Review of Caché (2005) by Holdenc. — 08 Nov 2006

A lot of people seemingly aren't seeing the big picture, and that's fine. They should be applauded for seeing a subtitled film in the first place. Unfortunately, some of their reactions suggest it'll be their last.

Loved the film. Talked about it for hours afterward. Got the metaphor. Worked well. Don't believe the reviewers here who state you need to know Modern French history to understand the allergory.

It works with any history. Us Australians and our Aboriginals. You Americans and your Natives. Same idea. Not identical, of course, but a whole lot of wrong done by our ancestors that's not been addressed yet, by this generation or anyone.

.. Two major problems with this film. 1. I didn't care about any of the characters. Big mistake. If I don't have anyone to like, then why am I watching it? I don't watch reality TV for the same reason.

They're all idiots. I don't want to watch idiots. Here, the best we have is the wife, played excellently by Juilette Binoche, but mostly for her I felt pity. But that's small potatoes compared to the next point.

The main point. 2.It's marketed as a mystery. And when you watch the first act, you're watching a mystery. And people, when you get into the 2nd act, it's still a mystery. However when you settle into the final third it seems the director changed his mind and went, 'Yeah, that whole mystery thing is less interesting than this big drama thing I got going on.

" And thus there is zero resolution to the mystery. Now, I don't mind open ended films. Love them in fact. Mullholland Drive was amazing. Left the theatre not knowing what the hell just happened, but knew I loved it.

BUT, we were given enough clues to work it out later, which I did, it took five straight hours of discussion, but I got it. Point is, you're given the clues. It's not tied up into a pretty bow, but if you're into it enough, you can figure it out.

In this, you're given squat. Remember, I'm talking about the mystery of who is leaving the tapes, not the whole "What the film is really about" thing. (Yes, I saw the two kids talking in the final shot, very clever.

) You are not given clues as to who is leaving the tapes. In the end, the tapes don't matter. Ah, the tapes were a Macguffin. They were a catalyst for the drama, not important really at all. THEN WHY IS IT A MYSTERY?! Folks, if you write a mystery, you've gotta give the audience something.

At the end of this film I felt very unsatisfied. Like I'd listened to a joke but never got told the punch-line. And if the punchline wasn't important, then it shouldn't be called a joke, rather, 'a descriptive story.

' This goes further back than films can reach. This goes back to storytelling. There are many unwritten rules that a story teller must remember when spinning a yarn. Hanke has broken two of them with this film.

However, all that being said, I was AFFECTED by the film, and I love it when that happens.