CANNES 2011 - Michael

Michael (2011) dir. by Markus Schleinzer
Starring Michael Fuith and David Rauchenberger

**1/2

By Blair Stewart

The man is a blank.

Balding, pasty, forgettable. Bland suit, bland shoes, bland words. He arrives home from the insurance office, removes the bland suit and shoes, makes a snack, goes downstairs to his padlocked basement, into the playroom of the 10-year-old boy he's held captive for months, and he rapes the boy. That's his routine.

This is the reality of Michael, Markus Schleinzer's debut feature after cutting his teeth as a casting director, most notably for Michael Haneke. His influence hangs over so many of the art-house releases these days, he's like a trend instead of an auteur. Michael deals with the outrage of the Josef Fritzl revelation and other cases of child enslavement within our generation.

Michael Fuith is Michael the adult, an obsequious middle-manager type of deep silence, hard-wired as a sexual predator, matter-of-fact and mostly competent in his crime. David Rauchberger is the boy, required to engage Michael in sex, expected to play the role of a playmate and chattel. The film shifts between the man's outside existence and his casual trips down to the basement, absolute evil reduced to banality. The scenes of molestation are mostly implied but brutal to fathom, even if you're not a parent. The film doesn't insist exploitation or controversy, it confronts an aspect of human nature that's existed since the catamites; it could occur, and has already, in small-town Austria, Afghanistan, California.

As a film, in regard to design, Michael is accomplished but unspectacular and quite predictable. But to be fair, if the story was sensationalized, I'd be furious – Schleinzer has made a mostly honest film from an unfathomable source. It does pander though in having Michael as a vacant monster, Todd Solondz was much braver in humanizing Dylan Baker's paedophile in Happiness. Fuith and Rauchberger are committed in their roles and commendable in their bravery. Michael is a film of great unease that I don't want to watch again, but it’s worth respecting.

"But I... I can't help myself! I have no control over this, this evil thing inside of me, the fire, the voices, the torment!"
-Peter Lorre in Fritz Lang's M.

Revanche

Revanche (2008) dir. Götz Spielmann
Starring: Johannes Krisch, Irina Potapenko, Andreas Lust, Ursula Strauss

****

By Alan Bacchus

Some spoilers below...

Götz Spielman's Oscar nominated Revanche is an inspired masterpiece of a thriller, which doesn't really turn out to be a thriller in the end, instead something more emotional complex and profound than a mere genre film.

Alex and Tamara are a pair of lovers, desperately trying to make a life together. First they have to get out of the sex traffic business, Tamara is a hooker/stripperworking for an Eastern European gangster and Alex is the club’s hardened but ineffectual barkeep. Alex makes a plan to hold up a small town bank, grab the cash, pay off their debts and ride away into the sunset in freedom. Plans go wrong of course when the heist is interrupted by a humble cop, Robert, who interrupts their escape.

Spielmann is clever to subvert our expectations, steering the movie in the direction of a lovers-on-the-run road movie in the first half, before pulling the rug from under us and making a dramatic left turn to something deeper and complex. The second half deals with the fallout from Alex/Tamara’s encounter with the cop, the details of which I won’t reveal here. Soon Alex finds himself alone hiding from the authorities in the home of his elderly grandfather and his kindly female neighbour Susanne, who happens to be the wife of the cop who disrupted the heist.

The title Revanche, means revenge in German, but it can also mean ‘second chance’ - the prevailing theme which dominates the rest of the film. Alex wrestles with the desire for revenge and his inability to commit to another act of violence, or whether his grandfather and the town will become his second chance at making a real honest life for himself.

Afte the heist Spielmann disposes of the urban setting and the strip club and we don't ever see the slimy pimp and club owner again. As such, it’s a greyer area of conflict. What was easily characterized as good vs. bad, hero v. villain, protag vs. antagonist, is much more difficult to identify with.

The relationship of Susanne and Alex is particularly intriguing. For Alex, he would appear to have contempt for Susanne a) because of her association with the cop that prevented the bank robbery and b) Susanne’s nosey small town congeniality which threatens Alex’s grieving process. Then out of the blue Susanne seduces Alex. It’s a shock to us, but an instinctual carnal attraction of desperate souls, not unlike Halle Berry and Billy Bob Thornton’s smouldering love affair in Monster’s Ball.

For Susanne though her agenda is more devious than Alex’s. Alex easily succumbs to passion, because well, he’s a man and it’s doesn’t take much to seduce a man. For Susanne, it’s a desperate attempt to save her marriage, by secretly conceiving a child even if it’s not her husband’s.

Spielmann sets a quiet tone, a trendy observational style, languid easy going pace, and unstylized though pristine visuals. Without overt violence or conflict Spielmann slowly simmers his situations and characters with internalized emotions. Like Hamlet, Alex who desires revenge against Robert, is unable to make a decision and take action – a trait of Alex’s planted by Tamara’s pimp in a throwaway conversation early in the film. So we sense there’s possibility of violence at every moment, whether it’s against Robert, Susanne or even himself. Spielmann’s repetitive use of the wood chopping is almost pornographic, suggesting either it’s groundwork for its significance later in the movie, or that at any time Alex, who is so wound up, could lose control, chop off a finger, or lose a limb.

Revanche succeeds masterfully because Spielmann’s makes us love Alex, Susanne, and Robert so much that we desperately want all of them to achieve their dreams and make good for themselves.

Revanche, nominated for a Foreign Language Oscar in 2009, has just received the Criterion Collection treatment on Blu-Ray a format’s which render’s Spielmann’s compositions sharp and immaculate.

Berlin 2010-THE ROBBER

The Robber "Der Rauber" (2010) dir. Benjamin Heisenberg
Starring: Andreas Lust and Franziska Weisz

***

By Blair Stewart

If you're going to pick an interesting hobby, you could do worse than a bank robbery. A dry procedural about an extraordinary man makes for one of the surprises of the Berlinale.

"The Robber" relates the life of Austrian marathon runner, thrill junkie and career criminal Johannes Rettenberger. Adapted from the book "Der Rauber", Rettenbergen, as played with quiet pathological menace by Andreas Lust, had a public 'lust' for running and a private one for stealing. Upon his release from prison Johannes easily shifts back into his old habits with an animal compulsion to do only what he knows and desires, often for the spike of his heart rate as he barrels across Vienna from police gunfire. In due time Johannes hooks-up with his old lady Erika, who as a criminal case worker for the local government has another form of weakness-she loves the bastard.

Relinqished of melodrama, "The Robber" observes a man who's great at the skill of his own downfall with a clinical eye and a shrug. No explanation of a tortured childhood or disgust with modern society, Johannes just wanted to go fast, and all the better while being chased. This was an objective tactic used recently in Mann's "Public Enemies" to middling effect; John Dillinger was presented both as a tough-guy myth and a mortal who just enjoyed stealing, whereas Rettenberger comes across as a single-minded force of nature in a run or on the run.

Director Heisenberg shows a great skill for action that's becoming lost in American cinema, there's fast-cutting chases but for once it's action we can follow. The script is tight and drained of artifice, and as serious as a German bellhop. Worth seeing alone for the third act surprise, and worthy of being remade by Hollywood down the road should it be noticed.

DOG DAYS

Dog Days (2001) dir. Ulrich Seidl
Starring: Maria Hofstätter, Erich Finsches, Gerti Lehner, Claudia Martini, Viktor Hennemann

***

In 2001 renowned Austrian documentarian Ulrich Seidl made his dramatic feature debut with his provocative surrealist satire, "Dog Days". There have been many films satirizing the mind-numbing decay of suburban living, but with "Dog Days" Seidl skewers the lifestyle deeper and more sadistically than anyone before or after him.

Around a quaint Austrian township, so non-distinct it could be any Ontario suburb, or California, or Texas or wherever, lives a group of peculiar citizens whom we observe going about their days with the usual routine.

The film opens on a crazy club-goer, Mario, abusing a group of voyeurs who gawk at his dancer-girlfriend in a German dance club. In the ride home the obsessed maniac physically and mentally abuses her in the car before throwing her out of the car on the side of the road. There is abuse like this in every corner of this seemingly mundate and overly average suburban enclave.

There's the curmudgeon old widower when he's not complaining about the inaccurate weight of his packaged dog food at the grocery store he, torments his maid by treating her like his wife.

There's the mentally challenged young girl who wonders parking lot shopping malls and grocery stores looking for car rides - encounters which start out like congenial neighbourly favours which turn into obsessively annoying verbal abuse by the girl.

One of most surreal relationships is a middle-aged woman whom we first see having sex in a brothel, then routinely showering, getting dressed and coming home to her emotionally distant former husband. Despite being divorced she continues to live with him, often smugly tormenting with him other sexual encounters in front of him.

There's a door-to-door security salesman pitches his wares to the frustrated householders on the block. When he succombs to the pestering by the mentally challenged girl, he'll use her to exact sadistic revenge as reparations for all the abuse he's taken in his pathetic job.

It's also an intensely hot day in the picture. Seidl has his characters walking around in lingerie or bathing suits, randomly stipping off their clothing exposing their unflattering bodies. At one point one of the women takes off her panties and trims her pubic hair. This becomes one of the most peculiar scenes when the elderly callgirl and her two drunk clients argue about 'shitting in their living room'. It then devolves into a frightening scene that pushes the boundries of cinematic abuse comparable to the home invasion scene in "A Clockwork Orange".

This mix of absurd humour and genuinely intense emotional realism keeps us on edge. We never know what to expect and while it may seem like a random series of events and encounters for our characters, it's all in aid of Seidl's disturbing commentary on the false pretentious utopia this lifestyle presents.

At 121mins, its probably 30mins too long, but there's something thrilling in it's audacity, reminding us of the best of the Dogme era when those crazy Danish filmmakers replaced the polish of their films for the honesty of raw storytelling and an often sick self-deprecicating sense of humour.

TIFF Report #9: UNIVERSALOVE

Universalove (2008) dir. Thomas Woshchitz
Starring: Anica Dobra, Daniel Plier, Sascha Migge, Erom Cordeiro, Kyoichi Komoto

**

Director Thomas Woschitz is not to shy with his intentions – to create an abstract film about love, with no allusions toward traditional narrative. “Universalove” is symphony of emotions interconnected not through story but music and imagery.

The film intercuts a number of separate stories about the triumph and tragedy of love. We cut from New York, to Brazil, to Serbia, to Japan, to France. There’s rarely an establishing shot to tell us where we are. Location is deduced by the language the characters are speaking. Each of the stories involves a couple dealing with some form of tragedy or wistful longing for love.

The content of each vignette feels obligatory though and only serves as a makeshift coathanger on which the director can hang his grandiose emotional moments. Much of the action does not make any sense at all either. At one point a Japanese man who has been stalking a woman he doesn’t know gets stabbed by someone we never see. And the American woman at one point gets hit by car, but instead of going to the hospital her husband takes her to their home to die on the couch. Logic, smogic.

The credited co-author of the film is “Naked Lunch”, an Austrian indie rock band that provides the soundtrack throughline. The music is a melancholy rock soundscape of moaning guitars and moody pianos, “Explosions in the Sky” meets “Sigur Ros”. The filmmaker’s passion for the music is evident; unfortunately he doesn’t provide us with the imagery to match the power the music. Both the sound and picture needs to stand on its own for a film like this to work - Godfrey Reggio’s “Qatsi” trilogy being the best example.

Woshchitz’s visual style borrows from Alejando Gonzalez Inarritu (“Amores Perros”, “Babel”). The handheld grainy over-the-shoulder close-ups are also mixed with a number of slo-mo and time-lapse beauty shots. If Woschitz stuck exclusively with the stylized imagery as opposed to the grainy realism, he would have come closer to matching his soundtrack.

In the end “Universalove” is better as a music CD than the harmonious visual and auditory symphonic experience it desires to be. It’s a shame, I applaud the ambition to create such an abstraction, but by not fulfilling the potential only make me more frustrated.

THE COUNTERFEITERS

The Counterfeiters (2008) dir. Stefan Ruzowitzky
Starring:Karl Markovics, August Diehl, Devid Striesow, Martin Brambach

**1/2

“The Counterfeiters” was the Best Foreign Language Film winner at this year’s Oscars. It’s a true story of a group of concentration camp prisoners in WWII who survive the horrors of the Holocaust by making counterfeit money for the Nazis. It’s a story of personal survival amidst the most harrowing of historical events that unfortunately suffers for missing its opportunities to be a 'great' film, instead of just a 'good' film.

Salomon Sorowitsch (Karl Markovics) is introduced in post-war Monte Carlo, gambling, and whoring his life away. Though he's winning with ease, he's not happy. After a night with a beautiful girl, entranced only by his money, she notices his concentration camp tatoo on his arm. This piece of information sends us back to the War to show how Sorowitsch survived the Holocaust.

Sorowitsch was one of the most famous forgers in Europe, he made an unscrupulous living falsifying passports for whoever had the money to pay. But once the war starts, Sorowitsch, like all Jews under German occupation is imprisoned in a concentration camp. Sorowitsch witnesses and is subject to the imaginable brutalities of the concentration camp and vows to survive at all costs. Sorowitsch's expertise becomes a valued asset and he soon finds himself leading a group of forgers with varying skills counterfeiting British Pounds and American Dollars to fund the Nazis' last ditch war effort. The group find solace in their work, but when another member of the team, Burger (August Diehl) objects to the immorality of working for the Nazi cause moral conflicts compound on each other threatening everyone's lives.

The strength of the film is the fundamental and confounding moral question of 'what you do to survive?' Before Burger raised his ethical hand, Sorowitsch thought he knew the answer to this question. But the heart of Ruzowitky's film is how Sorowitsch reconcile's these internal and external conflicts.

By tackling the Holocaust Stefan Ruzowitzky is automatically pitting himself against the great films that have come before it. “The Counterfeiters” is a good film, and perhaps deserves more than 2 1/2 stars, but considering the subject matter and the potential the materials presents, I must dock large points for each opportunity missed.

The cinematography bothered me – so much so, I literally couldn’t look past it. Ruzowitzky and DOP Benedict Neuenfels shoot the film with a blanket of grain it’s actually very difficult to see the detail in the film. They also employ an unnecessary handheld swishing camera technique that doesn’t fit the material. The result is something akin to Alejandro González Iñárritu’s stylized “21 Grams”. The style worked to enhance the grittiness of Iñárritu’s story, but for the Holocaust, the subject does not require such enhancement.

As well, we barely get to see the detail of how the counterfeiters created such perfect recreations of currency. Salomon Sorowitsch was such an artist with his work we needed to see the details of his craftsmanship to truly appreciate the timeconsuming work being done. Like Col. Nicholson is "Bridge Over the River Kwai", seeing the details he obsesses over makes his eventual redemption even more powerful. But with the distracting fuzzy cinematography the preciseness of Sorowitsch's work is lost and with it another layer of internal conflict. 

It's a shame to critique a film of such compelling real life subject matter on the basis of its camera technique, but it's also a shame for the director to distract us away from his story with an unnecessary artifice.

The final on screen text frustrated me even more, when we learn that the Counterfeiters' work in the film was the largest counterfeiting operation in history. That took me by surprise because this scope never got across on screen. The most amount of money we see at one time is a handful of dollar bills. Again this is a missed opporuntity for Ruzowitztky to show us the scale of the operation instead of telling us – and at the end of the film.

"The Counterfeiters" is a good film, but I just can't help what could have been...a shame. Enjoy. 

The Counterfeiters