Right up Haneke's alley, and as good an adaptation as Welles' of "The Trial". I was surprised to see critics ragging on this for not being "funny" enough, played too straight, when that's what makes Kafka so affecting. That particular, skin-crawling Absurdist humor only comes out when the overwhelming incomprehension is real and threatening; it's reactive. Haneke works to that end ably, here.

A very promising and funny start turns into a failure. You know it's coming when the twins arrive. Twins aren't funny, ever. The tension and comedy snaps when K. and the rest of the characters start to behave like a lunatics. Most of this let down is related to the Frida storyline. It loses every connection to the real world. It picks up the interesting absurd vibe when he finds the man in bed but it's too late, the viewer is already alienated by pure, pure boredom

kafka nın şatoso

Gerçekten gereksiz bir çaba olmus.

Like usual Kafka is misunderstood

I don't know what's up with this haneke fellow but he sucks!!!

A well-executed adaptation that remains faithful to the spirit of the book. Almost every scene plays out visually as it did in my head and the pacing is just right.

that's the book alright

When Haneke makes a solid adaptation of an unfinished story all about futility, aimlessness, and alienation, written by one of the top writers of a literary school whose mythological symbol is a dude carrying a boulder up a hill over and over for eternity, and people -including many Haneke fans- complain that the movie is frustrating, aimless, and tedious. Well, GOOD! The pointlessness is the point. The ultimate solution to the absurd is "Acceptance of the Absurd".

60.000

painstakingly literal adaptations of great literary works are almost always pointless and redundant, and this is no exception, but i do think adapting kafka faithfully is some kind of feat in itself.

I get what it's trying to do, but as has been said by others the whole aimless, frustrating thing makes this film very unengaging, especially considering the protagonist is rather unsympathetic and the film is just over two hours long. I prefer Welles' scarier, funnier and all-around weirder Kafka adaptation in the form of The Trial.

I've not read the novel so I may not be "getting" this movie. But whatever, this is a muddled, meandering, aimless, tedious movie. Maybe that's the point? I don't care, it's boring as hell. Even when I'm not getting Haneke, I'm at least interested (such is the case with Code Unknown). But here I just wanted the movie to end. Definitely my least favorite Haneke.

A solid, respectful adaptation of Kafka's unfinished novel. The narrative flow looks interesting on the screen, while the bureaucratic talk seems much more rewarding in the book than on film.

The story is as faithful as it can be, and Haneke does a good job of evoking the unusual rhythms of Kafka. And he doesn't try to make K. too sympathetic. But it doesn't feel quite right. The drab palette is appropriate, but black and white would have been better. And the voiceover felt unnecessary. The novel is told in the third person voice, but it feels first person. And it just didn't seem absurd enough. You don't get the sense of K.'s epic, labyrinthine struggle. But it's a good effort.

I know that it's supposed to be aimless and frustrating, but that doesn't make for good viewin'. Competently made but there's no reason to watch this, really.

Bressonian surrealism sounds like a strange combination, almost an oxymoron, but somehow it just clicked with me and I was entirely compelled from beginning to end.