A haunting, thought-provoking masterpiece

Rating: 9/10 (21 November 2010)

This is the kind of movie which haunts you and keeps you thinking long after it is over. If you are looking for a clear-cut thriller where the culprit is clearly revealed at the end, this film is not for you. Like many of his films, Haneke purposely does not provide answers and instead shows that things are disjointed and the "who" is less important than the "why." It is often speculated that the pastor's children are the one's who "did it" in this movie but this is the wrong approach both in terms of overall message of the film. The film is about seething anger that comes from unjust abuse and punishment, a top-down authoritarian society and about the types of behavior which sough the seeds for more violent, totalitarian societies, be they in Hitler's Germany or Stalin's Soviet Union. So we immediately see the basic power structures in the film: the baron oppresses the workers, the parents oppress their children, men oppress women and the cycle of abuse spirals downward until even the most innocent are the victims. We see 4 "pillars" of the community – the baron, the pastor, the doctor and the teacher. The hierarchy of the community is in that order with the baron acting as overlord, the pastor there to maintain the social order and prop up the baron's power, the doctor who is educated and needed in the community, thereby commanding respect. The teacher has little power and is not taken terribly seriously by many, yet he also does not seem to be the object of such anger. Then we have the social stratum - the baron, the steward, the employees, the farm workers and then the Polish migrant workers. We have the parent/child dynamic, where any misstep of a child outside can destroy a family, so the children, particularly the pastor's children, are held to a ridiculously high standard. Finally, many of the men oppress the women. At the same time, all of those at the bottom of the ladder start to revolt and strike out at others, sometimes hurting the most innocent. Central to the film, of course, is the children. The overriding point of the film is not so much who did what specific act but rather that this is a society of constant punishment and retribution. It is almost certain that the pastor's children are at least aware of some of the heinous acts. They are themselves victims of physical and emotional abuse yet are expected to be models to the community. They can be pushed only so far until the power structure is challenged and Klara kills her father's pet canary – once again striking out at the weakest. But there is much more to the story. First, the doctor is attacked, making the "healer" in need of healing. We have the farmer's son destroying the baron's cabbage out of anger for the way his mother died. In fact, one of the big culminations of the film is the big harvest festival where the baron can show his largesse to the workers, an event sanctioned by the pastor. But the event, coinciding with the death of a worker, seems to cement the resentment of the baron's family and the excess with which they live. This is followed by the savage beating of Sigi, the window left open at the steward's home to hurt the baby, the fire at the barn, the doctor's son wandering around in a confused state, the incident involving Sigi's flute and the severe beating of Karli. Clearly the open window and the flute incident were by the steward's children and the motive appears to be anger about being deprived things – from a new baby to Sigi who, the epitome of a spoiled brat, to a father who would kill his son for embarrassing him in the eyes of the baron. It would also seem unlikely that the pastor's kids would have caused the barn fire as Martin was tied down at the time and Klara seems accounted for. Now several points should be noted: 1) Perhaps Anni and/or the midwife would have a motive in attacking the doctor – he mistreated them both, sexually molested the daughter and perhaps others. 2) In the scene on the bridge, Martin reveals that he sees everything as being dictated by God, there is no free will. So any punishment meted out is "God's will" 3) Note that parallel and name similarity between Klara and Karli. Diametrical opposites: she as the eldest(?) female pastor's child is held to the very highest standards in the community, she represents order and a threat to the power structure, he is utterly powerless, flouts all social paradigms, has a questionable parentage. Karla is very aware of this power structure and is willing to mete out punishment herself. 4) What are we to make about the doctor? Why did he leave town so abruptly separately without the midwife, taking "her" child along? Was his sexual abuse going to be made public? Did the midwife have a role in her son's beating in more of this "trickle down" rage? Did the pastor make threats? There are no easy answers and Haneke doesn't want there to be. The point is that abuse travels downward until eventually some of the abused strike back. The individual culpability is not as important as the overall mindset of the authoritarian society which preys on the ones who are weaker. It is also worth noting the backdrop of WWI. It illustrates how these personal agendas are temporarily cast aside by larger, more sweeping changes but also how a war can start for the most part over one individual – the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand. So like in the film, individual behaviors can branch out and change an entire community or, in some cases, a whole society. The mindset of this generation would come into focus as its children grow up twenty years later in Hitler's Germany.