Michael
Directed by Markus Schleinzer
Written by Markus Schleinzer
Written by Markus Schleinzer
with Michael Fuith, David Rauchenberger, Ursula Strauss
2011
Quietly unpredictable, and too restrained to be shocking, this Austrian drama plays its horrific scenario so deadpan it almost emerges as a black comedy. Reminiscent of more than one famous case of child abuse, Michael lays out a lifestyle of secrets and deception in the most clinical and emotionless way, and leaves you feeling dazed from tension. Played with a weird simmering dorkiness by Fuith, the outwardly dull bachelor Michael is in fact holding a young boy prisoner in the cellar of his home. The worst details of this existence are deliberately kept out of sight in favour of the emotional aspects of their home life, and the face Michael presents to the outside world. Efficient but nearly mute in his job at an insurance company, he only really communicates with his captive, whom he alternately plays with, cares for, and abuses.
The unswerving steadiness with which director Markus Schleinzer films each scene is well-judged; discomforting and addictive in equal measure, entirely because of its laconic nature. Meanwhile some long takes are so perfectly realised you can’t help but smile. This is cinema based on the visuals rather than the script; dialogue is kept simply a frame to arrange the actors, who are all utterly convincing even though most of the roles are miniscule. Apart from Michael the only character that isn’t an outside threat is his ten-year-old victim, but the paedophile compels despite giving almost nothing away as a person. He’s expressionless for at least ninety percent of the film, although we see snatches of a psychopathic sense of humour, amongst other things, in his relationship with the boy.
It’s only fair to say that Michaelbenefits a lot from its subject matter, and it’s also important to remember that the scenario is not an entirely fictional one. The truth is that as well produced as the movie is, the fact it fascinates has a lot to do with its real-life counterparts humming around the back of your mind as you watch. But this can’t detract from the thought the filmmakers put into presenting the man’s daily life, and the skill with which they exploit your prior knowledge. The last section is a masterpiece of dramatic irony, while the final blow is as under control as everything else: not exactly satisfying, but it’s difficult to say what else you need to see.
This film is provocative in the best way possible. Not once does it treat its dark subject matter flippantly, but at the same time the sheer black awkwardness of the situations Michael finds himself in, as if you are being dared to feel sorry for him, produces points where all you can do is find it funny. Maybe you think this inappropriate, but personally I feel the exact opposite: a film dealing with something like this needs to remember it’s a film, and needs to do more than mimic real-life horrors hoping to feed off people’s natural disgust. Humour, however black, is a way of maintaining this distance, and if I hadn’t wanted to laugh at points I honestly wouldn’t think this film was as good. As it is, if I wasn’t gritting my teeth, I was grinning.
Tom
0 comments:
Post a Comment