Reviews

Like others, the main reason I went to see this film was Michael Haneke. Although I always thought that he lacks humor and takes himself too seriously, he did make some outstanding and memorable films. Unfortunately, this one feels stale, redundant, and out of step with the times. The subject matter, the bourgeoisie entrapped in their self-serving bubble as a theme, has been shown so many times, and in much more poignant ways, including by Haneke himself. This film doesn't add anything new or noteworthy, neither with the story, nor with the style.

The way social media and phone messages are shown also feels embarrassingly dated, like a grandfather explaining this "new" phenomenon. "Cache" was made over a decade ago, and technology and the discourses of its impacts have moved on with furious speed; apparently, Haneke has not. Even the metaphor of using Calais and the migrant 'jungle' as point here misses its mark. It tries to be smart about it, but, once again, it just feels old in its approach.

Interestingly enough, another western European film, the Swedish "The Square," dealt with some similar themes and issues in the same year, but was more successful with its narrative framework and style. "Happy End" just felt boring, not necessarily because of the long takes alone, but because of its uninspired re-threading of familiar ground. Because of that, those long takes eventually really did become boring. Perhaps Haneke will resurface with some interesting new work, or perhaps it is really time for him to retire. In any case, I hope the comparisons to Bunuel will cease. Bunuel was a pioneer with his films; this is a film by an old man, who doesn't seem to have much new to say any more.

"Houston We have a Problem" started with an interesting enough concept through a documentary/narrative/fictional structure and strategy in order to deliver a certain idea, which in the end becomes a kind of clinical allegory about the disintegration of Yugoslavia – trying to be entertaining and funny while at it. Until the last third of the film, it was interesting, I admit, and intriguing where it would end up. By the end it was somewhat disgusting by the shallowness of its "irony," given the tragedy it depicts.

Zizek's usual overcooked but useless philosophical platitudes ring even more hollow than usual in this context – although he did have some funny lines in the beginning (yeah, and the socks, whatever).

It may be an interesting film for a disengaged and clueless audience, who were not affected by the history depicted in this film (or similar experiences in other parts of the world) – but imagine making such a clinical allegory of another, more "relevant" "country disintegration war" or even (gasp) genocide – take your pick – Israel, Palestine, Syria, Libya, etc. -- the filmmaker would maybe be more vilified/ostracized/banished than celebrated for his "cleverness." If you want an effective allegory of what happened with Yugoslavia, watch Tanovic's Oscar winner "No Man's Land," or even better, Kenovic & co.'s SaGA films (google it) – from that part of the world, Bosnians are much better and more interesting storytellers and record keepers than Slovenians (and much funnier, too – for full disclosure, I am not Bosnian and I don't subscribe to ethnic disparagement or similar).

PS. It's not really a "1" more like a "5" rating, but just to counter this ridiculous overrated extravaganza here.