So I watched this last night. Starring Daniel Auteuil and Juliette Binoche, it's interesting in that it's deeply loved by some critics, reviled by others, and you can quite easily see the reasons for both.
Many American viewers would likely detest it. I didn't though. I found it rather interesting, no minor feet given that it moves at a snail's pace. The craftwork (directing, staging, lighting, costumes, etc.) is very well done, and if you simply look at it as a film that's about how uncomfortable both watching and being watched are, and what being in those positions does to a person (or perhaps as an exercise in the stresses that the world experiences due to the way we perceive events) it's very good. And there are a few great scenes (like the one with Auteuil and his mother) and the family-life events feel real.
But there's a lot to loathe too. One point in particular (and it's a big plot point) makes no sense no matter one's perspective, and a lot of people might not buy the Auteuil character's actions (though I can see them making sense to him at the time). And then there's the matter of end of the film ...
But that said, it could actually be an important film that I should watch again before judging too harshly. So until I do that, I guess I'll leave my comments there.
Posted by armand at August 1, 2006 10:36 AM | TrackBack | Posted to MoviesWell my take on cache is that's its one of those films with this "message" that it wants you to get (here, the whole getting watched thing) which just about anyone is going to get by the end of the film. However, the way it gives you that message is just so bizarre and messed up that the whole thing doesn't really make sense. This is the same reason why I absolutely hate "Signs" - there is no reason to have aliens in that movie - they really shouldn't be there at all. Cache is very much like that. There are so many things in that movie that make no sense at all and I just kept asking myself "why is this here?"
Posted by: ryan at August 1, 2006 03:30 PM | PERMALINKAs you know I hate Signs (soooo bad), and maybe if I thought more about Cache I'd end up seeing it the same way. But a big part of why my initial thought is to like Cache more is that it's just more clever and tricky (traits I appreciate, of course) - and that the way in gets to its point sort of is the point (or illustrates it, I should say), though of course you think the movie is about something else ... but realizing that is of course central to the whole thing, and ... well, even though the plot is a giant MacGuffin in a way, all the layers kind of fit together.
So even if it's a failure, it's trying to be something sort of smart and interesting - whereas Signs was just ompletely stupid and pointless.
And I wouldn't say that there's a lot that makes no sense - just a lot that's not explained - depending on who's seeing what things could make sense. Well, except for that one big thing (I presume you know what I mean - the thing that happens just before she has to send the guests away).
Posted by: Armand at August 1, 2006 05:44 PM | PERMALINKhey, speaking about bad movies, let's talk again about HOW INCREDIBLY F*&KING BAD CRASH WAS, can we, please please please . . .
don't get me wrong, Signs was bad, but Crash was like . . . just, worse.
Posted by: moon at August 2, 2006 09:59 AM | PERMALINKhey - we've got entire threads on this site devoted to discussing the awfulness of crash - feel free to resurrect one of those if you like, because crash (the best picture winner, not that car crash fetish film) was truly AWFUL and we should never forget that :)
Posted by: Armand at August 2, 2006 10:57 AM | PERMALINKand i think signs is antisemitic by association as well.
Posted by: moon at August 2, 2006 12:39 PM | PERMALINK. . . which merely serves to illustrate how important it is that we never forget the message taught us by CRASH, the movie so bad it almost made racism seem appealing.
Posted by: moon at August 2, 2006 12:39 PM | PERMALINKOMG!!! More Crash-related crap!!! And in Pittsburgh!
Posted by: moon at August 3, 2006 12:49 PM | PERMALINKJames Marsden! And Ribisi and Dennis Hopper and Lesley Ann Warren ... and James Marsden!!!
That might actually be enough to get me to see this, the stench (horrific, loathsome odor) of Crash notwithstanding.
Posted by: Armand at August 3, 2006 02:19 PM | PERMALINKregrettably, my tentative response is much the same. maybe crash sucked as a premature sophomore effort to squeeze something out before its time, or in virtue of the collaborators.
Posted by: moon at August 3, 2006 06:29 PM | PERMALINK