Sony Pictures Classics | Release Date: December 23, 2005
6.6
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 255 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
167
Mixed:
18
Negative:
70
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
9
StanS.Aug 21, 2007
My take is that Majiid's son set up the surveillance probably without his father's knowledge. The long shot towards the end of young Majiid being forcibly taken from the Laurent home iis extremely sad.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
ShaseH.Jan 24, 2006
Very original story, with a realistic style and interesting cinematography.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
BenK.Jan 30, 2006
A film more about the viewer than what appears onscreen. We must know, we demand to know what it all means but the are no satisfying answers.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
CarynH.Jan 30, 2006
So bad--where to begin? How can the whole premice of a movie be a six years olds feeling of extreme guilt at being jealous of another child (totally normal). But it is a great example of horrible parenting. George doesn't like the So bad--where to begin? How can the whole premice of a movie be a six years olds feeling of extreme guilt at being jealous of another child (totally normal). But it is a great example of horrible parenting. George doesn't like the little Algerian boy so we better send him off. Oh no, Pierrot's not home yet (it was 10:15) I'll just sit here by the tv and keep working? And then they just hang out all night waiting. Wouldn't a parent be calling any and everyone the kid knows? Wouldn't teams of friends, neighbors, whoever be out looking? And then he comes back like nothing happened. So manyunrelated, unrealistic things going on in this film. (what's with all the swimming scenes?) All adds up to nothing. Are we really suppose to believe the 2 sons concocted this whole thing? And what was the point of the suicide? Maybe Majid did all the taping to lure Georges to witness his suicide? Please. No matter which scenario you use the movie only makes sense as a movie--and a bad one at that. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
JeffKJan 4, 2006
Cache is not up to the standard Haneke set with Code Unknown, but he comes close. Why do Americans filmgoers always require an easy resolution at film's end? In Cache, it's simply not possible to do so, or if Haneke did he would Cache is not up to the standard Haneke set with Code Unknown, but he comes close. Why do Americans filmgoers always require an easy resolution at film's end? In Cache, it's simply not possible to do so, or if Haneke did he would ruin all that came before. It's anything but smug to leave the film unresolved. That's pretty much how life is, no? This is a strongly felt, coolly observed film about the consequences of colonialism, the reality of our true identities, the nature of relationships (between husband/wife, father/son, native/foreigner). I believe it will hold up to repeated viewing, and, I must disagree with ken s. - the opening credits are perfect in setting the very unsettling tone that Haneke skillfully maintains throughout. Another worthy film by an increasingly mature, bold and incisive filmmaker. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
FantasyFeb 2, 2006
I had heard through the grapevine that this was suppossed to be a great movie. After one hour of mind boggling nothing I walked out of the theater. Perhaps you pseudointellectual snobs want to rave about this crapola but the truth is it is I had heard through the grapevine that this was suppossed to be a great movie. After one hour of mind boggling nothing I walked out of the theater. Perhaps you pseudointellectual snobs want to rave about this crapola but the truth is it is awful. It failed at every level imaginable. I kept waiting for it to get moving but it just hung around meandering doing absolutely nothing. Not my cup of tea. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
LaurenceM.Mar 3, 2006
Maybe it's only surprising to me because I don't read many film reviews, but I'm disappointed by how much the professional critics seem to have missed in this film. One of the themes of this film is that the meaning of events Maybe it's only surprising to me because I don't read many film reviews, but I'm disappointed by how much the professional critics seem to have missed in this film. One of the themes of this film is that the meaning of events or of the characters' lives is often "hidden" in plain sight, played out in the margins of what otherwise seem like long, boring, straight shots. This film, with its restrained direction and unresolved mysteries, is a great antidote to hollywood movies. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
ScottR.May 2, 2006
It had me but I did not get the ending. I understand that the whole film would feel much better if you knew about the french / albanian history. I didn't know either and it left me feeling stupid. I dont need to have everything wrapped It had me but I did not get the ending. I understand that the whole film would feel much better if you knew about the french / albanian history. I didn't know either and it left me feeling stupid. I dont need to have everything wrapped up in a nice litle package but let me know what Happend please. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
S.FondueMay 6, 2006
Hmmmm.... I liked the slow pace of the film, a nice change from the usually Hollywood fare. Lots of people probably got bored by the slow scenes but I found it quite hypnotic and I enjoy slow-paced films generally, I'm used to Jim Hmmmm.... I liked the slow pace of the film, a nice change from the usually Hollywood fare. Lots of people probably got bored by the slow scenes but I found it quite hypnotic and I enjoy slow-paced films generally, I'm used to Jim Jarmusch and stuff like that so it's no big deal for me to wait a while for a scene to unfold. I can wait. The violence was great, one scene had the whole theater in audible shock. Yay for violence in films. Acting was excellent all-round, Juliete Binoche in particular was amazing. Some annoying things though: I don't need a film to tell me that racism is bad, and that white people in Europe have done bad stuff to minorities. I already knew all that stuff. Believe it or not. So when the film started getting 'political' I felt a bit cheated because I was expecting a more traditional thriller. I guess the director's trying to subvert our expectations, which is all very well and good, but I can't pretend to be thrilled by biting into an apple and tasting a pear if I don't like pears. Plus - when the ending came I missed what it was I was supposed to be looking at because there's so much detail in the scene, it's hard to know where to look. I mean, yay for not spoonfeeding us Mr. Haneke, but I wish I had the freedom of the actors in the film did to 'rewind' things so I could rewind that last scene and play it again.... I'd go see it a second time just to see that bit but it costs money to go to the cinema... at least for me... fortunately enough people posted spoilers in this website thingy here so I kinda know what I missed now.... but I still would've liked to have seen it with my own eyes... I guess there's a certain irony in a bunch of rich people whining about how they didn't understand a movie when people in other parts of the world have real problems, and that's probably part of what the director's point is. Okay, so you didn't understand the film, not a big deal really. You could be in some foreign country getting blown up or something, hey, so be happy that you're in a westernised country and you have the internet and you can read this text right now and some soldier isn't trying to shoot your feet off. The key scene in the filmat least in my opinion is not the ending, but the bit in the middle where the two parents think their kid is missing and they're... doing something or other on some room, I can't remember, and in the background the TV is showing images of the Middle East and all the violence over there. And that's exactly what the world's problems are to the two main characters - background. They don't even notice the TV. It was at that point where I understood the true aims of the movie. And then I started to feel a bit cheated because if I knew it had a political subtext I wouldn't have bothered going.... Smug, maybe. I guess the director's using smugness to wake us up to our own smugness. But I already knew I was smug before this movie came along, it's telling me nothing new. But I tell you what, during that aforementioned scene I was mesmerised by the TV and didn't even pay attention to the main characters. I'm fascinated by people in other countries getting shot at, I find it very scary. I'm lucky to live where I do. Maybe I'm not so smug after all... This film is good, you should see it. And if you didn't like it, well... the film probably doesn't like you, either. I can see why the critics liked it while the public remain very polarised about it. You're not really supposed to 'enjoy' this film, just like you're not supposed to enjoy getting beaten up by some guy down at the pub, but if you think carefully about why you got beaten up, you might learn something. "Hidden" (Cache) isn't a film for everyone, but it makes you think, (especially after the film is over) and in a world of chumps, that can't be all bad. Unless you don't like thinking. And we all like thinking, don't we? Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
Ridley666Oct 10, 2007
I find it interesting that Michael Haneke's "Cache (Hidden)" won the Best Director award for Haneke at the 2005 Cannes Film Festival and that it received an 83/100 on Metacritic, putting it in the category of "UNIVERSAL ACCLAIM" and I find it interesting that Michael Haneke's "Cache (Hidden)" won the Best Director award for Haneke at the 2005 Cannes Film Festival and that it received an 83/100 on Metacritic, putting it in the category of "UNIVERSAL ACCLAIM" and that it received an 88% out of 100 on Rotten Tomatoes with only 15 out of 121 reviews rating it "rotten." Surely the awards and the opinions of the handpicked jury members of the Cannes Film Festival and all the opinions of the countless credible and legitimate scholars of film crumble in the face of Dustin C's and fjuan n's and Maz D's towering infallible authority. These three erudite individuals clearly have something to teach all those countless lowly credible and legitimate scholars of film. In fact, Dustin C, fjuan n, and Maz D should each teach a course titled "How to Understand and Decipher Complex and Sophisticated Meditations on Bourgeois Discontent and Alienation, Racial and Class Privilege, and the Importance of Boundary Transgression Narratives" at Harvard. They clearly know so much about these subjects. Or maybe they should just keep their infantile mouth shut. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
JohnM.Jan 16, 2006
Caché is an breathtaking, exhilarating film, with the most deliciously ambiguous ending since Before Sunset (though I may even prefer the way this film ends over that one). This was, at least for me, the best film of 2005. I Caché is an breathtaking, exhilarating film, with the most deliciously ambiguous ending since Before Sunset (though I may even prefer the way this film ends over that one). This was, at least for me, the best film of 2005. I haven't left the theater so infused with a sense of giddiness (and unease?!) since I walked out of Mulholland Drive over four years ago. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
GeorgeG.Jan 16, 2006
With better lines for Daniel Auteuil, the Georges Laurent character would have been a lot more believable, both as a charecter in situ and in terms of allegory. But what does it matter when the movie is a cheat to begin with? Aside from the With better lines for Daniel Auteuil, the Georges Laurent character would have been a lot more believable, both as a charecter in situ and in terms of allegory. But what does it matter when the movie is a cheat to begin with? Aside from the question of who delivered the tapes, there is no real mystery here, and no way to determine it. In the context of this intentional carelessness -- think of it as anger, hatred, directorial sadism toward the middle class audiences who will watch -- in this context, the gruesome and unexpected suicide of the beaten-down Algerian childhood victim Majid comes across as violent porn, straight shocking and simple. Real movies about the west and the mideast? Compare Cache to Battle of Algiers and Syriana and you just wind up seeing Haneke as a punk in his sixties. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
KevinSOct 18, 2006
Best movie of the year (I know that is not saying much this year). Terrifying, creepy, torturous to watch but absolutely brilliant and thought provoking.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JordiM.Jan 20, 2006
What a crap! The only thing that Haneke do in this film is a melting-pot of his old ideas. Now his brain are empty. Sorry for the fans.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
MaryamJan 25, 2006
An incredible film - Haneke deserves to be up there with those few directors who make consistently excellent films about difficult issues.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
ElliottM.Jan 27, 2006
This movie is simply outstanding. The grip Haneke maintains on his audience is very tight and the movie builds to a level of unbearable tension... Also, it's a little peculiar that the metascore dropped 3 points from one negative review This movie is simply outstanding. The grip Haneke maintains on his audience is very tight and the movie builds to a level of unbearable tension... Also, it's a little peculiar that the metascore dropped 3 points from one negative review out of SF. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
CindyJan 30, 2006
Great film...very French in that the ending is ambiguous. The first movie I've been to in long time where I didn't hear anyone talking during the film and you could have heard a pin drop in the theatre. Some shockingly violent Great film...very French in that the ending is ambiguous. The first movie I've been to in long time where I didn't hear anyone talking during the film and you could have heard a pin drop in the theatre. Some shockingly violent scenes (one made the whole theatre gasp). Good acting, good directing, good movie. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
CatherineB.Jan 30, 2006
This movie for me failed at every level and did not address any of the central themes with any conviction at all. I have given it 1 point purely as Binoche is a fine actress although this did not give her any challenges at all. very disappointing.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
PhilM.Jan 30, 2006
A refreshing breath of French Air. A view of French racism that in these Post-Katrina days we can see is different from and even more unconcious than our own.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
HollisH.Jan 9, 2006
Wonderful movie!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
AlexG.Feb 15, 2006
I went to see this movie last night and I just could not wait to get out the cinema. Although the main character's performance was OK, the film is excruciatindly slow and I left feeling I completely wasted two hours of my life. I went to see this movie last night and I just could not wait to get out the cinema. Although the main character's performance was OK, the film is excruciatindly slow and I left feeling I completely wasted two hours of my life. Definitely one to miss. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
9
SquishFeb 10, 2006
It's a truly great movie with many open ended questions. I never considered it a "thriller" and find the repetition of this term in many of the film's slatings, indicative of it's crirtics' attitudes to films as a whole.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DavidA.Feb 18, 2006
[***SPOILER***] The film was riveting. But questions remain: why such a violent action (suicide) to rupture the life of Georges and his family when just the existence of the videos would have been sufficient??? What does the meeting of the [***SPOILER***] The film was riveting. But questions remain: why such a violent action (suicide) to rupture the life of Georges and his family when just the existence of the videos would have been sufficient??? What does the meeting of the two sons at the final credits portend??? Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
CarolAnnC.Feb 2, 2006
Tedious is the only word or thought that comes to mind. I waited anxiously for someone to have a interesting conversion so that l would be able to understand the true feelings of the characters It never came. Boring unrelated scenes that did Tedious is the only word or thought that comes to mind. I waited anxiously for someone to have a interesting conversion so that l would be able to understand the true feelings of the characters It never came. Boring unrelated scenes that did not flow.I stayed for the entire movie only because l couldn't believe how truly boring it was. Enough said, TEDIOUS! Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
ToddFeb 9, 2006
There are no words to express how truly awful this film was except for REFUND.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
10
DaveS.Mar 10, 2006
This movie plays directly on the emotions, and will stick with you long after you leave the theatre. American movies, even the good ones, generally feel the need to resolve everything. With Cache the pleasure is in the mystery -- those who This movie plays directly on the emotions, and will stick with you long after you leave the theatre. American movies, even the good ones, generally feel the need to resolve everything. With Cache the pleasure is in the mystery -- those who appreciate it will leave the theatre looking over their shoulders. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
8
GavinM.Mar 10, 2006
This is only a "thriller" in the sense that the filmaker, through the filmaking technique, creates a sense of total disorientation. We are never sure if what we are watching is real or filmed, and as the film develops, and introduces scenes This is only a "thriller" in the sense that the filmaker, through the filmaking technique, creates a sense of total disorientation. We are never sure if what we are watching is real or filmed, and as the film develops, and introduces scenes of shock into the sedate pacing, we begin to fear the jolt of violence. It is also only a "political" movie in terms of an allegory of public (elected) figures, hiding their complicity in the creation of "terror" - even from their own "people" - hoping that it will go away. (Compare that with the simple documentary, self-inflicted bloodyness of the "oppressed" character in a desperate scene implying a futile "cry for help"/"wake up call".) With the aftermath of this pivotal scene, it could be argued that there is even the (politicized) hint that George (W?) perhaps did not witness a "suicide" but was more proactive in exacting revenge - under the guise of protecting his family - and continues to protect his family by keeping the truth hidden. [One wonders if this incident was also secretly taped....] I agree with many of the negative reviews, that the critics perhaps built this movie up to be more gripping than the average viewer would agree. Its more helpful to depict it as a very adult subject which is filmed in a very cold, adult way. And the thrill in watching it involves the viewer slowing themselves to the pace of the movie, and allowing themselves to merely watch it, coldly, from a distance, much like a voyeur, and leave the intellectualizing and second-guessing for your own subconscious to evaluate at a later date. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
7
FrankO.Mar 24, 2006
I enjoyed this movie but its slow pace wore on me; overrated by the critics, I enjoyed the lead characters of Binoche and Auteuil. Only those viewers who enjoy french flicks should watch this.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
5
DanC.Apr 25, 2006
A deeply disappointing and unsatisfying movie by an impressive director that should know better.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
6
DylanMay 25, 2006
i understnd that this movie has many underlying meanings, many of which relating to the racism in france etc. but it still does annoy me that i left the film not exactly knowing what happened, if the the two sons stnading in the stairs are i understnd that this movie has many underlying meanings, many of which relating to the racism in france etc. but it still does annoy me that i left the film not exactly knowing what happened, if the the two sons stnading in the stairs are talking does that portray that it is the people of the future who are requried to mend the wrong doings of the past? can some one help me? Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful