Le temps du loup

ginobartolomi

'Time of the Wolf' is post-apocalyptic in a way that only Haneke can produce, like nothing that's ever been done before. He drops his viewers into the middle of an unnamed time and place without any explanation as to what has happened, why or how long ago it happened. In all truth, these details are completely unnecessary to the film's structure, and to Haneke's message. It's largely a social commentary,...↓

Lynch/Fellini

This is a horrifyingly quiet apocalyptic film from Haneke!

Zachary George Najarian-Najafi

Has a lot of shades of Tarkovsky. The ending is by far more hopeful and uplifting than is usual for Heneke. It doesn't reach the level of perfection that he reached with Cache, but there are some amazing moments. I need to watch more of his movies. He says that he rapes the viewer with his films, but here he doesn't force himself, it's more consensual and contemplative. Great stuff.

comeandsee

another near-masterpiece from Haneke. the most visually stunning of his films before 'the white ribbon'. his presentation of a post apocalyptic world is something Danny Boyle could only dream of. he investigates the gaps in society along the lines of race, nationality and gender. only some pacing problems hold the film back from a five star rating.

Lopezz

Chilling, moody and masterful cinema.

Richmond Hill

Opaque variations on too-familiar themes. Haneke's modus of not providing so-called 'answers' is compounded with little sense of trajectory either, just a strongly realised series of situational reactions but an unsatisfying whole. The oft-used apocalyptic device is here underwhelming with the expected glassy detachment revealing or hinting at little about human behaviour we didn't know or could have guessed.

Rafael Zen

Such a poetic finale. This is not Haneke's best for me, I missed the iconic imagery, the fetish for striking stills. However, it's a beautiful work about endings: political, social, cultural. The question slammering: what to do when we've passed the end? And what to trade for days or minutes further?

Nicholas Gregory

First 10 and final 20 minutes are done well, however, the rest is pretty much dullsville. It's more realistic than overblown, yet it swims in familiar waters too often to be literary and is without a focus to be experimental. The languid, cold, and repetitive nature makes it more sterile than provocative. The narrative is mainly directionless and bland.