It's very tough assigning grades or "stars" to the films of Michael Haneke. He tends to trap his audiences within the context of the films themselves, which makes any judgment of the film a reflection of the viewer on his or herself. This is very difficult to do as a director, and very uncomfortable for Haneke's audiences--and Haneke wouldn't have it any other way.

That said, this is my 4th Haneke film, and I was impressed to see the vision, style and moral perspective Haneke HAMMERS his audiences with as vividly present in "The Seventh Continent", as all of the films I've seen Haneke has released since. However, once again, as fascinated as I am personally by Haneke's style and efficiency, "The Seventh Continent" is another Haneke film that is difficult to recommend to what I would consider a normal functioning adult.

I don't doubt that the story told in "The Seventh Continent" could happen. I don't doubt that it did happen very similarly to the way it was presented. What I take issue with is that it comes off as a stinging rebuke of the monotony of modern middle-class life (television's influence, etc...), when more likely, what happened to the family the story is based on was probably caused by something more tangible and less speculative. But even if that wasn't the case with the family the story is based on, the presentation of the fictional family in this particular film is intended to assign blame. And the daily mundane and boring rituals of a typical modern family (even monogamous marital sex) are clearly guilty in this film. And I don't think I personally agree with Haneke's assessment on this issue. (But that's between me and Mr. Haneke ;) )

My recommendation for now is to avoid Haneke's early work in general (maybe up to "The Piano Teacher"). It's not that there isn't much social value in Haneke's early films, it's that Haneke tends to focus on the EXTREME fringes of the human condition in his early work where insanity, mental instability, sociopaths and psychopaths are always going to linger. No amount of cultural change or faults addressing modern suburban middle class existence (or upper class apathy and ennui) is going to change that fact.

The ending and central themes of the film did remind me in a lot of ways (and it's been mentioned here as well) of Todd Hayne's brilliantly dark existential drama "Safe" (Julianne Moore, 1995). And though "The Seventh Continent" came out before "Safe", I would highly recommend "Safe" over "The Seventh Continent". As for Haneke, I would recommend "The Piano Teacher" or "The White Ribbon" as the more evolved director starts to catch his stride. Because Michael Haneke has SOME stride!

I think that many people will be able to identify with this film. As always, I made a point of knowing virtually nothing about it before I saw it, and I'd recommend doing the same. If you know about the plot beforehand, the impact will be markedly ruined. The first thought that came to mind after the first few sequences was "they haven't shown anyone's face yet".. I guess that's the point. If you are reading this, then you most likely are not starving, and are amongst the rich 1 billion of the world. So the actions portrayed initially in this middle class existence needn't any face, as they pertain to all of us, we the regurgitators of human aspirations (weird phrasing). We don't have a face, as there is nothing to tell us apart from the next person. Anyway, it's absurd to think that the mental process that took over the family is considered an exception, but the fact that it is only highlights how sick our society is, refusing to remodel this cataclysmic and decerebrate way of being. I was affected by the subsequent events that transpired, and one particular scene still haunts me in a vicious way, although it cannot be mentioned here... suffice to say it broke free from a certain degree of apathy shown by the main characters throughout, revealing the desperate and twisted cry of raw emotion that can exude from even the most planned chaos. Watch it all the way through, it is meant to bore you for a while, it wouldn't be the same if it didn't.

...which actually proved perfect to put Haneke on the map when this first feature was shown at Cannes. Bourgeois were shocked as Haneke himself had predicted.

If that was somewhat a marketing plan, well done, I just think that this movie is then disposable once its director had proven he could shoot real substantial full-length features. If it was just a naive first big screen endeavour it is somewhat very disappointing and deserves oblivion. Either way it is not impressive at all, even despicable.

Another reviewer who did not like it and also took the time to review it (and give it 4*) writes it could have been much better edited down to 90min. I think this kind of depressing true story viewed through the eyes of the morbid director would barely deserve half of that. Seriously what kind of director would think he is so brilliant as to allow for 50min of exposition? The diluted narration covering the repetitiveness of the family's meaningless life has no cinematic or social value. Sure anyone can claim it has artistic value since whoever showcases diamonds in manure is thought of as an artist these days. Cut this story down to 30-45min and it will certainly be much more effective: routine, boredom, impending doom will work all the same and simply demand great editing skills.

Morbid fascination is a totally unproductive mindset. There is nothing to gain, to create by re-enacting and building empathy for hopeless characters, especially when they just slide to their own gruesome demise. I was not aware of the real event here, and for good cause: it does not deserve attention if you are not some kind of psychiatric scholar (have fun) and since this movie was released fascination has grown for those kind of "nice clean familiy" horror stories. Movies have been made to feed into it just like other movies have opportunistically been made about gangsters. In the end fascination with physical violence or socio-psychological violence is just morbid and books/movies focused on it are just plainly exploitative. No artsy pretension can hide this.

Whatever Haneke might think of it Funny Games is just in another dimension, really powerful, gripping, because at a basic level it works as an horror movie. A compelling narrative that masterfully succeeds in describing the utmost horror with a sense of immediacy, while also breaking the fourth wall (twice?) to further soak us in it.