MovieChat Forums > Caché (2006) Discussion > The viewer or director is sending the ta...

The viewer or director is sending the tapes

posted 11 years ago by natnat2007
4 replies | jump to latest

I don't know how to word this, but the entire movie is being filmed in the same way the tapes are being filmed.
Same format, same camera, even the same positions sometimes.

What I got from this movie is that it's not really a movie but real people under surveillance, hence the title "Caché", the cameras are verywhere, but they remain hidden to the characters.

To make an interesting 'film' the person or entity in charge of the cameras sends parts of their taped lives to different characters, this entity naturally knows everything about Georges' past as we see the cameras present during that time aswell.

We see a scene in which Georges is editing his show, he is cutting out parts which are boring and unnecessary, manipulating the footage. I think that is what happens i nthis film too, everyhting we see in it is footage from the hidden cameras, selected to make it fun to watch, tapes are sent to the right people to create drama.

I think that's also the reason why their son is aware of his mother's affair with Pierre, because he too has been sent a tape which contains proof of their relationship.

Edit: In the scene when his show is ending he receives a call and steps out of the studio, the camera which tapes the show follows him and now acts as the camera which shoots the film, signifying that he's oblivious to the cameras that surround him in his daily life.

Also in one scene Georges even references how surprised he was that he couldn't see the camera there right in front of his house when he walks past it on the tape and that it's position is awkward too, his wife claims it must be inside of a car but it doesn't look like it's been shot from behind a window.

[–] gthull644 11 years ago

I agree.

[–] ichbinsisyphos 11 years ago

This used to be a very popular theory. But a guy once asked him boldly at some film festival (London something?), he laughed and declined. Take that as you will.

I will now end this debate with you.

[–] garp-26 9 years ago

You may be right, you may be wrong, who can say for sure in this maze of paradoxes? I was struck by the dialogue in the scene where Georges has a meeting with his producer who tells him he has just seen a copy of the.tape showing his first confrontation with Majid. In the build up to the conversation the producer disappoints Georges by telling him the decision for a TV special has been put on hold, vaguely offering hope there may be a positive outcome adding "public television moves in mysterious
ways". "Let's hope God is listening" George retorts. His boss then replies to this with (I'm paraphrasing all of this of course) "Unfortunately polytheism rules here..." Aside from the fact the boss might be a closet anti-multiculturist, this is in keeping with a certain spirit of Haneke's film. So many characters may have something to hide or have conveniently forgotten which will return to bite them at their most vulnerable. Everyone has their own versions of "the truth", justifications for their destructive actions and entitlements to claim the moral high ground so that the objective truth of the issues that bring them together is obscured - hidden. If we accept there is an entity and that "God or gods are listening" then it's/His/their motive is equally hidden because we can't be sure if the tapes were meant to clarify or mystify or just provide signposts. I watched a televised interview with Edward Snowden last night, trying but probably failing to locate what was hidden there also.

[–] Mamabadger56 9 years ago

That idea did cross my mind. Almost everything points to Majid's son being the person responsible - especially the fact that George's meeting with Majid was filmed from inside Majid's apartment.

George's son receiving a film of his mother with her co-worker complicated things a little, but it could still be M's son, extending his surveillance to other areas, just to wreak havoc on their comfortable life.

But what really throws that theory off is the dream scene near the conclusion of the movie. It is shot to look exactly like surveillance footage, but it comes directly from George's memory.

That leads me to believe that either George himself is responsible, reacting to his own guilt by forcing a confrontation; or else it is meant to be someone or something outside the story: the audience, or the director himself, or even the all-seeing eye of God.

Tell me the truth. Are we still in the game?