Funny Games

Funny Games (1997) or Who Needs A Fourth Wall Anyways?

Hecklefest film, you know, movies like Unlawful Entry where people do stupid things like leave the gun lying next to the bad guy after takin' 'em out with a rolling pin. Those movies leave the audience to squirm in their seats unable to stop the cliché. Funny Games, on the other hand, is a chilling Austrian suspense thriller about a family heading off the cottage country for a week or two only to be terrorized by a couple of rich brats when they arrive. What sets Funny Games apart from other home invasion / hostage terror flicks is its hyper-realistic nature. Yes, it's brutal and more than qualifies as a Caution Film but writer / director Michael Haneke quite obviously spent much time on the script and the plot development, since, with very few exceptions, we as the audience can enjoy the very logical unfolding of this extreme human drama.

Recommendations: Inglourious Basterds (Quentin Tarantino, 2009), Requiem for a Dream, Dawn of the Dead

FUNNY GAMES

Just about the time you think you've seen it all along comes a movie that redefines everything.

RESERVOIR DOGS, THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, NATURAL BORN KILLERS, THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT, STRAW DOGS, PULP FICTION -- none of these films compare to the astonishingly disturbing FUNNY GAMES, the 1997 Austrian film written and directed by Michael Haneke.

There are lots of descriptive words that leap to the forefront: harrowing, distressing, uncomfortable, chilling, compelling, unbearable and gut-wrenching are just a few.

The acting is outstanding, especially Susanne Lothar as the mother of a family terrorized by two sadistic but-ever-so-polite young killers. And Haneke knows how to clinically ratchet up the inexorable tension while, at the same time, irritating the viewer beyond what I thought possible from a screening experience. Yes, I said irritating -- in the same vein as Ms. Fundis streaking chalk across the blackboard in seventh grade -- where every nerve ending imaginable is zapped to the fullest extent.

FUNNY GAMES is also infuriating because Haneke tries something incredibly stupid at the 90-minute mark. Some ersatz film critics have applauded the director for his decision to break the fourth wall -- as if this hasn't been done before. One example is MR. SARDONICUS from beloved schlockmeister William Castle. For Mr. Castle it was a gimmick that worked, at least to a degree. Unfortunately, the same can not be said for Mr. Haneke -- even Film 101 students at the University of Texas know better (although I'm not so certain that's true about the over-rated faculty).

In closing, let me assure you that should you chose to see FUNNY GAMES you will hate it for what it does to you. But, I also can assure you that you will not be able to turn away.

An aside --

I've tried to think of something that could equal the incessant, inflammable, visceral irritability of FUNNY GAMES. About the only thing I've come up with is to have Topo Gigio do a Bowflex commercial narrated by Fran Dresher with Ms. Fundis providing the sound effects. On second thought, that doesn't even come close...  

(Read Less...)

Robert A. Nowotny

Funny Games: Victim Blaming

The MPAA rated this film R for Terror, Violence and Some Language…don’t worry about the Language. This seems to be a shot-by-shot remake of his 1997 film: I suppose he wanted to make the story accessible to American Audiences by casting Naomi Watts and Tim Roth.

The plot is fairly basic: two young punks kidnap a family and hold them hostage in their summer cabin. They begin to play sadistic games with these totally innocent victims until the film's rewind anti-climax. Why is this movie sadistic and frustrating when the body count in DARK KNIGHT is hundreds higher? Could it have something to do with us, the audience?

There is very little on-screen violence as the camera holds on close-ups while we hear the tortured screams and shotgun blasts. Somehow, this makes the ordeal even worse. There is a trick to FUNNY GAMES and it’s this: Haneke manipulates the audience into victim blaming. Every single person who watches this film exclaims that it would not happen to him or her; they would run away, call for help, or get a weapon and fight back. He even sets up a few scenarios to foster this belief. He wants to incite the audience into an emotional backlash against George and Ann.

As the sadism progresses we begin to feel that they somehow deserve what’s coming to them for being so stupid to put themselves in a helpless situation. I speak from professional experience: most people blame crime victims. How many times have I heard, “If she was being raped, why didn’t she scream?” Too many. It’s no mistake that the murderers are young, good looking intelligent young men; Haneke manipulates us into liking them (and here’s the trick) at the victim’s expense. Once we the audience imagine our own heroic actions and escape, we cease to empathize with the true victims and become the sadists. Final Grade: (B)

Recommendations: The Birds, Breathless (Jean-Luc Godard, 1960), Funny Games

All reviews copyright Korova, Ltd. Visit Alex at his Home Theatre Blog, http://korovatheatrepresents.blogspot.com/

FUNNY GAMES (2007)

BOTTOM LINE: “Funny Games” has some interesting potential with its two antagonists and self-referential treatment, but the confrontational anti-violence themes get lost in a very ugly and mean-spirited execution of a story that will do nothing but leave a bad taste in your mouth.

THE GOOD: Director Michael Haneke has a dislike for violence and its role in the media, particularly in the media’s ability to sensationalise violence for its own ends. In directing “Funny Games”, a shot-by-shot remake of his own 1997 Austrian horror film, he attempts to confront you with how vicious and nasty real violence actually is. This is a film that makes you feel the brutality and ugliness of violence, particularly as nobody is spared. A young family on vacation at their holiday house are suddenly taken hostage by a pair of well spoken male psychopaths who proceed to torture and kill them through the use of sadistic games. In some ways, the realness of the violence in this film, the propensity to focus on the psychological aspects of it as opposed to outright blood and gore, and the number of self-referential nods to it demonstrate how disgusting the torture-porn genre which include movies such as “Saw” and “Hostel” really are in using this horror as an entertainment. Throughout the film, the two psychos nod and wink to the camera, as if actively asking you to participate in their fun, even asking us at one point to bet on who will be the victor between them and their victims. There is a nice demeaning banter between the two psychos that can at times be amusing and the two actors, Michael Pitt and Brady Corbet, do a very good job of portraying two deeply disturbed individuals who execute their brutality through a thick layer of politeness and supposed etiquette. Naomi Watts puts in an excellent performance as Ann, adding a layer of depth that might have otherwise been absent. “Funny Games” has the potential to be a unique take on violence in the media.

THE BAD: The experience of watching this film vacillates between total disgust and boredom. The film is disgusting in its mental and physical torture that it portrays, and it is boring in every other aspect for its slow direction and lacklustre visuals, not to mention some extremely long-winded shots, one of which lasts for ten minutes with action that could have been wrapped up quicker. I guess the idea is to make it as real as possible, but then this is a film and artistic licence is always a given. The film plays with genre conventions by setting up the possibility of escape and then turns them on their head; not necessarily a bad thing, but when for example the son is the first one brutally shot, or George (Tim Roth) is gauged off screen with a kitchen knife before being shot in front of Ann, and the absolutely ridiculous scene of one of the psychos using a remote control to literally rewind the action to get the upper hand after something goes wrong for them, the film does nothing except turn you against it. There may be an anti-violence lesson in here, but the ugly, mean-spirited and uninspired direction of this film will do everything to sabotage that lesson and its ability to teach you anything about the brutality of what you are seeing.

RATING: 3/10

(Read Less...)

Todd Murphy <br />
http://www.allaboutmovies.net

Funny Games (2007)

This is, then, part of the reason for director Michael Haneke's remake of his own film, Funny Games. While I've never seen the original, I can safely conclude that this 2007 rehash is a successful attempt at creating Hanek's original story that can stand on its own without having to know the background of the films.

Last updated: 2009-08-24 03:47:22 by Ryneb