Amour (Michael Haneke, 2012)

Discussions of specific films and franchises.
Message
Author
User avatar
TMDaines
Joined: Wed Nov 11, 2009 1:01 pm
Location: Stretford, Manchester

Re: Amour (Michael Haneke, 2012)

#51 Post by TMDaines » Sun May 19, 2013 12:01 pm

I don't know what it is like in the States but Amour has been in big demand on the arthouse circuit here. I'm pretty sure we're bringing it back for a third run soon.

User avatar
zedz
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 7:24 pm

Re: Amour (Michael Haneke, 2012)

#52 Post by zedz » Sun May 19, 2013 4:29 pm

Seems to be the same down here, and if the film is running and running in cinemas - an incredibly rare phenomenon these days - it only makes sense to postpone the home video release, if you can.

User avatar
ShellOilJunior
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 7:17 am

Re: Amour (Michael Haneke, 2012)

#53 Post by ShellOilJunior » Wed May 22, 2013 7:10 am

I finally got to this film a few weeks ago at the local cinematheque.

The film felt all too familiar for me. Mainly because my parents are currently going through a similar ordeal (My dad is the one that had a stroke). Most of what I saw on screen was stuff I've seen firsthand. The pain, the temporary paralysis, frustration from lack of speech, frustration from having to depend on others for small tasks, the slow recovery, etc.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Amour (Michael Haneke, 2012)

#54 Post by mfunk9786 » Mon Jun 03, 2013 5:20 pm

ianungstad wrote:This was released in theaters by Sony Pictures Classics on Dec 19, 2012 and they still don't have a dvd/blu release solicited. Seems very odd. It is very unusual for a major studio to not have any word on a dvd/blu release 6 months after theatrical.

I noticed a few people speculating already that maybe Sony licensed the film to Criterion. There's no real precedent for this.
Coming August 20th from Sony

shaky
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: Amour (Michael Haneke, 2012)

#55 Post by shaky » Wed Jul 31, 2013 4:23 pm

Some general thoughts on Michael Haneke’s AMOUR:
SpoilerShow
I think AMOUR is, in one very important way, a film about death(and the final movements toward death) as spectacle, as performance, an aesthetic experience. Life as theater, nuanced melodrama. Hence the second shot of the film with the audience(which is a compositional progression from the final shot of CACHE), and the precise, overtly classical/balanced compositions/camera movements/staging. Frames within frames constantly throughout this movie, distancing us, forcing us to reconsider the dramatics of every scene, to consider the emotions represented not by words but by motion and motionlessness.

It's also quite a political film. This is not a universal depiction of death but a depiction of death as experienced by a specific class. Haneke is one of the most class-conscious filmmakers around and this film is no different. I don't think people should get too caught up in the tenderness/compassion of Haneke's depiction of these people(though this is no doubt important) as it's easy to lose sight of the political/societal implications. I found this to be a very Brechtian film. I found myself very often focusing on Anne and George’s wealth, their education, their class, social status, occupations as musicians, all which Haneke, through mise en scene, decor, and performance direction helps detail for us.

But though Haneke’s cultural assessments are very acute, he does venture into some pretty universal/humanistic territory as well, particularly regarding memory. Formally, we get many, MANY recurring camera placements which come about at different times throughout the film. This works the viewers’ memories in an extremely interesting way; we recall having seen a particular depiction of space before, but in a different context, with less narrative information with which to work. As such, I think Haneke is very interested in the way time affects space, how vacant areas often seize the memories of people and objects who were once there, and how occupied areas hold onto memories of when they were once empty.

There’s also the narrative representations of memory: Eva once listening to her parents having sex, George recalling a movie he once saw(he believes emotions are more important than content. Would you say Haneke agrees or disagrees with this?), Anne looking through photo albums, a musician reminiscing on his days as a student of Anne’s, unclear moments of past intimacy discussed between George and Anne after Anne has had her second stroke, George’s daydreams(or are they daydreams? Is it more complicated than this?) Memory is slippery, venerated, a guide or a diversion from the truth.

I've seen the movie three times now and am still coming to terms with my feelings about it. I think that the moments with the pigeon were inspired but a bit heavy-handed as symbolism. I also didn't immediately like the day-dreaming sequences(I still don't like the moment when Georges sees Anne playing piano before turning off the cd player as it felt way too obviously clever on Haneke's part.) But Grundmann's reading of these moments, particularly the second to last moments of the film, has really helped me look at them in a new light:

"Rather than allowing the world of fantasy and the world of reality to exist side by side the way we encounter it in magic realism, Haneke ‘subtracts’ Georges from reality by permitting him to follow his wife out the door. There is no indication that the film intends us to read Georges’s escape as a suicide; it is not as though he literally follows his wife into Nirvana. What the film does is release Georges into an altogether different dimension, one into which it cannot follow him."

I think AMOUR is a very good film but not necessarily a great one(I believe Haneke’s great films are CODE UNKNOWN, CACHE, THE PIANO TEACHER, and perhaps THE WHITE RIBBON though I need to revisit that one again to be sure). I’m very glad I made myself spend as much time with it as I did though; it’s an important movie, one I think we should all see, regardless of whether or not I think it’s a masterpiece.

shaky
Joined: Mon Jul 29, 2013 2:52 pm

Re: Amour (Michael Haneke, 2012)

#56 Post by shaky » Mon Aug 12, 2013 7:23 am

Unsurprisingly, the Region A Sony release has optional English subtitles. :D

http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/61431/amour/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post Reply