Let's be realistic.

good back-story, and good acting

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Movie's director plays much too much with viewers suggesting illogical events or matters just in order to get them lost. Besides, the main character's reactions can be seen as too caricatural and even unbelievable. The end opens up other dimensions in the understanding of the story which, once again, is merely another trick to make people think about a movie which is simply irrelevant most of the times. Sorry to say it, but suiciding because of a childhood trauma, although having built one's own life and being a father, is at the minimum extremely depressing and absurd if not completely impossible in reality.

Recently I've seen Cache, by Michael Haneke. (2005), and I must say that I was fascinated by this film. The scenery of the film is extremely simple and repetitive. The most interesting is in Haneke's way of positioning his camera, and the duration of his plans too. Not only does its staging allow the viewer to appreciate the dialogues between the characters at the maximum, but the editing constantly keeps the latter in suspense. Hidden is the story of Georges and Anne, a couple from the Parisian banner who is sent envelopes containing anonymous cassettes. The contents of the tapes are their own house filmed by an unknown person from Georges's childhood. The couple tries to find the identity of the person who sends the cassettes...but things get complicated. The scenery of the film may be very simple, but one notices the choice of filming in high definition. Normally, a film of the same format as Caché would be filmed in an old-school way, but it is interesting to see that high definition elevates the visual of the film to a higher level. Does this choice of image quality have anything to do with the narration? I don't think so but maybe Haneke had an idea. As is the case for many of the film sequences for that matter. Moreover, the level of violence in the movie is incredibly high. We see long sequences without any action, then without warning, we see the head of an animal to be cut free by the axe or a man to cut his throat. This inequality in the bloody sequences of the film is very interesting. The spectator is constantly thirsty to know who sends these tapes, and who also sends these macabre drawings. But Haneke reveals very little in the film, and that is precisely one of the interesting aspects of the plot. One is constantly absorbed by this type of narration which cleverly shows the psychological state of Georges throughout the film and the hell that he's going through. He sups a man who apparently had a past with him and the other does not know what he is talking about when he talks to him about the tapes. And this is all we know, Haneke gives free rein to any interpretation of the spectator and I believe that this was precisely his goal.

Michael Haneke is a true genius when it comes to directing films and Caché (Hidden) is another one of he's brilliance. The story to Caché (Hidden) is about Daniel Auteuil character George, who hosts a TV literary review. Then suddenly he starts receiving packages containing videos of himself with his family-- shot secretly from the street--and alarming drawings whose meaning is obscure. He has no idea who may be sending them. Gradually, the footage on the tapes becomes more personal, suggesting that the sender has known Georges for some time. Georges feels a sense of menace hanging over him and his family but, as no direct threat has been made, the police refuse to help. Now I've seen many movies like this where it involves a person being stalked or being threaten by a known or unknown figure. Some of those movies normally have that realistic feel to it that the movie really needs if it wants to give the viewer interested and not feel fake. This can easily be pulled off if it's directed fantastically, as the director can build up the suspense and create a sense of realism to the films atmosphere to make it more effective. Some movies can pull it off successfully but some sadly don't. But Caché (Hidden) takes all the best elements that I just named off and put it into one movie that's truly flawless, because Caché is one of the best movies I've seen from 2005. The only movie I've ever seen from Michael Haneke is the 2012 film ''Amour' that I saw back in early march this year. I haven't seen many of Michael Haneke movies yet, but I will get around to watching them as I feel I need to watch them in a special time when I'm not so busy. For what I've seen in Amour really showed me the talent and the brilliance that Michael had as I felt that every scene and every second of the movie matted, and it got me interest in he's other films right afterwards, and I'm so glad I picked Caché, because Michael Haneke directing in this movie was absolutely spectacular and probably the best directing I've seen in a while. The reason why I think the directing in this movie was so excellent is because while watching the movie I got that feeling of someone breathing down your neck kind of feel that only happens when everything is shot, acted, and directed excellently. Michael really injects the sense of anxiety and the feeling of being watched, and that was through the camera work and the directing. All throughout the movie I thought I was watching an Alfred Hitchcock movie, because this movie got the Hitchcock brilliance written all over it; you could say it's a modern day Hitchcock film that Alfred himself never directed. I'm so glad that Michael won best director at the 2005 Cannes Film Festival because he absolutely deserves it. Magnificent work Michael Haneke. Daniel Auteuil and Juliette Binoche are both unknown actors to me as I haven't seen any movies that they stared in and this is basically my first time I get to see these two act, and let me just say that I was completely amazed by their performance in this movie. When I saw these two act in a scene together I didn't see two actors delivering lines to each other, I only saw a couple trying to deal with their issues and having a real conversation that troubled couples will have. Daniel Auteuil and Juliette Binoche sold they performance in this movie and they were brilliant. Another thing that made this movie truly great is the writing as it was absolutely astonishing. The movie is about 117 minutes long and those 117 minutes you get to know and deeply understand the characters of the film. Michael Haneke wrote the movie and within a flash he gives away a lot on the character's just by the movement, the way their act, and how people speck made the characters and the environment that the movie is set in feel realistic. The writing made everything seem so down to earth and Michael Haneke wrote this movie brilliantly that he put his soul and heart into this work. Caché (Hidden) dose stay true to it's title, what I mean is that the movie dose have it's hidden messages that I know a lot of viewers (Including me) may not catch on the first viewing. Yes it's one of those 'Need to watch more than once' kind of movie that I honestly don't mind re-watching, but some may not. After the movie was over I straight away re-watched it because I felt like I missed something and I was right, the things I missed on the first viewing really made the story and the movie itself even more fantastic, because the movie only gives little hints on things that relate to the characters past life and the movies theme. The movie can be analyzed by many ways possible, as people can make creative and challenging theories for this movie with the films hidden secrets that lies beneath. That's just the brilliance of what a movie can do and that's making you come back and learn more. Now for the problems: I have none.

CACHE (HIDDEN) (2005) * (FRENCH/SUBTITLED) Overcooked soufflé of deceit; another reason to hate the French.I must admit that I am a foreign film snob. It's my Achilles heel (and no it has nothing to do with reading subtitles!) but I know that 90% of all the foreign films I cave into going to see leave me cold and quite Xenophobic in the process. Something is lost in the translation and the worst is when I listen to other critics especially if there is a large majority cajoling unsuspecting viewers to see something universally praised as being one of the year's best. I'll save you all the pain : it is one of the year's worst! There I've said it. Oh and for those who have problems with the French; another reason to despise them!The storyline focuses on a well-to-do French couple of the bourgeois set Georges Laurent (Daniel Auteuil), a literary TV host a la Charlie Rose and his pretty wife Anne Laurent (Juliette Binoche), a publishing type, whose quiet, seemingly perfect life find themselves upended when they receive a mysterious videotape that seems to be a surveillance of their upscale home. At first Georges thinks this nothing to be concerned about - some harmless prank perhaps perpetrated by their teenage son Pierrot (Lester Makedonsky) - but as the tapes keep coming they get more disturbing (a crudely childish drawing depicting a child vomiting blood, among other artistic inclusions add fuel to the fire). Anne insists they go to the police but they in turn inform the couple that nothing can be done unless something actually goes into action (i.e. a violent act upon their persons). So what do they do? Argue! Deceive one another, keep secretive (Georges has a skeleton in the closet concerning his family and a foreign family that were his servants which tie into French history's dark little secret too) and in general get progressively stupider as the potboiler continues to percolate. Well not exactly. I honestly couldn't care less what was transpiring. The tapes were boring and stupid as were the main characters who grew in annoyance and carpingly petty until the film's one truly jarring moment of violence (I literally thought seconds before the sequence, "Jesus when the hell is there going to be some action in this f*&$er!??!") that will knock one for a loop but even that aftermath things escalate into idiocy. And the 'don't blink' ending frankly is borderline inane. I just simply hated this film and only give it its rating due to the swift violent moment that frankly felt part of another (better) film in the long run.I do not know anything about the film's director Michael Haneke except that I can only surmise he will cash in on this when there is the inevitable Hollywood remake. Until then don't bother.