Featured Audience Ratings

• paul o

  
  The feeling of emptiness your heart receives in the end is close to unbearable.

• Daniel P

  
  The film opens with one of the more daring static shots you'll ever see, a couple of solid minutes of footage of the protagonists' house, and people coming and going, passing by, and - of course, this is Haneke - a moment where the tape is rewound to remind you that you are… More
  The film opens with one of the more daring static shots you'll ever see, a couple of solid minutes of footage of the protagonists' house, and people coming and going, passing by, and - of course, this is Haneke - a moment where the tape is rewound to remind you that you are watching a movie. In come the voices of Daniel Auteuil and Juliette Binoche, who we learn are watching this tape that has been sent to them. Here begins the story, in which more mysterious packages arrrive, all seemingly with the goal of getting through the exterior of their happy, consumer-society life to reveal that which is... wait for it... hidden. By degrees, the film reveals more pieces from one character's past - who struggles with how much of it to tell to the other charcter - and it sets up misdirects along the way, too, before closing with a final shot that - were it not for the 20+-minute interview on with Haneke in the DVD's special features - I might have interpreted totally differently: there's an element that apparently, only half the viewers notice, and the interpretation of the film comes out differently as a result. Hard to go into much more detail with this film without ruining the intrigue, but suffice to say, it has all the calling cards of the classic psychological thriller, and that it's one of the more intellectually accomplished films you will see in the way that it succeeds in leaving everything open to interpretation, and questioning constantly what is in the open and what is... once more?... hidden. Fantastic film. This is my third Haneke (Funny Games; The White Ribbon), and I'm learning that I've really been missing out.

• Chris W

  
  Ah Michael Haneke, we meet again. This time around, Haneke delivers a film about a Parisian family whose quiet and rather mundane existance is disturbed by the arrival of videotapes of their home, as well as some menacing drawings, all of them sent by an anonymous sender for seemingly… More
  Ah Michael Haneke, we meet again. This time around, Haneke delivers a film about a Parisian family whose quiet and rather mundane existance is disturbed by the arrival of videotapes of their home, as well as some menacing drawings, all of them sent by an anonymous sender for seemingly unkniwn reasons. There are some theories as to who is sending them, and why, but the answers aren't really the focus. The film is mainly interested in examinging guilt and paranoia, and the effects they can have, whether they are really justified or not. It's a very interesting concept, and the film gives some pretty good food for thought. It has a heavy Twilight Zone vibe to it, as well as some similar stuff that was used previously in David Lynch's Lost Highway. I guess you could call this a thriller, but not really a whole lot happens, and yet, the film is still somehow very creepy and unsettling, like the bulk of Haneke's work. Also like them, this employs his trademark use of no soundtrack, lengthy static shots and long takes, usually with a point, instead of just being hollow displays of flashiness. I did like this movie, but I'm torn between the rating I've given it and a half star more. On one hand, the film is intriguing and thought provoking, and I like the style and techniques at hand, on the other, the film is rather maddening in that it's not for all tastes, and will drive some people nuts because of it's deliberate pace and open-ended nature. Some might like how it ends, others will hate it. I'm not sure what I think of it yet. If you want to see something that is oozing with artistic craft, and makes the oridnary eeire, and also makes you work instead of just spoon feeding you everything, then give this one a go. If not, then find something else to watch.

• Emil K

  
  Cache is truly a good film from Austrian Michael Haneke. His work, in my opinion, has often based on a too much of shocking the audiences than telling a thoughtful story. His interesting and provoking Benny's Video was the right step to a right direction, even if the… More
  Cache is truly a good film from Austrian Michael Haneke. His work, in my opinion, has often based on a too much of shocking the audiences than telling a thoughtful story. His interesting and provoking Benny's Video was the right step to a right direction, even if the shock-elements were there, it showed that Haneke is capable of something much more deeper than being just cold and calculating director. I guess that for me he will be always a very contradictory person as a director. Sometimes he makes me angry with his solutions as a director, especially with his more nihilistic films like Seventh Continent and Funny Games, but when he finds his balance, he can actually prove that he has potential as a director. Films like Benny's Video, Code Inconnu or Cache are all good examples of his better skills . In many ways Cache is his most ambtious work to date and also his most complex. From the surface it may seem like a ordinary thriller, but that it is not. Haneke's genius here lies in the details and the nuances of story. He brilliantly plays with audiences expectations and turns them completely upside down. This is a deeply psychological film that actually turns out to be story about guilt and the hidden past. If only Haneke's own style would not be so cold and distant, then this film could be even something great. There is nothing wrong of being a minimalist with style, but there has to be connection between audience and the film or otherwise it may turn out to be a bit indifferent. Haneke does not achieve the connection, but at least he makes us think and he does that big time. In Cache there are no simple answers.

• Anthony L

  
  Hitchcock once said that it's not the bang that is important but rather the anticipation of it that is. With Hidden, Haneke is obviously in agreement and his admiration for the late director shows. What Haneke brings to the table is just as good though, and that's that it… More
  Hitchcock once said that it's not the bang that is important but rather the anticipation of it that is. With Hidden, Haneke is obviously in agreement and his admiration for the late director shows. What Haneke brings to the table is just as good though, and that's that it doesn't matter 'who done it', it is why they have done it that is important. Maybe not a new idea but Haneke's film is very unique. It is unsettling to say the least but subtle where it counts. A truly great film, a very modern classic. It seems that much like Haneke himself, this film is either loved or hated, I can't help but think a lot of people actually missed what happened in the end just as the credits start to role. It may need second a viewing.

• Jonathan H

  
  Michael Haneke's brilliant, challenging masterpiece begins with an outstanding solitary opening shot. At first it looks like a well framed long shot; then, he lets it linger for a while and you might think it's a POV shot. Is someone spying on the house in the center of the… More
  Michael Haneke's brilliant, challenging masterpiece begins with an outstanding solitary opening shot. At first it looks like a well framed long shot; then, he lets it linger for a while and you might think it's a POV shot. Is someone spying on the house in the center of the frame? Then, you realize it's a prerecorded videotape. The seamless integration of those three readings of one shot perfectly sets the stage for a thoughtful mediation on voyeurism and the age-old self-reflexive idea of the viewer being an active participant in the process by "watching." Then, Cache becomes a clinical, psychological and social study of a respectable individual in European society. Then, it morphs into a study of a larger contemporary European segment of its population. We start seeing themes of guilt and social responsibility develop, and we find out that a central character has a shaky past that correlates with the Paris massacre of 1961 (this is a Haneke film, after all). Then the film ends with a great, ambiguous medium static shot of a high school that will make you think for hours hence. But be careful: if you think too much about the plot, about "whodunit," you're missing the point. Sure, those things are fascinating to think about, and Haneke gives you plenty of clues to chew on (hell, even Ebert famously wrote about these clues), but the story is really a Macguffin about something much deeper -- which is Haneke's bold genius at work. This is his indictment of French bourgeois culture, and how we "hide" ourselves from the mistakes and despicable things we do. We avoid accountability at all costs. Georges' (Daniel Auteuil) final moments are directly symbolic of that. Put it this way: everyone wants to know who sent the tapes. Haneke, when pressed with this question, slyly answered, "It was definitely one of the characters." He's absolutely right. It was him. He delivered a tape to France called "Cache" (hidden), so its citizens can hold the mirror up to their collective faces. It's a coy Brechtian clue, and a fantastic piece of self-reflexivity.

• Randy T

  
  Michael Haneke's visual proclamation that 'truth' and 'reality' are both relative terms. I truly enjoyed this film but I'm finding it rather difficult to explain why. I suppose it's simply a matter of perception. <i>Caché</i>

• Robert C

  
  There is some great work here, from both the director and the actors involved. Though I think that this may be a little too "subtle" for some viewers to really appreciate. In fact I was completely confused after first seeing it. It wasn't until I had some time to… More
  There is some great work here, from both the director and the actors involved. Though I think that this may be a little too "subtle" for some viewers to really appreciate. In fact I was completely confused after first seeing it. It wasn't until I had some time to process it that it "came together" for me. And even now, I feel that it is flawed in several ways. Here are three of them. First, I can't help but feel that if Georges (and his family) were perhaps a little less likable, the premise might have been a bit more powerful. I think we were meant to feel like they were a little snobby, but I didn?t feel that way/ Second, I ended up feeling like the fact that he was being tormented for what was a essentially a stupid (and cruel) childhood prank that any good parent should have been able to figure out and rectify, made for a weak crux for the story. Third, if there had been no drawings accompanying the mysterious video tapes and it was only Georges guilt that lead him back to Majid and that unfortunate childhood event, it would make the final shot of the film much more powerful and very thought provoking.

• Dan S

  
  A very well-acted, nonetheless disappointing psychological thriller in which a family is terrorized by an anonymous stalker, who leaves violent drawings and video tapes consisting of following his victims around, at their doorstep. Haneke inserts many of his calling cards here, such… More
  A very well-acted, nonetheless disappointing psychological thriller in which a family is terrorized by an anonymous stalker, who leaves violent drawings and video tapes consisting of following his victims around, at their doorstep. Haneke inserts many of his calling cards here, such as prolonged scenes, a tense atmosphere, sudden acts of violence, and ultimately, an anti-ending. This formula worked wonders in his heavily underrated near-masterpiece, "Funny Games" (US Version), however, it doesn't work as well here. The slow burn exercise he puts his viewers through doesn't completely prove rewarding, as he ends on a giant cliffhanger while not really explaining many of the questions the family, and viewer, still have. As far as performances go, Daniel Auteuil and Juliette Binoche are pitch-perfect, and they do a good job showing different sides to their characters. To me however, I just felt an overwhelming amount of dissatisfaction with the conclusion of the story, it felt very incomplete.

• Lorenzo v

  
  <i>"I wanted you to be present..."</i> A married couple is terrorized by a series of videotapes planted on its front porch that may be the direct result from an event from years ago. <center><font size=+2 face="Century… More
  <i>"I wanted you to be present..."</i> A married couple is terrorized by a series of videotapes planted on its front porch that may be the direct result from an event from years ago. <center><font size=+2 face="Century Schoolbook"><b><u>REVIEW</u></b></font></center> Gripping yet subtle thriller that brings back the eerie joy in voyeurism through film. Adding his own paranoid vision to the classic detached cinematography, Michael Haneke spins a misunderstood web of class struggle, emotional repression, and stalker fear in the guise of this slow but effective whodunit. Though not the masterpiece some may claim this bold film to be, Cache effectively puts you into the increasingly tense atmosphere dealing with this French couple's mysterious "watcher". Many viewers might be turned off by the movie's indecision to make up it's entire mind for us, although the writer incorporates enough social and psychological insight to make the main plot take a back seat to the underlying themes that represent what is truly "hidden".

• E.J. B

  
  Cache is full of amazing yet subtle moments and it fully requires audience participation.

• Gordon A

  
  Tense and unsettling tale of the past catching up with you, with a nicely ambiguous ending. Little happens or is resolved which can be off putting. Certainly an enigma if not terrifically enjoyable.

• Lady D

  
  "The first great film of the 21st Century" - well, that's what it says on the cover of the dvd. I think this is the first sub-titled film for me, that seems to lose something in translation. According to the synopsis ("This utterly compelling psychological… More
  "The first great film of the 21st Century" - well, that's what it says on the cover of the dvd. I think this is the first sub-titled film for me, that seems to lose something in translation. According to the synopsis ("This utterly compelling psychological thriller..."), I feel this didn't come across at all, perhaps that was something you sensed in certains tones of the voices etc as opposed to any visual content. This film was a disappointment to me, as I really was expecting good things, however it seemed like a bit of an anti-climax and had a very abrupt ending which I didn't understand at all.

• Jani H

  
  Interesting french thriller by Michael Haneke (better remember his name...). It's difficult to review this movie cuz at first I got this feeling of disappointment but the minute the credits started to roll I was amazed. Every shot is thoroughly planned and there's very… More
  Interesting french thriller by Michael Haneke (better remember his name...). It's difficult to review this movie cuz at first I got this feeling of disappointment but the minute the credits started to roll I was amazed. Every shot is thoroughly planned and there's very minimalistic photography. But it's only a positive thing cuz it doesn't take away the attention of the perfect acting. The story itself could've been more interesting, leaving some questions unanswered.

• Bannan i

  
  This movie is really something else...it's amazing how there is no need for special effects of any kind...and how repeating certain things can really get under your skin. The actors are amazing in here, regardless of how well known they are/aren't. But really...and the… More
  This movie is really something else...it's amazing how there is no need for special effects of any kind...and how repeating certain things can really get under your skin. The actors are amazing in here, regardless of how well known they are/aren't. But really...and the certain events in here are SO IN-YOUR-FACE....and you wonder what the hell happened....jump back and then tune in anticipation wondering if that was just now...what's going to happen next. It seriously scared me, intensely. Just wow. The sad thing was...when it ended...it stopped making sense...and I didn't get it. Maybe it's something that needs to be watched again and again to get it...but overall the atmosphere was just phenomenal to really make you think. More review...later.

• Tsubaki S

  
  Is it that hard for Haneke to actually go and make a solid statement about anything at all? I'm tired of all his gimmicks and tricks, i didn't loathe this as i did with The Piano Teacher and Funny Games, but like those two, i felt i wasted my time after the film ended. Go… More
  Is it that hard for Haneke to actually go and make a solid statement about anything at all? I'm tired of all his gimmicks and tricks, i didn't loathe this as i did with The Piano Teacher and Funny Games, but like those two, i felt i wasted my time after the film ended. Go get a real job Mr Haneke, you are as pretentious and as clueless as your euro-trash collegue Lars Von Trier.

• Luke B

  
  Nothing short of pure cinematic genius. This really is one of the most stunningly great awesome films of the last 10 years. It takes a dangerously slow pace for a thriller but pays off, you'll have to keep your wits about you as this is never in your face. The shots are… More
  Nothing short of pure cinematic genius. This really is one of the most stunningly great awesome films of the last 10 years. It takes a dangerously slow pace for a thriller but pays off, you'll have to keep your wits about you as this is never in your face. The shots are beautifully crafted moments of art and the performances are strikingly real. A rare cinematic treat for anyone with enough patience to last til the credits.

• William S

  
  Maybe I'm missing something somewhere!? To me this is anti-film. Absolutely nothing happened for 110 minutes! NOTHING! Literally! I would like to maybe watch this again just to see if I missed something some place but the thought of putting myself through again what amounts to… More
  Maybe I'm missing something somewhere!? To me this is anti-film. Absolutely nothing happened for 110 minutes! NOTHING! Literally! I would like to maybe watch this again just to see if I missed something some place but the thought of putting myself through again what amounts to staring at someone's house for 90 minutes makes me want to self harm! I really payed attention I watched and watched but I would have gotten more out of watching the cloud formations from my bedroom window. Whole portions of this film involved a camera plonked down somewhere and after what seems like an eternity a figure in long shot will pass by! This story could quite easily have made a 30 minute story - and even that would be a tad hard going I think! Totally and utterly disappointing. Haneke's previous film Funny Games was an assault on the senses and the cruel and cynical story made me sick with anger. But I think that was the point. Give me that vile little film rather than this empty 'thriller' anyday.

• Ross C

  
  The director himself (Haneke) toys with his characters leading to a thriller without a reveal. I would forgive the frustration if there was just a bit more action, but the film ends up feeling too repetitive, leaving me without any sympathy for the central theme of guilt and racism.

• Red L

  
  I'm not sure what to think about this movie. Some unknown person is sending the hero (Georges) personal films. Georges is not being totally honest with his wife which causes lots of grief between them. Yet, we never find out what Georges problem is or who is sending the tapes.… More
  I'm not sure what to think about this movie. Some unknown person is sending the hero (Georges) personal films. Georges is not being totally honest with his wife which causes lots of grief between them. Yet, we never find out what Georges problem is or who is sending the tapes. Perhaps it is good art, but I found it frustrating. (in French with subtitles)

Read all 20 featured audience ratings