several times to see how much longer I would have to endure the agony because the movie was asinine—I did it because I wanted to know when I would finally be able to stop watching such heart-wrenching filmmaking. 

amour-trintignant-2012-huppertThis in itself is surprising, as most of Haneke’s work (Cache {2005}, Funny Games {1997}, The Piano Teacher {2001}, and The White Ribbon {2010}), at least for me, is anger-inducing.  All of his films, this one included, are uncomfortable to watch.  His films are usually filled with mentally unstable people who do extremely irrational things in very calm manners.  As such, he presents cinema that is jarring and exhausting to watch. Yet, Haneke’s Amour has something new in it—heart.  While he would never allow sentimentality to creep into one of his movies, Haneke does permit the viewer to feel some empathy for his characters this time. Still, there is some Haneke callousness in the presentation of the couple’s daughter, Eva (Isabelle Huppert), and a nurse who is fired for abuse, although we don’t see it. 

Overall, Amour is a gripping story that I hope I never watch again. 

6 comments:

  1. Good review Kim. It's sad, it's depressing, and worst of all, it's emotionally draining. However, it is very realistic and honest to the point of where I really did see an aging, old couple fall in and out of love, over the course of over two-and-a-half-hours.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Dan. You're right, of course, it is such a draining film because it is so realistic about aging/dying.

      Delete
  2. I appreciate your post, Kim. I'd completely forgotten about this film, and that I'd planned to watch it since it was nominated for an Oscar last year. But after reading your review, I think I'm going to skip it. I think I enjoyed your write-up far more than I would the film.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, thanks for the nice comments. While the film is extremely well done, such cinematic anguish isn't for everyone.

      Delete
  3. I have to say, after having just watched this a week ago and being psyched to be watching it (since it got so many great reviews/accolades), that I was disappointed. It is clearly well-acted, but it was just soooooooo BORING. I think over and over the director let scenes drag on waaaaaaaay too long (for example, did we need to see the old man wash and cut so many flowers at the end? I mean show him at the start and the end of the task and be done with it. there was about 30 minutes of "dead time" that should have been cut). Thank goodness I watched it On Demand, because i kept nodding off for little bits and having to rewind since I'd missed a few subtitles here and there. Emmanuelle Riva was nevertheless excellent in the role and thoroughly deserved the recognition she got. I haven't seen the other Best Foreign Picture nominees from last year but this could not have been the best one - if it was, it was a down year

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All of Haneke's films are paced like this. What we view as "dead" time he views as extra time to make the audience more uncomfortable. As for winning the Academy Award, it was probably the best of the nominated ones--although Denmark's A Royal Affair was pretty good, too.

      Delete