Amour (2012)

AMOUR is what you do with all that youthful love after the youthful part is no more. Brought to you by Michael Haneke, a director that seems to court controversy as much as pursue art, as if in his mind they were both one in the same. His most violent expression thus far was in the enigmatic FUNNY GAMES (1997, remade by Haneke in English in 2007) a movie designed almost so that you would hate something about it. I say that because I enjoyed his CODE UNKNOWN (2000) and I think his film CACHE (2005) is one of the top ten films on the first decade of this century. CACHE is a straightforward film with intrigue, subtlety and even a little shock value, but all doled out in proportions that are digestible mind food. Haneke’s excuse for FUNNY GAMES was that his violence in the movie was a harsh commentary on violence, as if Jerry Falwell began making skin flicks to point out the immorality of skin flicks.

Haneke’s 2001 film, THE PIANO TEACHER got a lot of ink either because his subject matter of unhealthy sexual relationships was daring or that it struck a nerve with movie critics. I’m not one to think that every perverse human practice needs to be documented in art films, but for those that do Michael Haneke is here to oblige. His last two films have been a change of pace. 2009s THE WHITE RIBBON is an early 20th century period piece shot in black and white that would have been a comment on fascism had I finished it. I gave up on it after an hour because of fatigue, meaning to return but never finding the motivation.

And here is Amour (2012) nominated for Best Picture about an elderly couple trying to cope with aging. Realistic to the point that you get to read your own meaning into it. It can be a commentary on how money won’t buy immortality if you want it to be. It can also be a comment on how no one is prepared for the reality of human frailty or a comment about how adult children and adult parents grow apart. All of these themes have been mined to death in cinema, but as a change of pace for Haneke I can see why the Academy reacted as they did. Haneke’s not trying to shock them is a shock unto itself. Emmanuelle Riva is also nominated for Best Actress without any argument from me, but ignored is the actor that plays her husband, Jean-Louis Trintignant. Hers is a portrayal of a degenerative illness while his burden is the more difficult one, having to show the quiet angst of picking up the pieces. I’ve seen enough French films through the years to wonder why this one stands out in the minds of voters. It probably has more to do with 10 open slots than anything else, not a knock on it as much as a curiosity. If you are a person with the tolerance for foreign films you will most likely appreciate the execution, but I doubt you will want to hit the replay button.