Peter Handke: In the Woods, Might Be Late (2016)
In the sixties, Peter Handke was one of the first to show how the business works: the writer as angry young man and pop star of the literary scene. As soon as he was on the bestseller lists, he turned his back on the hype. For many years, he has lived and worked in his house in a Parisian suburb, more quietly and more hospitably. Peter Handke's precise, free gaze becomes perceptible in his texts, his conversations, the cosmos of his notebooks.
Watch Trailer
Cast
Similar titles
Reviews
One of my all time favorites.
Excellent but underrated film
Absolutely Fantastic
Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.
"Peter Handke" (I'll go with the short title) is a German 1.5-hour film that got released recently, so a 2016 movie. It is a documentary by writer and director Corinna Belz, who was mostly known for her film about painter Gerhard Richter by now. But lets take a look at this one. In the center of it is Handke of course, a prolific writer and occasional filmmaker/director as well and he is probably mostly known for his work on the script/screenplay of several Wim Wenders films, actually also some I like a bit and some I like a lot. But I wish I could recommend this documentary to people who enjoy Wenders like I do, but I just can't as I never really managed to develop an interest in Handke or his work from what I watched here. The film depicts him as a controversial figure, especially in terms of his professional life, but also brings in segments about his past. Sadly, this is just restricted to references shocking for the sake of it, like his mother's suicide or his complicated relationship with his daughter and these moments tell us almost nothing about his early years or about how he became who he is, a really successful writer, to this day. The inclusion of old video footage from interviews in the 1960s and 1970s seemed pretty random and also did not do a whole lot in helping us understand Handke. I don't remember how much I liked the Gerhard Richter film, but this one here did not do a whole lot for me. I guess you have to know and, even more importantly, like Handke before watching this film already. If you don't know him or are only vaguely familiar with him like I was, then you will most likely not be impressed. I spoke about something random earlier and I also found the filmmaker's question to Handke a bit random on several occasions, but that is just personally subjective perception. However, as simple as the title may sound here, this film is far from simple as Handke's explanations sound very deep and complicated all the time because of the language he uses. If you were mean (or realistic?), you could say that a big part of the film is actually fairly pretentious. Thumbs down from me and I don't recommend these almost 90 minutes.