Alicia I love this movie so much

Nonureva Really Surprised!

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Curt Watching it is like watching the spectacle of a class clown at their best: you laugh at their jokes, instigate their defiance, and "ooooh" when they get in trouble.

Anthony Iessi Michael Haneke creates a multiple character, multiple plot-line film that film lovers have seen time and again. Amores Perros, Babel, Short Cuts, Magnolia. You know that the essence of a great filmmaker is one who can juggle multiple stories and characters at once, and even more so, whether or not he can intertwine these stories at the very end. It's confusing whether or not Code Unknown does that, but it attempts it successfully at the very least. A lot of the talking scenes didn't resonate with me. Although the ADR scene blew me away. At first I was in the midst of a shocking scene where a child almost falls off of a building, to reveal that it was part of a filmed scene-within-the-movie of which the actress is in the process of re-recording. That is awesome stuff. Also, take a look at the unbearable tension in the subway scenes. It's nail biting stuff.

tedg German art has its own fascinating charm, especially contemporary German film and most especially the Austrian subset. There's a desire for purity that creates clarity, often remarkably clear and well-machined films. The problem is that the filmmakers truly believe that this Cartesian purity brings one closer to the human condition, crisp beings that we are.So we get a shorter distance between us and the film. That's good. But there is an almost unbridgeable gap between the film and the world — any world — that matters. Herzog has figured a way around his national urge in this regard by pretty much just being nuts and making committed obsessive films about committed obsession. Tykwer escapes by becoming Polish. But Hanake is stuck.I really liked this as a film, as an artifact with craft. There's a lot of polish and refinement in what it is, how it is imagined, and the machining of the parts. It starts (and incidentally ends) with amazing panache: deaf children playing charades and unable to guess.It has some true performances, most particularly with the women around whom this revolves — including Binoche.It has some remarkable long scenes that are continuous takes, often tracking in complex ways. These are not interspersed; they are the thing itself, with many scenes of simple observation where nothing apparently happens. This allows us to really drill into the lives of these people — if they were anything like humans.The problem is in the construction. He has decided to follow an already well established structure of several casually interwoven lives. What he has uniquely done is weight every life — indeed every action in each life — as equally important. So adjusting a camera is as "important" as a shot of a farmer shooting his bulls because his youngest son has abandoned him, the last family member to do so.In wiser hands, this could have conveyed the angst of the ordinary, but it works the other way, selling the banality of the dramatic.For students of narrative folding, the chief man is a war photographer, and his photos anchor what we see in the film. His girl friend (Binoche) is an actress and we have folded in two films (a remake of "The Collector" and a fictional one that matches "real life") and a Shakespearean play about shrewish love. Wonderfully imagined, and structured, but in a mechanical universe.Vienna as an algorithm.Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

ellkew A mesmerising film that spoke to me on so many levels. The opening sequence (after the deaf children) which kick starts the several narrative strands is such a brilliantly filmed sequence. An admittedly wrong act by a youngster (how often do we see that) which is responded to by a passer-by thus setting in motion a chain of events that touch the lives of various people. The sub-heading of the film 'Incomplete tales of several journeys' reminded me of '71 fragments....'. Life is incomplete, unfinished and things are not resolved. What Haneke is taking on board here is the responsibility as a filmmaker to present the fiction as honestly as possible. This is perhaps why he is interested in using the fixed camera approach. A sort of anti-Hollywood (if you like) shooting style. By minimising the shots and dispensing with editing within a sequence he is presenting something in real time and with the intent I imagine of being more honest and less manipulative. That said I think in a work of fiction it is still possible to present a narrative using a variety of shots to engage theviewer. As a filmmaker you are manipulating time but who said a filmmaker had to be true to the viewer. Film is fiction, even documentary. It could even be argued that documentary is less honest than fiction. What is truth? Or is film really the truth 24 times a second. We know who said that. So as a filmmaker just by presenting a narrative we are presenting fiction, however we show it for we are giving our interpretation of events, that we have written. Haneke is trying to straddle a fundamental problem here. One of truth. I think he fails in being honest but succeeds in making a superb piece of cinema. The acting is beyond reproach. Binoche excels herself in a scene which is a rehearsal for a film within the film. It is a fixed video camera filming her as she reacts to the direction given her by the director off camera. It is a wonderful scene. Another powerful scene is when Binoche is on the metro and is pestered by two youths. She moves seat but is confronted again. It is a brilliant example of how we are unable to break out of our rigid class system and confront what is happening around us. Afraid of the world around us. Tied to a rigid system of behaviour. Mute. The big bad city is all around us and it will chew us up and spit us out, whatever path we choose. We are slaves to its rules. I suppose Haneke is saying this is the route we are going down. He is also saying that often the route is out of our control. Meaning our lives are out of our control. We are at the mercy of chance encounters, brief moments that we pass by without acknowledging. These small instances are what really govern all our destinies and the incomplete time we spend here.

raraavis-2 This would seem to be a collection of people and situations meant to show us the underbelly of modern France. In fact, the only common theme would appear to be a politically correct view of illegal immigrants. Even this would have been OK, had it been done artfully. As it is, the film jumps around without much cohesion (apparently this is supposed to make viewers think. I found it amateurish). There is not a single instant of joy or even of contentment: everything is dreary, sad and miserable. Insofar as I am concerned, this is one of those films that justify Samuel Goldwyn's famous words to his scriptwriters, "If you have a message, go to Western Union!". Hard to believe Juliette Binoche let herself be captured for this. Absolutely sleep-inducing and best avoided.