Georges (Jean-Louis Trintignant) is troubled by wife's (Emmanuelle Riva) recent strokes in Amour. |
There's nothing quite like sitting through one of Michael
Haneke's films. The Austrian director has a tendency for scrutinizing the world
through a bleak, somewhat disturbing lens that challenges even his most
optimistic audiences. His latest film, Amour,
is no exception and his most rational view on the gloomier moments in life. The
title itself, which translates as "Love," immediately throws
audiences for a loop, who presume to be uplifted by geriatric romance.
Check all those positive vibes at door, because instead,
we're treated to over two hours of a devastating study of decay and dying,
solely focused on an elderly Parisian couple. As soon as the opening credits
end, the first shot is a fire brigade breaking an apartment door only to reveal
a rotting corpse adorned in flowers. Already hitting audiences with a
heavy-hearted impression, Amour
quickly turns back the clocks to disclose who Georges (Jean-Louis Trintignant) and
Anne (Emmanuelle Riva) were and what specific episodes brought about this grim
finale.
The chemistry between Trintignant and Riva is mesmerizingly
spot-on, not expressed with smothering affection of two young lovers, rather
depending on the care of one-another as the duo progress through seniority. Georges
and Anne enjoy each other's company coupled with small talk at a kitchen table
or hand-in-hand at a piano recital, but everything takes a turn for the worse
when Anne suffers multiple strokes ending up bedridden. Even as Riva lays
immobile for at least half of Amour,
Trintignant bellies up a slew of conflicted emotions questioning his patience towards
his dying wife and even his love.
Amour is
exceptional in leaving audiences depressed, but Haneke's most glaring issue is
not getting the ball rolling soon enough. The first hour of Amour drags its feet through scene after
scene of simplistic cinematography reminiscent of a stage play. Before events
for Georges and Anne take a turn for the worst, every exchange of dialogue is
composed in an overuse of dull shot-reverse-shot. The two constantly wear out
the furniture as if there's no other place in the house to have a conversation.
Haneke overtly frames his scenes around windows and
doorframes, maintaining a sense of rigid form, despite opportunities to compose
less static scenes. Until Riva's Anne finds herself unable to move and her
husband's faith deteriorating, Amour
is a standstill just waiting for a spark of intensity to shoot it across the
finish line. As the bedridden Anne, Riva shines in what may give the impression
of an undemanding performance. Every emotion flowing out of Riva surfaces from
subtlety - her eyes and gestures just to name a few.
Sticking with Amour's overdrawn
story is the linchpin in whether or not the film personally fails or succeeds.
Sometimes it can be difficult to empathize with Georges unless you've had to
watch someone you care about slowly die before you, while feeling helpless
inside. Many times, Haneke paints Georges as a disgruntled old man with
detached jerk-like attributes. However, being not relatable at times only transfigures
Trintignant's character into one more complex than what's being shown on the
surface.
The film would function much better if it wasn't caught up
in appeasing such niche storytelling that seems to be directed by two different
directors with conflicting styles. In reality, Haneke is Amour's only director, but the inconsistencies between the first
half and second question on-the-fly decisions or a change of heart in style
without considering any tonal or stylistic patchwork.
Despite over two hours of a depressing and heartbreaking
narrative, Amour manages to reference
love that might not be in the traditional sense, but in a form that's appropriate
for that segment of life. Haneke knows how to get the job done, making
audiences feel uncomfortable yet respecting the morbid content. And while the
film is encompassed with two of 2012's finest onscreen performances, one go
around with Amour is more than
enough. There's simply no incentive to watch the elderly suffer and die again
and again on a loop.
GRADE: B (8/10)
Thanks to your review blog; I'll be able to save myself 8 bucks. I don't think I would be able to sit through this movie without being bored.
ReplyDeleteIt's worth watching at least once just see what it's all about, but any more viewings beyond that just aren't happening.
ReplyDelete