I have to agree with Michael B here. Having seen this (uncomfortable) film a few times now, both versions, I can honestly say I never once thought of the killer as handsome. If anything he seems nihilistic to an extreme. I also never once had a remote thought that the cab driver was getting "comeuppance" or something remotely like it. That the cab driver is a somewhat irritating person is beside the point, or rather, that it is beside the point is the point: anyone getting murdered is problematic for Kieslowski. Which is why Michal B's point above is true: Kieslowski wants to show that both of the killings (ritualistic as they might be), whether sanctioned or not, are completely immoral. I'm not sure any "relativism" could be interpreted here, though I'm very intrigued by that interpretation if it can be explained further. It certainly would be an interesting way to look at some films based on a very rigid code of morals. Maybe part of the issue with Kieslowski is that he seemingly presents the ideas clearly: here are ten films loosely following the Ten Commandments; here are three films about Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity; of course it's ever quite as simple as that.MichaelB wrote: ...he "deserves to die" - at which point Kieślowski grabs the audience by the collective scruff of its neck and says "Look, this is what 'capital punishment' actually means. Aside from being more polished and professional, what's the essential difference between it and what you witnessed earlier?". And I'd argue that it's by avoiding the usual manipulation that the film achieves its cumulative power: because it doesn't fall back on the usual clichés - indeed, because it seems to be consciously undermining them at every turn - the viewer can't ever relax.
As for the love film, I think I posted above that it's really a lust film, and in this case it does follow the commandment and even some Gospel edicts almost literally, and as a film about warped love and lust its characters are clearly acting irrationally (or perhaps they're sort of living relativistic-ally while not aware they're in such a rigid universe?). But as I mentioned earlier Kieslowski uses certain ideas almost as starting points and templates for him to then play around and sometimes even throw us off our expectation. The first time I saw the movie I was surprised by Magda's response. Actually, my first viewing of that film I thought it was pretty well-crafted, suspenseful, and surprising--and it still holds up as top-notch K.
I hadn't fully considered Michael B's point that the woman in this film, Magda, is also living a fantasy life of sorts. Her surprising response to the peeping of Tom might just cynically be taken as someone who enjoys being watched. If that's the case then it is a kind of immaturity. Furthermore, often in these films situational irony is part of the point: the characters themselves aren't aware of the moral universe they're living in. Magda is more practically experienced than Tomek, and she's not a creepy stalker, but beyond that I don't know what else we're getting from this character. The issue with this film is not that it presents voyeurism as a form of love and if it is an issue then Vertigo is also guilty. In both cases voyeurism ultimately equals obsession and possession.
As for the arguments about Kieslowski's aesthetics, or lack there of with some apparent sloppiness, it seems to me like he's in total control. The mix of images and music are undeniably his and his crew. In Kieslowski on Kieslowski I think he even mentioned how he didn't feel like he filmed Poland as bleak as it really was (none of the long waits at the grocery).
As an aside, I will have to briefly disagree with Michael B about Blue and Red (the former I think of as one of Kieslowski's weakest, though the latter is admittedly my favorite film of all time). In some ways I think of the former as an anti-European art film. Just like with Dekalog, he takes a certain set of ideas that are supposed to be the subtext of the film, and plays them either straight forwardly or ironically, sometimes both. Blue is a mix of mourning, egotism, and frustration. It's a tough film in a way, emotionally perhaps, and it's the Kieslowski I revisit least frequently. And as you said, I wonder if the hype surrounding it was too much and if any revisits have changed your opinion at all on these. As for Red, I'll be brief and probably superficial, but for me every aspect of that film, its form and content, come together in a way that expresses Kieslowski's themes, which are still handled with a deft touch and some nuance, though maybe some here find them superficial.