Michael Haneke re-examines the intricacies of a violent nature with this remake of his own 1997 thriller. Naomi Watts and Tim Roth star as a middle-class couple whose visit to their summer home with their son (Devon Gearhart) is beset by a pair of ostensibly genteel young men (Michael Pitt and Brady Corbet) who hold them captive and subject them to heinous acts of torture, seemingly for the sake of it. 112 min. Standard and Widescreen (Enhanced); Soundtrack: English Dolby Digital 5.1; Subtitles: English (SDH), Spanish, French. NOTE: This Title Is Out Of Print; Limit One Per Customer. Michael Haneke is a modern master, which his spellbinding films Cache and The Piano Teacher proved to an international audience. When it came time for a Hollywood remake of his ultra-disturbing 1997 picture Funny Games, who better than Haneke himself to helm the new version? And indeed, the second Funny Games bears the impeccable sense of control and technique that the Austrian version had: it is a horrifyingly precise account of a family terrorized by two psychopathic young thugs at a vacation home. For anyone who’s already seen the ’97 film, this new one–a nearly shot-by-shot transcription of the original–will seem superfluous, no matter how impressive the performances of Naomi Watts and Tim Roth are. (Michael Pitt and Brady Corbet are suitably creepy as their menacers, too.) For newbies, the movie might be as infuriating and thought-provoking as Haneke intends it to be. That’s because Funny Games is an intellectual game itself, a direct rebuke to the audience that gobbles up gratuitous violence and cynical manipulation. Haneke sets up our expectations, and then refuses to provide the conventional catharsis… or the conventional anything. All of this was pretty bracing in the first go-round, but feels like gamesmanship in the remake. Even if you dig what Haneke’s up to, this is a brutal movie-watching experience. –Robert Horton
Product Features
- Condition: New
- Format: DVD
- AC-3; Color; Dolby; Dubbed; DVD; Subtitled; Widescreen; NTSC
Not for Everyone, But a Very Intelligent, Thought-Provoking Movie If you read film reviews frequently you will occasionally come across the phrase, “this movie indicts the viewer.” Never has this phrase been more appropriate than with Michael Haneke’s “Funny Games,” an Americanized remake of his 1997 film of the same name. Unlike the majority of people who will see this movie, I have not (yet) seen the original and knew little about either version before watching this. I didn’t know what to expect when the movie began and, now that it’s ended, I don’t know what to think.The basic summary one can give for this film feels simple enough; a nice suburban family consisting of George (Tim Roth), Ann (Naomi Watts), and their young son Georgie are vacationing at their semi-secluded lake house. Minutes after arriving, two young men appear at their house. Soon, they are being held hostage by the two men and are forced to play a series of little games all revolving around a little bet. The two men bet that the family will be dead by 9 a.m. the next morning and the family bets they’ll be alive.Well…something like that. The set-up appears to be just your average set-up for a hostage/slasher movie. But that’s not what this film is at all. If you’re looking for a horror film or a psychological thriller, start looking elsewhere. “Funny Games” is an indictment of moviegoers who are so accustomed to seeing on-screen violence we’re desensitized to everything.Here is a film where we have two, clean-cut, innocent looking men who just happen to be killers. They have no motive or explanation for what they’re doing. We have a typical suburban family who have no idea what’s going on and react appropriately and realistically to the situations they’re thrown into.The film absolutely defies convention in every aspect. Not a single thing that occurs in this film is predictable, there’s not a single cheap thrill here, and it’s really just a brilliant piece of filmmaking. For a critique on the apathetic quality moviegoers have to violence against innocent people, it’s brilliant how Haneke allows a film that could have been very violent and gory to have little on-screen violence. To further the indictment of the audience, Michael Pitt’s character will talk directly to the camera, making the audience a part of what is going on.In the hands of a different writer/director this could’ve become an annoying plot device. Enough about that though, let’s discuss one of the most pivotal aspects of the film; the acting.Watts and Roth are so believable, you do empathize with their characters….These are the kinds of performances where they completely embody who they’re playing rather than just playing a character. Pitt and Brady Corbet as the psychotic duo are quietly blood-chilling and wholly believable.I’m guessing Haneke’s goal with his Americanized version is just to present the film to a broader audience but whatever the goal…”Funny Games” is a film that deserves to be viewed, thought about, and discussed. It’s not very entertaining, nor is it meant to be, and it’s not very satisfying either (once again though, it wasn’t meant to be). It’s definitely a thinking person’s movie, but it’s an important film. See it.GRADE: B+
You might feel unimpressed by this film but it holds some great points. I’ve seen the original to this film and I love it. The first thing I really enjoyed about this film, was the director’s decision to make Ann and George very ordinary and very vulnerable, and because of Roth’s and Watts’ brilliant performances it was equally terrifying. Before watching this I had assumed I would be cheering for Tim Roth the entire time – being a huge Reservoir Dogs fan and all – since he was one of the reasons I was attracted to this film in the first place. As it turns out, Naomi Watts was far better in this film than Roth, and showed audiences that she is one of the best actresses working today.Brady Corbet as the childish and shy Peter seemed at first to be a horrible casting decision. His first scene was fantastic, then for awhile he didn’t contribute anything besides being the muscle for Paul’s plan. After the movie started to pick up speed however, he really started to shine through, and I wouldn’t be surprised if this role lands him a few more parts in the genre. Michael Pitt’s performance as the mastermind behind the operation was flawless. The way he manage to stay calm and polite and yet, come off as a complete sociopath was fantastic. Paul repeatedly breaks the 4th wall to talk to the audience; asking for their approval, whether they think they’ve gone far enough, or sometimes just to smile maniacally. At first I thought it took away from the film, then I came to realize it only added to the message of the film, that we as the audience want to be completely shocked, and the only reason we watch movies like this are to feel sorry for the people involved. Or perhaps we are on the other side of the fence and want to see these people suffer. Whatever your fancy is, I’m sure you’ll be thoroughly satisfied with this movie.It’s very obvious throughout this movie that director Haneke wanted to make a film as a social commentary on media violence. The dialogue between characters very much portrayed this concept, and while simple and sparse, it was very realistic and made certain scenes very hard to watch at times. The characters act very rational, and while there are a couple instances where they do something out of character, overall they are believable and as I said, realistic portrayals of both sides to this equation. This film felt much more like an art film than a psychological thriller. Many scenes lasted for upwards of 5 or 6 minutes with no cuts, and there was very little camera movement. Almost every shot was stationary, and either completely symmetrical, or completely out of balance depending on the particular mood of the scene. Also, this film had very little color, as everything was a very neutral tone, making certain items and effects standout more than they normally would have. What little violence there is in the film is almost entirely off screen, and left to the viewer’s imagination. This movie was not made with the intent of grossing out an audience with over the top gore in a horrific situation. It was merely to poke and pry at our minds to see – and possibly to wake us up to – just what we as a society find entertaining.It’s unfortunate that even after being remade many viewers will not have the opportunity to see this. Then again, a film like this never does very well at the box office, so maybe it’s for the best that it’s being released on video for easy admission. Chances are there’s enough people out there in the horror community who’ve been watching this just as closely as I have, and will pick it up instantly. Funny Games is a great psychological thriller, but it is also a fantastic artistic message given to us in the form of a horror film. It’s one of those movies the audience can really get into, on more than one level. I don’t live in upper class suburbia, but I can appreciate how terrified a family would be in a situation like this. Part of its charm is how it makes you think, and will definitely stick with you long after the credits have rolled. Along with the original this is one of the most chilling and disturbing pictures I’ve ever had the experience of viewing I hope you feel the same way too.