What we have here...

Rating: 8/10 (8 October 2009)

...is partly a recycling of the 'Caché' concept, Haneke's previous (original) film which proved to be an international hit. Again we have a whodunnit to conceive greater themes and to show ?more important problems? that are not as easily perceivable on first sight as a dead body. I think I won't reveal too much if I say that again, just like in 'Caché', Haneke doesn't reveal to us what, I am sure, most of the audience wants to know, whether they like to admit it or not. I won't even bother looking for the solution, because I think I know M.H. well enough to be convinced that he did his best to leave the big mystery unsolvable. I admit that I was foolish enough to look forward to that ?banal? piece of information. But as the movie started to become suspenseful 'Caché' came to mind again and I remembered that what I am watching isn't a Hitchcock movie, even if he enjoys coquetting with the elements that Hitchcock is partly responsible for popularizing.
Apparently Haneke fears that revealing the perpetrator of the story's crimes to the audience would make this person the scapegoat for all the wrongdoings in the community. It certainly is an argument. But you could just as well say that without blaming somebody specific for the most obvious crimes everybody is to blame, but only abstractly, diminishing the power of the indictment that this film is, while if you have a physical perpetrator the more intelligent among the viewers will also realize the share of the blame of many members of the community. The definite revealing of the perpetrator would make it a more powerful statement just like it makes it more powerful to have the story take place at a specific time and at a specific place. It's what elevates it from abstractness to a parable that connects itself automatically to our own time and situation.
After two viewings I could half-forgive this audacious practice in 'Caché', because it indeed had interesting and more unusual things to say that go beyond a simple whodunnit. In 'Das weiße Band' I can easily half-forgive it since the movie is less of a mystery, instead the focus is more on making us witness how this village's community reacts to the crimes as well as how adults raise their children, but I wouldn't be able to tolerate this trick a third time in an M.H. film.
Violence is the order of the day in 'Das weiße Band' and the imposed restrictions gave about anyone in this village reason to do those things, which makes it less important to actually know who did what. As usual life at those times is one full of conventions, restrictions and artificial politeness motivated by fear. Superficially it is the old story of hierarchy where those with the most power still are no more free or happy than those with the least. But thanks to the subtle way this is handled it isn't a film about anything in an obvious way. First and foremost it is the portrayal of a few people and families in a rural community.
The acting by the whole cast is excellent as usual, which notably includes the children too, and the B&W photography as well as the set design and costumes and the whole mise-en-scène create a convincing pre-WWI atmosphere. Plot-wise it also is a more interesting film than 'Caché' thanks to its complexity, telling stories of not only one but several households. The 2 1/2 hours pass swiftly and it is almost not enough time to make us understand all those people. A film that profits from rewatches, I reckon.