Caché (Hidden)
Sony Pictures Classics | Release Date: December 23, 2005
6.7
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 281 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
189
Mixed:
21
Negative:
71
Watch Now
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
1
KenOJan 4, 2010
Love the comments from the "feelm" snobs about how great this was. Pretentious, boring, slow...does France have a surplus of video stock? That's the only explanation for the multiple minutes-long scenes of *nothing* happening. I figure Love the comments from the "feelm" snobs about how great this was. Pretentious, boring, slow...does France have a surplus of video stock? That's the only explanation for the multiple minutes-long scenes of *nothing* happening. I figure the actors and crew were having lunch, someone left the camera on, and when they got back Haneke shrugged his shoulders and said "print it". And the slasher scene---sure, everyone knows that Friday the 13th and Halloween part 25 are the epitome of artistic cinema, but this? Looked more like Monty Python's Black Knight.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
EdT.Jan 29, 2006
I wasted two hours of my life on this movie. The director never made me care about any of the characters and that is a major flaw.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
EthanP.Oct 5, 2006
Any of us could fall prey to the "terror" in the film, and the resulting footage and emotionless fallout would be just as boring. (But at least a hidden camera in any of our lives might happen to catch a rerun of Survivor in the background.) Any of us could fall prey to the "terror" in the film, and the resulting footage and emotionless fallout would be just as boring. (But at least a hidden camera in any of our lives might happen to catch a rerun of Survivor in the background.) "A seemingly well adjusted man in a well ordered universe is brought to the brink..." of taking a couple Ambien and going to sleep.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
RichardD.May 28, 2006
I would call a thriller a movie that keeps me on the edge of my seat, not slumped asleep in it. I would call it a tragedy in every sense of the word. I give it a score of 1 for the dog joke.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JimH.Jul 16, 2006
I have no idea how such an uninteresting non-thriller could get so many good reviews. An infuriating movie for many reasons.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
JamesH.Aug 25, 2006
I'm giving it a "1" only because I enjoyed watching some of the locations in the movie; kinda reminded me of visiting Paris/France. I almost gave up after 2 minutes of watching the same scene right at the beginning. WHY didn't I I'm giving it a "1" only because I enjoyed watching some of the locations in the movie; kinda reminded me of visiting Paris/France. I almost gave up after 2 minutes of watching the same scene right at the beginning. WHY didn't I trust my instincts? I get REALLY annoyed by filmakers who test the patience of their audience, and this movie does from the 1st to the last frame. And that isn't meant in a positive way. Involving your audience by making a movie well is one thing; slapping together a seemingly improvised 2 hour film and allowing critics to faun over it as "challenging" is not only lazy, but very telling of the personalities of the critics. I will treat any of the "fauners" with a HUGE grain of salt.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
PatS.Feb 13, 2006
My husband and I heard this movie was good so we went and it was the most boring movie ever except for one brief shocker. When the movie was over we looked at each other and went huh? We were told to watch the crowd at the end of the movie. My husband and I heard this movie was good so we went and it was the most boring movie ever except for one brief shocker. When the movie was over we looked at each other and went huh? We were told to watch the crowd at the end of the movie. We did and all we saw was the 2 sons. What did this all mean? HELP? This has driven us crazy all weekend.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
StuartMar 12, 2006
slow moving, sub-titled, and just plain boring, save for 10 minutes worth
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
nonoMay 26, 2006
I watched this film with a native French speaker just to make sure the clues werent in the actual language. I watched it at Cinema Paradiso in Nothbridge Perth. What a let down. I love alternative films but they have to have something going I watched this film with a native French speaker just to make sure the clues werent in the actual language. I watched it at Cinema Paradiso in Nothbridge Perth. What a let down. I love alternative films but they have to have something going for them -this had nothing. Metallic acting,poot cinematography,cheap stunts to shock the audience. At the end of the film, the entire audience was asking each other "What was all that about". How can a film disappoint so many people and all at the same time? So sorry I wasted my time and Icant remeber a film I've ever had to say that about except "Atarnarjuat.Last of the Eskimo Runners" which was filmed entirely in the Arctic watching snow melt!!!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
DustinCJul 26, 2007
why is my only question. why after spending 2 and a half hours of this drek would anyone try to convince anyone else to watch it. i was duped. i advice you not to listen to the so-called "critics on this one who rant and rave over its why is my only question. why after spending 2 and a half hours of this drek would anyone try to convince anyone else to watch it. i was duped. i advice you not to listen to the so-called "critics on this one who rant and rave over its meaningfulness. this is the only movie that when the credits started rolling i felt truly jipped. everything that made this movie interesting completely died and i was left feeling like 3 hours of my life had been literally stolen from me. shame on you, France.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
1
GeorgeKDec 21, 2005
Bogus, largely dull, silly "thriller". What the hell were they thinking? If you blink during the long slow dull final shot, you miss whatever "meaning" is supposedly there.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
FantasyFeb 2, 2006
I had heard through the grapevine that this was suppossed to be a great movie. After one hour of mind boggling nothing I walked out of the theater. Perhaps you pseudointellectual snobs want to rave about this crapola but the truth is it is I had heard through the grapevine that this was suppossed to be a great movie. After one hour of mind boggling nothing I walked out of the theater. Perhaps you pseudointellectual snobs want to rave about this crapola but the truth is it is awful. It failed at every level imaginable. I kept waiting for it to get moving but it just hung around meandering doing absolutely nothing. Not my cup of tea.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
GeorgeG.Jan 16, 2006
With better lines for Daniel Auteuil, the Georges Laurent character would have been a lot more believable, both as a charecter in situ and in terms of allegory. But what does it matter when the movie is a cheat to begin with? Aside from the With better lines for Daniel Auteuil, the Georges Laurent character would have been a lot more believable, both as a charecter in situ and in terms of allegory. But what does it matter when the movie is a cheat to begin with? Aside from the question of who delivered the tapes, there is no real mystery here, and no way to determine it. In the context of this intentional carelessness -- think of it as anger, hatred, directorial sadism toward the middle class audiences who will watch -- in this context, the gruesome and unexpected suicide of the beaten-down Algerian childhood victim Majid comes across as violent porn, straight shocking and simple. Real movies about the west and the mideast? Compare Cache to Battle of Algiers and Syriana and you just wind up seeing Haneke as a punk in his sixties.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
JordiM.Jan 20, 2006
What a crap! The only thing that Haneke do in this film is a melting-pot of his old ideas. Now his brain are empty. Sorry for the fans.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
AlexG.Feb 15, 2006
I went to see this movie last night and I just could not wait to get out the cinema. Although the main character's performance was OK, the film is excruciatindly slow and I left feeling I completely wasted two hours of my life. I went to see this movie last night and I just could not wait to get out the cinema. Although the main character's performance was OK, the film is excruciatindly slow and I left feeling I completely wasted two hours of my life. Definitely one to miss.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
fjuann.Dec 24, 2006
Don't waste your time watching it. I've slept several times while watching it so boring it is. Annoying to the extreme with the long static shots, you can't help thinking that the critics that gave good marks are just Don't waste your time watching it. I've slept several times while watching it so boring it is. Annoying to the extreme with the long static shots, you can't help thinking that the critics that gave good marks are just prettending to be smart and cool.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
shawnDec 27, 2005
I simply cannot believe how many reviewers are liking this ridiculous waste of film. An unoriginal idea (David Lynch already did this) with shots held far too long for no apparent reason. When Tarchovsky does it, it works. When Haneke does I simply cannot believe how many reviewers are liking this ridiculous waste of film. An unoriginal idea (David Lynch already did this) with shots held far too long for no apparent reason. When Tarchovsky does it, it works. When Haneke does it, it's akward, almost clumsy. What I also do not understand is why no one seems at all bothered by the slaughter of an animal onscreen. Are we supposed to be impressed by this lame attempt to get under our skin? Slasher films ran their course some time ago. Perhaps someone should tell Europe that the 80's are over. And I don't even know where to begin with all the comments comparing this hack to Hitchcock. Cache reminded me far too much of a student film that needs about 100 minutes edited out of it.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
SAllenJan 29, 2006
Don't waste ANY time on this contrived turd of a movie. Those praising it sound like the pseudo-intellectual pricks in college who majored in English, smoked pipes, and wore turtlenecks. YES, we all saw the deliberately placed clues and Don't waste ANY time on this contrived turd of a movie. Those praising it sound like the pseudo-intellectual pricks in college who majored in English, smoked pipes, and wore turtlenecks. YES, we all saw the deliberately placed clues and metaphors...BUT we all ENDURED an incredibly crappy mule ride and ending. This pretentious, monotonous film deserves to be "Hidden"...where no one ever again will find it.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
PamJ.Feb 11, 2006
The most mysterious thing about this film is that the plot was so much more predictable than anticipated. The only reason I saw the film was because the LA. Weekly said it was so great. It was a bunch of cliches masquerading as an artsy The most mysterious thing about this film is that the plot was so much more predictable than anticipated. The only reason I saw the film was because the LA. Weekly said it was so great. It was a bunch of cliches masquerading as an artsy film. Acting was good, but I gave it a zero because I'll never recoup those two and some most boring hours of my life.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
PenelopeL.Feb 11, 2006
A Woody Allen movie without the humor or Match Point twist. A bunch of rich white folks feeling guilty.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
LindseyD.Feb 12, 2006
The longest most painful 2 hours ever, i wanted to cry and if i wasnt in the centre of the row i would have left!
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
HanselH.Feb 25, 2006
Lamest movie ever. As interesting as a surveillance video in French.
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
MaxL.Sep 17, 2006
Beware - This movie is just a fraud! There is No Drama, No Suspense, certainly No Thrill! Too bad it cannot be rated negatively I would give it a - 10. Let's create a new category "Wasted Time", then it would get the 1st prize! 2 hours Beware - This movie is just a fraud! There is No Drama, No Suspense, certainly No Thrill! Too bad it cannot be rated negatively I would give it a - 10. Let's create a new category "Wasted Time", then it would get the 1st prize! 2 hours wasted. Any critics and papers that gave a positive review should be taken to court for misleading the public!… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
CraigCNov 20, 2007
Unlike the movie, I'll be brief. It's a pretentious waste of time. I kept the DVD fast forward pressed through the interminable slow shots where nothing happens, and it STILL bored me. My condolences to those who suffered through Unlike the movie, I'll be brief. It's a pretentious waste of time. I kept the DVD fast forward pressed through the interminable slow shots where nothing happens, and it STILL bored me. My condolences to those who suffered through this in the theatre.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
EdRMay 25, 2008
It seems that anyone criticizing this film will be immediately dismissed as an idiot, or someone who only watches and/or understands Hollywood dreck, but this is just the same kind of dull snobbery that presumably leads to people claiming to It seems that anyone criticizing this film will be immediately dismissed as an idiot, or someone who only watches and/or understands Hollywood dreck, but this is just the same kind of dull snobbery that presumably leads to people claiming to like a film like 'Caché'. It's an abysmal film, a clearly signposted "mystery" in which a dull, unlikable character wanders around disinterestedly heading towards a silly, thudding conclusion. Haneke's attempts to imitate the graceful, leisurely pace of directors like Tarkovsky are merely flat and self-important, the film's ploddingly obvious plot of interest only to those betting on how long it will go on for. A psychological thriller with no thrills and no psychology, which expects us to care about tedious, underwritten characters and, in failing to portray them in anything but the most heavy-handed, uninteresting terms, criminally wastes Auteuil and Binoche, two of the most talented actors of the last twenty years. The allegorical story about the relationship between France and Algeria ostensibly provides some depth, but that does not mean that the film is any less of an interminable cop-out. On as objective a level as is possible - it's dire.… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful
0
killerfistyFeb 6, 2011
Emperor's new clothes. According to the other reviews here, this film was over 2 hours long. It felt like twice that. Pretentious, vacuous and pseudo-intellectual. If you don't care about the characters, then, by extension, you won't careEmperor's new clothes. According to the other reviews here, this film was over 2 hours long. It felt like twice that. Pretentious, vacuous and pseudo-intellectual. If you don't care about the characters, then, by extension, you won't care about whatever they are metaphors for. So what's the point?… Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
next
Page:
More From This Movie

87 Critic Reviews

6.7 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 77 Project Hail Mary
2 75 Send Help
3 73 Hoppers
4 71 The Sheep Detectives
5 68 Crime 101
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL