MCN Blogs

By DP30 david@thehotbuttonl.com

DP/30: Amour, writer/director Michael Haneke (LA 2012)

Please see “DP/30 @ Cannes 2012: Amour, writer/director Michael Haneke” for more conversation specific to this movie.

This Interview interpreted by Robert Grey.

7 Responses to “DP/30: Amour, writer/director Michael Haneke (LA 2012)”

  1. Kevin says:

    Maybe next time you could treat Micheal with a little more respect, and ask him some decent questions?

  2. David Poland says:

    Perhaps you will give me a list…

  3. shank says:

    Watching this interview is so awkward..Bad silly questions..totally wasted the great man’s time

  4. scooterzz says:

    finally got around to watching this and must call bullshit on those first two comments…where exactly is the ‘disrespect’ and what questions would you two geniuses asked the ‘great man’? (really?…’great man’?…jeeze, fanboys can sometimes be such boors)…

  5. David Poland says:

    This attitude came up on the first Haneke interview too. Not sure what they want. Don’t much care. Haneke seemed engaged. That’s what I am after.

    It’s funny. I was quite intimidated the first time around with MH and with Olivier Assayas, The Dardennes, and a few others. Each time, it’s turned out that the director was far more down to earth and less up his/their own ass than I feared. So I remember pretty much every one of those with great pleasure.

    I had a pretty specific conversation about Amour with Haneke in Cannes and I’m not sure there was a ton more to say about that film. He is not terribly interested in self-dissection. So I did in this one what I do with many extremely talented people… I had a conversation as I might over dinner. I’m not saying it’s always great. But I don’t run into many people who are anxious to run as soon as the shoot is over. And MH and I did 10 minutes – that I wish I had on tape – on today’s indie film scene. He was not insulted or unhappy with the conversation. And that’s really my first goal. Then I pray that it is interesting for the viewers.

  6. Niall Maher says:

    David,

    What you do – I love.
    Your interviews give an insight into both the creative and the fiscal aspects of the film making process.Fantastic.

    Now David – the rub – PLEASE PLEASE have a bit of a chat with your camera crew.

    It’s below par, the constant re-framing suggest people justifying their existence.

    One good Mid – and THAT is a good interview.

    Sorry to leave a negative comment.

  7. Matt says:

    Thank you Niall, exactly what I was thinking:

    Great job David, but the camera is irritatingly distracting.

    Simplify please. One MID all the way.

Leave a Reply

DP/30

Quote Unquotesee all »

“I’ve been pleasantly surprised by how many recappers, while clearly over their heads, are baseline sympathetic to finding themselves routinely unmoored, even if that means repeating over and over that this is closer to “avant-garde art” than  normal TV to meet the word count. My feed was busy connecting the dots to Peter Tscherkassky (gas station), Tony Conrad (the giant staring at feedback of what we’ve just seen), Pat O’Neill (bombs away) et al., and this is all apposite — visual and conceptual thinking along possibly inadvertent parallel lines. If recappers can’t find those exact reference points to latch onto, that speaks less to willful ignorance than to how unfortunately severed experimental film is from nearly all mainstream discussions of film because it’s generally hard to see outside of privileged contexts (fests, academia, the secret knowledge of a self-preserving circle working with a very finite set of resources and publicity access to the larger world); resources/capital/access/etc. So I won’t assign demerits for willful incuriosity, even if some recappers are reduced, in some unpleasantly condescending/bluffing cases, to dismissing this as a “student film” — because presumably experimentation is something the seasoned artist gets out of their system in maturity, following the George Lucas Model of graduating from Bruce Conner visuals to Lawrence Kasdan’s screenwriting.”
~ Vadim Rizov Goes For It, A Bit

“On the first ‘Twin Peaks,’ doing TV was like going from a mansion to a hut. But the arthouses are gone now, so cable television is a godsend — they’re the new art houses. You’ve got tons of freedom to do the work you want to do on TV, but there is a restriction in terms of picture and sound. The range of television is restricted. It’s hard for the power and the glory to come through. In other words, you can have things in a theater much louder and also much quieter. With TV, the quieter things have to be louder and the louder things have to be quieter, so you have less dynamics. The picture quality — it’s fine if you have a giant television with a good speaker system, but a lot of people will watch this on their laptops or whatever, so the picture and the sound are going to suffer big time. Optimally, people should be watching TV in a dark room with no disturbances and with as big and good a picture as possible and with as great sound as possible.”
~ David Lynch