<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Sundance Diary: Michael Haneke, I&#8217;m sending you my shrink bill</title>
	<atom:link href="http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/</link>
	<description>Entertainment Weekly&#039;s PopWatch Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 04:27:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: lsjq dwfl</title>
		<link>http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/comment-page-3/#comment-463112</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[lsjq dwfl]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 10 Jan 2009 15:49:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ewpopwatch.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke#comment-463112</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[zcjkxmbew ofeu gjprs eyhtdma dwzqhm pbxomnjzh gsjh
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>zcjkxmbew ofeu gjprs eyhtdma dwzqhm pbxomnjzh gsjh</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sniqjx ftygpuo</title>
		<link>http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/comment-page-3/#comment-463110</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[sniqjx ftygpuo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 01:17:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ewpopwatch.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke#comment-463110</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[cqhfapo ojtu ptxiqezr mesa pkzuei kotx dxhu
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>cqhfapo ojtu ptxiqezr mesa pkzuei kotx dxhu</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eqndgwp okzwh</title>
		<link>http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/comment-page-3/#comment-463108</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[eqndgwp okzwh]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 21:24:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ewpopwatch.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke#comment-463108</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[higsu tfchluz jbwox cikazmlq efrlxvibq rlusqnedo jdrwti
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>higsu tfchluz jbwox cikazmlq efrlxvibq rlusqnedo jdrwti</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J Atwell</title>
		<link>http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/comment-page-3/#comment-463106</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[J Atwell]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jun 2008 22:01:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ewpopwatch.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke#comment-463106</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#039;m not going to see this movie.  I saw Natural Born killers and I hated it too, both intellectually and esthetically.  I did not enjoy it in any way.  Oh, and by the way, sarah, concerning No End In Sight?  Bravo for your sky high political rhetoric.  NEIS is full of half truths and poli-sci palaver disguised as analysis.  It&#039;s about as &#039;real&#039; as the Boogie Man.  The movie only exists to bash the Bush administration.
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not going to see this movie.  I saw Natural Born killers and I hated it too, both intellectually and esthetically.  I did not enjoy it in any way.  Oh, and by the way, sarah, concerning No End In Sight?  Bravo for your sky high political rhetoric.  NEIS is full of half truths and poli-sci palaver disguised as analysis.  It&#8217;s about as &#8216;real&#8217; as the Boogie Man.  The movie only exists to bash the Bush administration.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J.</title>
		<link>http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/comment-page-3/#comment-463105</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[J.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Mar 2008 03:05:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ewpopwatch.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke#comment-463105</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Funny Games is actually quite funny. It’s the sort of joke that small children find endlessly entertaining. A state of being that the surrealists called convulsive beauty, or in the playground would be just about going berserk. This film has no sexual tension and this sort of lands with a thud but as a re-creation of our earlier childhood experiences it is rather unique. It’s an inner world that’s all fantasy with no consequence. My sense was that its aim was slightly higher and then falls short of the mark. This work comes from a very long tradition of film as a subversive art.  The set-up is quite clever yet the unwillingness to go full throttle on the hydraulic of sex and violence leaves it a little underwhelming. Not exactly bad Hitchcock but then not Pulp Fiction either. Like the band Trooper’s hit song from the 80’s ‘She’s a Three Dressed up as a Nine’. This is a four dressed up as an eight.
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Funny Games is actually quite funny. It’s the sort of joke that small children find endlessly entertaining. A state of being that the surrealists called convulsive beauty, or in the playground would be just about going berserk. This film has no sexual tension and this sort of lands with a thud but as a re-creation of our earlier childhood experiences it is rather unique. It’s an inner world that’s all fantasy with no consequence. My sense was that its aim was slightly higher and then falls short of the mark. This work comes from a very long tradition of film as a subversive art.  The set-up is quite clever yet the unwillingness to go full throttle on the hydraulic of sex and violence leaves it a little underwhelming. Not exactly bad Hitchcock but then not Pulp Fiction either. Like the band Trooper’s hit song from the 80’s ‘She’s a Three Dressed up as a Nine’. This is a four dressed up as an eight.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ross Tipo</title>
		<link>http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/comment-page-3/#comment-463104</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ross Tipo]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 21:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ewpopwatch.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke#comment-463104</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Yahhhhhhh, I saw the German version a few months ago... freaked me the EFF out. There was one shot (which I really really hope Haneke repeats in his American version, which I will be viewing Saturday) which involves one of the most horrifying events on film and then stays on one of the other characters for perhaps a full five minutes. And it was the most crippling thing I have ever seen in a film... ever. Naomi better own &#039;dis sh*t.
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yahhhhhhh, I saw the German version a few months ago&#8230; freaked me the EFF out. There was one shot (which I really really hope Haneke repeats in his American version, which I will be viewing Saturday) which involves one of the most horrifying events on film and then stays on one of the other characters for perhaps a full five minutes. And it was the most crippling thing I have ever seen in a film&#8230; ever. Naomi better own &#8216;dis sh*t.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JordanB</title>
		<link>http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/comment-page-3/#comment-463102</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[JordanB]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 22:59:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ewpopwatch.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke#comment-463102</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[All Haneke is doing is showing the audience what they don&#039;t want to face - that they&#039;ve become desensitized to the violence in movies, especially American ones. He deserves credit for pushing the limits!
What bothers me is that this is not the first film to use such disturbing violence. (Hostel, anyone?) Funny Games doesn&#039;t show violence for violence&#039;s sake; it has a greater purpose.
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All Haneke is doing is showing the audience what they don&#8217;t want to face &#8211; that they&#8217;ve become desensitized to the violence in movies, especially American ones. He deserves credit for pushing the limits!<br />
What bothers me is that this is not the first film to use such disturbing violence. (Hostel, anyone?) Funny Games doesn&#8217;t show violence for violence&#8217;s sake; it has a greater purpose.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris G</title>
		<link>http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/comment-page-3/#comment-463101</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chris G]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:18:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ewpopwatch.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke#comment-463101</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I can&#039;t wait to see this movie!
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#8217;t wait to see this movie!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/comment-page-3/#comment-463099</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[James]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:57:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ewpopwatch.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke#comment-463099</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Comparisons to Kubrick&#039;s &#039;Clockwork Orange&#039;? It strikes me as illiterate of people to say that this is a rip-off, being that Haneke knows full well what he&#039;s referencing. It&#039;s a critique in itself and I suggest evaluating the comparisons on these terms.
The film is quite good, it pairs classic tropes and we as viewers are in quite the predicament to either continue watching or exiting. I think our desire was for resolution(as always), if in fact you continued to watch. It&#039;s an important film and one of the most difficult films I&#039;ve watched in recent memory. I think the continued use of self-reflexivity throughout the film was unnecessary with exception of the end and the remote scene. It does set-up a type of Brechtian involvement, we are no longer complacent by standers but incredibly self-conscious &amp; cognizant of our &quot;participation&quot; with the unfolding violence. It&#039;s a structuralist,  deconstruction of filmic, meditated violence &amp; fiction is our collective &quot;safe word&quot;.
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Comparisons to Kubrick&#8217;s &#8216;Clockwork Orange&#8217;? It strikes me as illiterate of people to say that this is a rip-off, being that Haneke knows full well what he&#8217;s referencing. It&#8217;s a critique in itself and I suggest evaluating the comparisons on these terms.<br />
The film is quite good, it pairs classic tropes and we as viewers are in quite the predicament to either continue watching or exiting. I think our desire was for resolution(as always), if in fact you continued to watch. It&#8217;s an important film and one of the most difficult films I&#8217;ve watched in recent memory. I think the continued use of self-reflexivity throughout the film was unnecessary with exception of the end and the remote scene. It does set-up a type of Brechtian involvement, we are no longer complacent by standers but incredibly self-conscious &amp; cognizant of our &#8220;participation&#8221; with the unfolding violence. It&#8217;s a structuralist,  deconstruction of filmic, meditated violence &amp; fiction is our collective &#8220;safe word&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: LadieDethstrike</title>
		<link>http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/comment-page-3/#comment-463097</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[LadieDethstrike]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Feb 2008 00:25:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ewpopwatch.wordpress.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke#comment-463097</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[If you&#039;re looking forward to Haneke&#039;s remake of Funny Games, you gotta check out this really cool spoof of the Funny Games trailer. The homemade spot is for Kubrick&#039;s The Shining!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GktNzXAQuCY
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you&#8217;re looking forward to Haneke&#8217;s remake of Funny Games, you gotta check out this really cool spoof of the Funny Games trailer. The homemade spot is for Kubrick&#8217;s The Shining!<br />
<span style="text-align:center; display: block;"><a href="http://popwatch.ew.com/2008/01/24/michael-haneke/"><img src="http://img.youtube.com/vi/GktNzXAQuCY/2.jpg" alt="" /></a></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

