You have to be logged in to comment! If you don't have an account register now for free! Your account allows you to post comments and reviews, upload videos and images, access or our forums, write personal blogs, and maintain your profile.
It's after midnight (close to 1:00, actually), still awake, so what is there to possibly do? How about go to OnDemand and watch the remake of Funny Games? After I saw this film, my initial reaction was that I had gotten so exited to see this film, I finally get the oppurtunity to see it, and I am comletely disappointed. But, weeks after watching it, it starts to really get under my skin and I feel that I was completely satisfied. Now I wish I could watch it again and ask myself how I could think this film was awful. In fact, that is kinda what I like about this film. It took a while for it to affect me, but when it did, I loved it. This film was awesome and i would give to see it again.
Great movie but I prefer the original version. Such a twisted head fuck of a movie and nice refreshing change from all the blood/gore torture porn that's around . This film actually makes you THINK and if you don't like it then your obviously missing the point.
If you're ashamed of your love for horror movies, if it bothers you to admit that a slasher flick would be no fun without the slashing, if you enjoy cinematic violence but believe it is therefore your fault that spoilt brat rich kids go out thrill-killing, then this film will probably make you hate yourself more than you already do. On the other hand, if you're like most people and understand that while art may imitate life, imitation is not reality, you're liable to find it offensive. And not, I suspect, in the way the film-maker intended.
Watching Funny Games is like being harangued by a strident, wildly hypocritical Media Studies teacher with a terrible grasp of his subject. Insulting the audience's intelligence at every turn, director Michael Haneke crassly assumes things about us that he cannot possibly know, and patently misapprehends the relationship between the viewer and what is being viewed. Taking a simplistic view of the correlation between real world and artistic violence, he tries to blame cinema goers for both. All of which I would be more than willing to forgive him for if the resulting film was interesting to watch. But it isn't. Deliberately ugly, and about as profound as a lump of concrete, Funny Games is deeply tedious. I hate not seeing films through to the end - who knows what hidden gems may lurk in the final reel, or how they may affect the perspective you have on the movie as a whole? But half way though this the urge to turn it off was almost over-powering - not because I couldn't take the horrors on offer, but simply because I was in danger of falling asleep.
I am genuinely amazed that this cobblers has got so many people fooled. If you think life's too short to be lectured at by people who hold you in contempt, you're strongly advised to avoid it.
Posted By: SeeScottSpaz at 11:52am, November 18, 2008
I had high hopes for this movie. But it was not clever. It was not scary. The acting was great, I won't lie. But this movie went nowhere. And I applauded when the man was shot towards the end, but as quickly as I enjoyed it, it was quickly taken away. It put me in a horrible mood, but it's taught me never to give eggs to people.
Posted By: Doc Arkham at 5:29am, November 15, 2008
A pleasant change from the over-the-top gore fests like the Saw franchise where after the 2nd viewing there are quite a few ways out of the traps. we are taken on a nice pleasant weekend away with a young family. Until the neighbors "friends" turn up. Then it's a downhill slope into tension, drama and some simple yet cruel situations. The way Pitt continually talks to the audience and mocks them by replaying a particularly violent scene is un-nerving and charming. Much like "Requiem for a Dream" this movie stays with you after the end.
I wanted to rate this lower, but the lowest number on the drop down list was a 2.
This movie is so shallow, so vapid and empty, it's hard to believe a director would wate his time making it.
And as a viewer I felt cheated for wasting my time watching it.
If you only showed the scenes with anything interesting happening in them,
this film would be about 15-20 minutes long. The characters are so
flat, so unlikeable, you never care what happens to them.
The breaks from reality add nothing to the film, except to annoy
the viewer. And that's the thing, as a viewer, I felt completely uninvolved with what was happening on the screen.
When it was over, I felt nothing but gratitude that this wretched waste of time had ended.
right, repo the genetic opera and seed of chucky are good but Haneke's Funny Games is bad...
You're completely out of your mind. The use of off screen violence in this movie is incredible. The acting (especially the original) is flawless and the story is great. Whatever qualms you have with it's message of media's influence on violence or Haneke's view of violence in film is besides the point. This is a great film. Pay more attention to writing code for the site and playing with you Chucky dolls and let Tex Massacre do the reviews. You're awful Mr. Disgusting.
Posted By: MrDisgusting at 1:56am, November 6, 2008
I can't believe any horror fan would enjoy this slap in the face. Michael Haneke basically calls us sick and disturbed for enjoying horror films. I wish we never even covered this crap.
Posted By: horrorfan25 at 8:32pm, November 5, 2008
What makes Funny games original and anti-Saw is because Funny game's violence is so disturbing and so intense that instead of Saw fans applauding for the next gory scene they will instead say turn off the T.V. this is too disturbing. And also all the violence is OFF screen yet the movie is still brutal. Overall Funny games accomplishes everything it was suppose to do. I highly recommend it to everyone.
One of the most disturbing movies I have ever seen. The film reminded me of "The Strangers" because it was about a group of people that go into a house and terrorize a family for no apparent reason. The film is brilliant in the way that it toys with your mind. There are little to no "jump" scenes but you are constantly terrified for what is going to happen to this family.
This is a great movie but it is definetly not for the faint of heart. The fact that "Saw" is a lighter movie really says something.
Posted By: Romerofan123 at 3:49pm, October 27, 2008
I hated this movie!
Posted By: paulcav151 at 10:28pm, October 24, 2008
I liked it. And I didn't hate the rewind scene. It couldn't end the way it did, and the rewind fixed that. From the first shotgun blast, to the boat scene, it made me uncomfortable, and isn't that what "horror" movies do?
Funny Games is brilliant. It's an acheivement in horror that is an uncomfortable, unforgiving, and devilishly charming thriller. We have movies like "Saw" and "Hostel" which are constantly upping the ante with each entry. Let's see how elaborate we can make this kill. Let's see how many people we can make squirm. It's all done in a very viseral and increasingly cheap way. Funny Games makes your squirm but in a differnt way. At the route of horror is psychological terror and that's where Games strikes. It doesn't show you the violence, in fact, most of the violence is shown off screen. The horror here comes from the cast. We aren't watching random people being killed in gruesome ways for our enjoyment. No, we're watching a family being tortured through psychological mindgames. As for the infamous "Remote Scene" I loved it. I may be alone here, but I have good reason to enjoy the scene. Just like Funny Games plays mind games on the characters it also plays mind games on you. This is a bleak film. It's an unforgiving journey in which we are guided by two psychopaths in white shorts.
Paul: What do you think? Think they stand a chance?
Posted By: stewietantrum at 3:17am, October 20, 2008
This film can be very slow at times, but it's like pulling a band-aid off slowly; it just makes it that much more painful. It was pretty good, even though after it was over I felt like I needed a shower... it has that effect. Quite disturbing.
I loved this film. Brectian Breaks are used correctly and effectively. The rewind scene has significance although mostly everybody hates it or dont get it. The closing shot with Michael Pitt staring into the camera is terrifying.
Posted By: Ralph Wiggum at 6:12am, October 5, 2008
Vague at best, painfully slow at worst.
Having never seen Haneke's original film, I rushed out to the opening screening along with another horror buff to view what was widely touted to be the hottest film of the season. However, our reactions rapidly shifted from bewildered, to frustrated, before settling on disappointed.
Ok, I get it; nihilism rules and the horror movie viewer is some type of culpable voyeur. This concept is neither new nor particularly well done in this film. Numerous scenes are so ridiculously slow and drawn out (Watts attempting to stand whilst tied at hand and foot) and appear to serve no purpose nor build any suspense.
Perhaps the only redeeming feature in the film was the villains creepy dialogue, switching names, inventing pasts, stirring each other etc. This, coupled by Watts' and Roth's portrayal of otherwise unendearing characters earned this film a lousy 3/10 from this disappointed viewer.
I agree with the masses; the 'rewind' was unforgivable and was the final nail in the coffin for this film.
Posted By: Protecious at 12:27pm, September 30, 2008
strange movie, very different villians than im used to, which is a good thing, there was one part in the movie i didnt understand, the whole rewinding thing and naomi watts not getting the shotgun in time, i dont understand that part, if anybody can explain that to me, im very curious.
the movie is based basically on suspense and terror, without alot of gore, but some here and there, kept my interest, but overall it fell a little short overall, as to where the strangers was better at achieving simple suspsense and intensity.
Posted By: Shakleford at 3:55pm, September 15, 2008
This remake of the 1997 movie of the same name is an exact frame for frame remake with only a new cast and english dialogue. Being someone who watched the original, I was curious to see if this movie was worth watching. It was well worth it but it has an aquired taste to it.
It is not a movie you will understand if you only watch it one time. This movie is great from the carefree attitude of the kids to the way they toyed with the family emotionally, One thing that caught my attention was the way they did not show the violence happening and did it tastefully.
I am giving this movie a 9/10 because not everyone will get into this movie, but those who do will understand what the director is trying to get at.
Posted By: flesheater123 at 1:20pm, September 13, 2008
This was the biggest time waster. It did nothing for me expect bore me. The remote scene was garbage. I guess it was suppose to be like a 2 end deal. If you wanted the dude to die then you got that. IDK. All I can say was this movie sucked.
This was a very good movie. Near perfect, I would say... until the whole 'rewinding' thing. At that point, it almost seemed like this was a cartoon of the Tom and Jerry sort, or something. It just got far too ridiculous. However, it gets bonus points for the incredibly depressing ending. I really enjoy those.
I thought this movie was very slow in parts and abit boring..never saw the original. Probably won't after watching this..I'm not saying it was bad just that it wasn't very interesting to me..
half way though I was looking for something else to do..I also bought the movie without seeing it and am alittle pissed that I hadn't picked up a different movie instead..:(
I loved the original film and the remake was just as good. I felt though the story has been over done. With so many films being made just like this one it's hard to see the originality in it. With The Strangers, Dead Calm, Storm Worning and so many like them a movie like FUNNY GAMES can easily slip between the cracks of human explotation films. The ending to both the FUNNY GAMES movies left me feeling that I just didn't get it, why put us through that to end the movies the way they ended??? I so tired of these type of films and I can't wait till hollywood gets over this style of film.
Having seen the original and the remake I actually get the point of the movie. An artistic and experimental attempt meant to examine the portrayal of violence in movies and the media. We are subjected to an alternate reality in which the main killer is aware that this is a movie and ask the audience to bet on the outcome (the remake seems to leave some of these parts out). However i'm a fan of movies and want to be entertained..not lectured..and not bored which is what Funny Games is. It's unpleasant,it's disturbing,but it's also boring..so the message doesnt seem to get across.
fist off I do not like torture movies and this was not one of them.
This movie can not get more than a 1 out of 9. It wasn't that bad...up until the remote. They screwed this movie up. Would have been much better if they were just kids who killed for no reason. But the point of this movie was just lost.
i was expecting a lot more from this movie. i was majorly disappointed. i thought it would be more like actual torture like the synopsis made me think. i think this movie could have been a LOT better but it wasnt like horrible. what could have made it better was if they didnt kill the dog. that just completely ruined the movie for me. i can take people getting killed but not animals.
The 97 original is a masterpiece. This is the same exact movie with a different but great cast so it's still a masterpiece.
No Hollywood shit here. Bravo Haneke for this really smart and vicious movie.
Movies rarely reach the originality of lesser-known video games like Killer 7 (PS2) and No More Heroes (Wii). Kill Bill, for example, was an okay movie, but it looks lame and raped of everything that made it intelligent or original compared to Killer 7. Funny Games gives me the same vibe. It’s good for a movie, but compared to No More Heroes (which uses similar plotting and storytelling devices, but 100x more effectively with insanely more action), it is nothing even slightly special. I think that is why I can’t give this movie a perfect rating, even though I’m very tempted to.
The other main problem I had was it had literally no action or scares. There were a lot of points where I was so bored I was about to turn it off. But maybe that was the point. Best line in the movie: “Would you like this to end now, or be more typical with an ending with some plot devilment?” So maybe boring was what the director was going for.
After hearing people say stuff like, “This is the most disturbing movie ever made!” I was very disappointed with the level of actually disturbing scenes. *SPOILERS* They kill a kid and a dog.*END SPOILERS* Sorry, but compared to a man getting his head shot out as he holds the severed head of his daughter (from Killer 7, as I referenced before), Funny Games just looks cute, not disturbing. I don’t understand why children are put on such a high pedestal and the second they get killed off in a movie it’s automatically “unfair” or “not playing by the rules”. So don’t expect this to be as disturbing as the critics are saying because it simply isn’t.
Overall, a very good movie but far from perfect. It fails to deliver the things like originality and disturbment (yes, I made that word up) that it’s tagged with. But like everything else that’s the critics fault more than the director’s. Very much worth watching.
i had really high hopes for this movie. it is intresting but i think its just not good enough. no score, no blood and very weird. come on naomi is a gfood actress why put her in this? she looked stupid. she was blowdrying a cell phone on one part. the camera also stayed in one spot for like 5 minutes one time. this movie is a letdown. glad i rented it and didnt buy it.
A really challenging movie. It intentionally goes against horror cliches and makes the viewer very uncomfortable throughout. The direction is incredible, simply due to the fact that it never spells anything out for the viewer. We are made to think and imagine certain things for ourselves, which is pretty rare lately.
I also loved how one of the villians occasionally breaks the 4th wall and talks, or just looks, directly at the camera. Almost as if he's saying "Well you paid to see horrible things happen to regular people, what'd you expect?". Almost as if he's criticising us for being entertained by watching these people be tortured endlessly.
The torture really is more psycological than physical, and this works on an entirely different level than average horror. Something in the way the 2 villians interact really made me uneasy, and as confused as the family members they are attacking.
The acting is also phenomenal, Naomi Watts might get some shit occasionally, (after The Birds she'll no doubt be referred to as 'the remake chick') but she does a great job here, as does the entire cast. I usually can't stand Michael Pitt, dunno why, he just seems like a cracked out Leonardo DiCaprio, but this role fits him perfectly. Same goes for his half retarded counterpart. Of course Tim Roth is great, though his American accent was unnecessary and kinda forced at times. Even the kid is great, all he really had to do was look scared, but he nailed it. It's one of those movies that's so engrossing you start to forget you've seen most of these actors 100 before in other movies.
I'm still trying to decode whatever message this film's trying to send, but hey, I'm still thinking about it all through the next day, so that pretty much seals it as a great, thought provoking film.
Even though I hear this is a shot-for-shot remake of the original I'm still gonna find my way around to see it. This director knows his shit.
THIS IS ART HORROR AT ITS BEST. Its slow moving, painful for the audience and screws with you the viewer. I think MIchael Haneke is a genius and this is worth watching on dvd.
BUT THIS WAS BORN IN THE DV GERMAN ART FILM MOVEMENT the first one being made in 97.
There is no blood really, nor too much violence, its all about screwing with your head. This film is somewhat hitchcock and somewhat Rob Zombie. I know that sounds weird, but you know how zombie is the king of making you squirm simply with his dialogue, this movie gives you the same effect.
If you have a brave girlfriend this might be the one to watch with her. But again I am bias Naomi Watts is my 3rd cousin.
I knew ‘Funny Games’ was going to be awful about a third into the film but, I stayed and was wrong; it was one of the worst films I have ever seen. I honestly wish they would have called it, ‘the most boring pseudo-intelligent, pseudo-artistic piece of crap you will ever see,’ so I could have been prepared.
