Benny's Video

It's all about shock value. Haneke's intro for this one is to desensitize you for the rest. What happened with the teenagers is nothing compared to what we see first because the first one is real (and we know it's real), what happened with the teenagers is fake and off-camera.

The discussion happens from this point. Why aren't we more shocked? Why is Benny so insensitive to what he did? It's because of his hobby. He doesn't see it as real, it's all from his camera point of view, like everything he saw before. It's just digital or analog information put on screen. He sees himself as a viewer and a camera at the same time. He is dehumanized, he is a machine, that gun was part of him as well. And like all Haneke, it's shocking.

In his second film of the "glaciation trilogy", Haneke once more hauntingly draws a torpid affluent society where the people live at cross purposes, where conservations are rare and toilsome, where communication is alienated to a technical process. Accordingly to that, the emotional life of the protagonists became stunted: Benny, after his "act", shows concernment only through surrogate actions, just like letting his hair cropped. The father immediately slyly pushes to damage mitigation, whereas only the mother indicates rudiments of emotion, though somehow tense. In a confusing blend of film and video images, Haneke creates a second level of reality, so to speak, where Benny's senseless "act" perfectly integrates in the horror pictures of the evening news and makes it open for question. At the same time, Haneke commits himself to no specific answer and denies any absolution. That is what makes this film so horrifying - there simply is no telling argument that makes a murderer out of a young boy.

What makes BENNY'S VIDEO so disturbing is threefold:

#1- Benny (Arno Frisch) himself. We get the definite impression that something isn't quite right about him from the beginning. Mr. Frisch plays Benny with cold, lifeless ease. He is just going through the motions of everyday existence. When the unthinkable occurs, it's very matter-of-fact, like brushing crumbs off a table.

#2- Benny's parents (Angela Winkler and Ulrich Muhe). They are almost as mindless as their son. After watching the video, their reaction is, while not altogether unexpected, jaw-dropping nonetheless.

#3- Director Michael Heneke, who keeps everything clinical and icy. He shows us a psychopath in a "normal" environment, just doing the daily routines. The shocking parts are presented as mere interruptions in the daily grind. The motives of all concerned are what bring out the true terror. There are no masked maniacs here, only upper class people forced to deal with an "unfortunate" problem.

A classic film about the horror of indifference and self-preservation...

If it is supposed to be a Haneke film, it does have a couple of pitfalls. It is not Haneke's best, perhaps because maybe he felt the pressure to top Der Siebente Kontinent. As someone said previously, it is rather heavyweight towards the end.

As a film without regarding who directed it, it is very good. It provides you with a raw documentary vision of a boy and his voyeuristic trend towards violence. It is rather simple yet, an amazing idea. Benny could be the boy living next door and, in fact, he is. He is not frightning on a "I know what you did last Summer" fashion. He is _truly_ frightning because he is a normal kid. And I do know a few like him. The ones I know never actually murdered anyone but, perhaps they simply didn't do it because they are afraid. Benny hasn't come to terms with that moral feeling yet and perhaps he never will.

On a metaphorical sense, it is the best portrait (along with Der Siebente Kontinent) of present day Austria, at least the Austria I see at some September rainy Vienna weekends...

Benny's Video is a slow methodical drama circling around the psyche of character decisions made through the movie. It has a strong start, and one that puts you into it right away with some disturbing footage. But then after 30 minutes or so it becomes a uneventful, both in events and character. Leading to a very slow end.

Directing is static, impactful and methodical. It's not afraid to sway from the norm, long takes that last forever. Enabling the viewer to be sucked in in certain moments. That is when it works, but there's also long lasting scenes on simply a TV. Now the I get it, the violence shown in the news and movie is supposed to be interesting and the 'story'' behind the actions. But it's dull and repeated too often. That said the directing in general managed to mostly keep me engaged and curious.

Sadly that curiosity is not rewarded. As a story it fits the notion of ''art house'' film, without a proper message to end with. But with a message as a whole. Perhaps back then it was more relevant, surely. But it makes for a weaker film now.

Acting is a standout, great work from all involved. Music, non existent. Sound design, maybe I'm weird but the eating and subtle sounds made this movie more uncomfortable than the disturbing stuff. Or maybe it was a mix of both. Just odd.

Decent but not as effective as I'd hoped.