Film Scenes that Stayed With me: Caché [WARNING GRAPHIC/SHOCKING FOOTAGE]
Breakdown of a gruesome scene from this Michael Haneke film
I hesitated quite a bit about whether I should review this scene. It’s horrific and, to be honest, quite shocking that they did this for the film. Maybe it’s hypocritical of me since we kill billions of chickens daily… But there is something disturbing about the scene as, of course, it’s got shock value, and the filmmaker knows it.
In fact, I do remember reviews of this film when it came out, and people were split about this scene. As to whether or not this is acceptable. I personally wouldn’t have done this on my set—there is enough CGI these days. But I’ll let you be the judge.
As for the film, I hadn’t seen it before and it was a suggestion from a reader, so I went for it. (Thanks for the mood boost
😉)I would be lying if I said that this is my favorite type of film lol. I would classify this as a genuinely ‘interesting’ film. It’s very well made, it requires a ton of skill. Essentially it’s a good film, but in a style that I don’t particularly cherish. It’s cold, it’s hard to connect with anyone, it’s slow. It’s a Cannes-type film.
I guess what I’m saying is, make sure to brew some coffee and watch this during the day.
Anyway. I will warn you one last time. THIS SCENE IS PRETTY HORRIFIC, so don’t complain if you click. Here we go.
So we start the scene with this shot below. In the film itself they actually hold this shot for a rather long time. The guy with a beard has zero other scenes in the movie, but his dialogue is really distracting and you end up listening to him rather than Juliette Binoche who is one of the key characters. He pontificates about the ‘end of the story’ from a philosophical point of view, talks Heidegger and other philosophers and even mentions Hitler… The actress reacts with irritation as he speaks loudly and seemingly a bit drunkenly about all this.
Such a weird and interesting shot. It’s very busy which is unusual and makes it oppressive and suffocating. The man with the black t-shirt is favoured, the eye naturally goes to him, but since Juliette Binoche is in white, we are also looking her way, making the watching of this rather jarring.
This scene is very Brechtian, it calls for thinking, it’s almost deliberately trying to take us out of the film. A reminder for those who didn’t do 5+ years of Drama: Brecht was an advocate for didactic plays where the audience was encouraged to think objectively and engage with the theatre production directly, instead of being passive spectators. This, as opposed to the Aristotelian view, which advocates for catharsis and dramatic identification (99% of stories).
In this case and especially with the transition to the chicken killing, we are really pushed away, sort of prompted to think, rather than feel.
The scene transitions when Juliette Binoche goes ‘Me too, I kiss you’, then boom, the poor chicken. In fact, as much as I dislike the fact they killed a chicken, the transition is brilliant. It’s really sick, but that’s what’s good about it, that’s what makes this artist who he is.
It’s very very dark humor, tongue in cheek, but in a very ‘Cannes’ kind of way. Although I wouldn’t be surprised if many people walked out on the Croisette during the film premiere as well. Not everyone will pick up on these sorts of meta jokes, I suppose.
But now let’s get to the horrific part. So this chicken gets its head chopped off. Not even straight away. It takes two massive axe hits to get it done. It’s absolutely shocking, the bird is flapping madly and right after the last hit, we cut onto a young boy…
Who gets splattered in the eye with a huge stream of thick blood. He then opens his eyes, looking absolutely monstrous.
It looks genuinely hard for the boy and that makes the scene all the more atrocious. He throws the agonizing chicken on the floor next.
By the way, as a side note, this scene reminds me of a scene in Alien 1979. Granted, it's a weird parallel, but it stems from the fact that some scenes are just so strong and shocking that they would work regardless of how they're shot.
This Haneke scene works like this. He could have shot it in 10 different ways, it would have worked. But of course, Haneke is a very talented filmmaker.
After this, and for long seconds we witness the agony of this poor animal.
And at long last, we discover the protagonist of the scene. Another boy, looking younger, innocent, as horrified as we are.
The fact that we find an emotional anchor in the scene reinforces the horror. Especially considering that it’s a child. The sound design of the agonizing chicken keeps playing in the background and there is no music. There is never a single music cue in the entire film, by the way.
Then we have this shot, and the use of shadow. We can’t quite see the boy, we don’t want to see the boy, there are a whole bunch of chicken behind him ready for his vicious treatment. But he is staring at us, at him… It could hardly be harder to connect with the character, we can’t see his eyes, but that opens up our imagination instead and turns him all the more threatening.
Back on the other boy, and you can seldom make a shot that is closer emotionally to a character than this—the most ultimate contrast with the previous.
We are level, and he is probably looking at a mark right on the side of the lens, that’s how close his eyeline is from looking straight at us. This really puts us into the boy’s head. And we can see how this is not the first time he has seen such thing. Yet, he dreads what’s to come.
Then we get a full 6 more seconds of agonising chicken and another close up to bring it all home.
Then the other boy comes our way. He moves slowly, almost mechanically, gradually revealed by the light, like some mythical figure.
The camera becomes handheld for the first time in this answering shot, and it moves forward on the boy, as if from the POV of the axe wielder. It’s shaky, incredibly uncomfortable, again emphasizing his internal fear. He is also dead centre, making the shot creepy and disturbing.
Haneke clearly wasn’t too happy with the pacing of the shot, because you can see he slowed the footage in post by probably as much as he could get away with.
As the other boy gets closer he looks truly monstrous, like an evil shadow.
We are powerless, unable to move as he hits us.
But of course it was all a dream. Thankfully.
Let’s hope it was all a big nightmare for that poor bird... We can pray they didn’t just have 30 people circled around this log with 4/5 live chickens at the ready, to make sure that boy or whoever stood in for him, managed to kill it just ‘the right way’. Maybe I’m just a city boy…
Truly, I don’t know what to think of this on the whole. It’s memorable, well made, and incredibly skilled. But there is a ferocious sadism in Haneke that is not quite for me, I’m afraid.
Here is a scene: my dad doing the whole thing of decapitating, straining the blood, plucking the feathers, and all that. I never saw any of it. Just a faint shadow as he was behind the coloured frosted glass door of our small bathroom. That chicken was going to be our Christmas dinner… As much as it made me uncomfortable, I knew even at the tender age of 12 that it was a natural process. That is a raw truth we cannot deny. I agree with Joseph Campbell, who said in The Power of Myth:
“One of the main problems with mythology is reconciling the mind to this brutal precondition of all life, which lives by the killing and eating of lives. You don’t kid yourself by eating only vegetables, either, for they, too, are alive.”
But watching a scene like that in a film somehow feels inappropriate… I don’t really know how to properly put it. I haven’t seen the film and to be honest I don’t want to. I am on the same page with Ana - Haneke’s films are disturbing.
I like though, your train of thought and your writing, Remy.
They must not have known how to kill a chicken! 🐔 When I was a kid my grandma killed one to two chickens each week for food.
I enjoyed reading about this movie through your lens and perspective Remy. Thank you! ✨