Great movie that people love to hate

Wellington 2022-03-20 09:02:00

Trapped in so-called reflections on the media presentation of violence, Haneke's author naively took away. The only thing that is really interesting in the whole film is precisely a political philosophical fable: the arbitrariness of play and violent domination based on the difference of power and the absolute weakness and weakness of the middle class attached to the (liberal) civilized order. In contrast to the extreme incompetence, and therefore the really interesting textual contrast to this film, it is not at all a mass media or violent exploitation movie but Hobbes and Karl Schmidt. Reflecting on our reality, isn't this kind of moment living on a knife board facing the fear of someone who can play with your power at will? It is also concentrated in this book that Haneke's greatest strength lies in the various tortured plots designed by a sincere anti-human heart, not what he thought he was talking about with these plots reason. Best of Haneke.

Demarco 2022-04-23 07:02:39

What can be regarded as a paradox is that the psychological effect of "controlling violence with violence" produced by the film (such as "poor people must be hateful, why not resist, if I were to fight back", etc.), will inevitably resist. Audiences who feel uneasy about the brutal reality of weakening the manipulated image again, and feel that it is not cruel enough, it is true that because of the reflexivity of the fourth wall and all violent processes occur outside the painting, the result is inside the painting, which offsets a lot of real shifts. Love, cartoon-like violence reappears but there are still warnings, it can be seen that Haneke's thinking on the media is quite complete, meticulous and powerful.