| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From director J.J. Abrams comes the next installment in the Star Trek saga, Star Trek Into Darkness. See it at Cinemark theaters now and pre-order on Blu-ray, 3D Blu-ray, DVD, and the Exclusive Starfleet Phaser Gift Set. Shop Star Trek Into Darkness and more in the Star Trek Store. Learn more |
Frequently Bought Together
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images? |
Special Features
None.
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com
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 Description
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.
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
18 of 21 people found the following review helpful
Format:DVD
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+
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+
9 of 11 people found the following review helpful
Format:DVD
Funny Games introduced me to a new sensation. As I sat in my seat, I felt sick. Viscerally sick. This film is cold and utterly heartless. That's the intent of the film, and it does that well. It chews up the audience and spits them out, painfully. I had no idea what the film actually entailed, and when I found out, I felt violated as few movies have made me feel. I kept watching, practically pleading for the atrocities to end. They didn't.
Funny Games harasses the viewer as much as the family it tortures. There is not a moment of resolve or justice in the entire picture, even if doing so has to be achieved by breaking the fourth wall. No breath of fresh air comes the viewer's way. Believe the reviewers, they're not exaggerating. Nobody with a heart can sit through this and not feel horrible.
Tim Roth, Devon Gearheart and in particular Naomi Watts all deliver knock-out performances as the doomed family, who one day are accosted by two sterile-looking, psychotic young men who enter their summer house asking for eggs and then refuse to leave, in the most psychologically agonising way possible. They then make a bet with the family that come next morning, they'll all be dead, voicing it as though they're betting on who can hold their breath the longest. With their surface politeness, the two young men engage the family in the horrible situation in which they find themselves. And horrible things do happen. Most of the horrible things happen off-screen, making them even worse.
Let me make one thing plain; this is no Saw. Funny Games holds very little blood or physical violence. What it does deliver in spades, however, is emotional violence; how it feels to be coldly taken hostage in your own house and humorously informed that you and your loved ones are gonna die. The situation is made plain, and it delivers.
And that's precisely what I vilify. Funny Games forces the audience to make a choice - don't watch and be a happier man, or give in to curiosity and pay the price. It does bad things to the viewer and toys with our emotions. Whatever we want to happen does not. You can interpret that last sentence whichever you like, it still applies. It almost feels like the director is punishing us for empathizing with the family. Is us wanting the family to rise up and fight back against the two monsters who invade their lives so bad? Why would anyone invest in such an unpleasant film if you get no payoff at all to show for it?
Horrible as Funny Games feels to watch, I have to commend the cast for their superb performances. Great as Tim Roth is as the dad, Naomi Watts really steals the show with a performance that is impossible not to be shaken to the core by, a loving mother who suddenly finds herself in hell in her own home with little she can do against her torturers. Her son's sheer terror is something I have not been able to get out of my mind or heart, either; Devon Gearheart is a terrific rising talent. Michael Pitt and Brady Corbet do their job good as well; I struggle to think of characters I hate more, pure sadists with no motives given for their actions apart from the apparent enjoyment they find in it, deaf to the pleads of both the family and the audience, breaking all rules of storytelling by conversing with the audience and just doing everything to make sure that nothing good can happen.
The acting by the family gets 5 stars; they make you feel for them and root for them, making the ride even more painful. The movie itself gets 1. It's well-made, but that's not my point. Funny Games is disgusting. Not because of the amount of physical violence (there is little on-screen), but because of the emotions it forces you to feel. It seeps into your skin and denies you any sort of resolve. You're a happier person without the images of this movie stuck in your head. They may not be graphic in the conventional sense, but they sure are horrible.
Funny Games harasses the viewer as much as the family it tortures. There is not a moment of resolve or justice in the entire picture, even if doing so has to be achieved by breaking the fourth wall. No breath of fresh air comes the viewer's way. Believe the reviewers, they're not exaggerating. Nobody with a heart can sit through this and not feel horrible.
Tim Roth, Devon Gearheart and in particular Naomi Watts all deliver knock-out performances as the doomed family, who one day are accosted by two sterile-looking, psychotic young men who enter their summer house asking for eggs and then refuse to leave, in the most psychologically agonising way possible. They then make a bet with the family that come next morning, they'll all be dead, voicing it as though they're betting on who can hold their breath the longest. With their surface politeness, the two young men engage the family in the horrible situation in which they find themselves. And horrible things do happen. Most of the horrible things happen off-screen, making them even worse.
Let me make one thing plain; this is no Saw. Funny Games holds very little blood or physical violence. What it does deliver in spades, however, is emotional violence; how it feels to be coldly taken hostage in your own house and humorously informed that you and your loved ones are gonna die. The situation is made plain, and it delivers.
And that's precisely what I vilify. Funny Games forces the audience to make a choice - don't watch and be a happier man, or give in to curiosity and pay the price. It does bad things to the viewer and toys with our emotions. Whatever we want to happen does not. You can interpret that last sentence whichever you like, it still applies. It almost feels like the director is punishing us for empathizing with the family. Is us wanting the family to rise up and fight back against the two monsters who invade their lives so bad? Why would anyone invest in such an unpleasant film if you get no payoff at all to show for it?
Horrible as Funny Games feels to watch, I have to commend the cast for their superb performances. Great as Tim Roth is as the dad, Naomi Watts really steals the show with a performance that is impossible not to be shaken to the core by, a loving mother who suddenly finds herself in hell in her own home with little she can do against her torturers. Her son's sheer terror is something I have not been able to get out of my mind or heart, either; Devon Gearheart is a terrific rising talent. Michael Pitt and Brady Corbet do their job good as well; I struggle to think of characters I hate more, pure sadists with no motives given for their actions apart from the apparent enjoyment they find in it, deaf to the pleads of both the family and the audience, breaking all rules of storytelling by conversing with the audience and just doing everything to make sure that nothing good can happen.
The acting by the family gets 5 stars; they make you feel for them and root for them, making the ride even more painful. The movie itself gets 1. It's well-made, but that's not my point. Funny Games is disgusting. Not because of the amount of physical violence (there is little on-screen), but because of the emotions it forces you to feel. It seeps into your skin and denies you any sort of resolve. You're a happier person without the images of this movie stuck in your head. They may not be graphic in the conventional sense, but they sure are horrible.
17 of 23 people found the following review helpful
4.0 out of 5 stars
You might feel unimpressed by this film but it holds some great points.
September 8, 2008
Format:DVD
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.
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.
Most Recent Customer Reviews
1.0 out of 5 stars
Typical private school punks.
I taught pouty-lipped, spoiled-brat, mamma's boys punks just like the two antagonist here in a private Catholic school for about six years. Read more
Published 2 days ago by Ernest D. Cossiboom
1.0 out of 5 stars
crappy movie
I was expecting fear and suspense and it was extremely lacking in both. Not only was a it a bad movie, but the story itself sucked and the only acting that was worth mentioning or... Read more
Published 17 days ago by Kris
5.0 out of 5 stars
This is a good value
For the money this movie is awesome. Underrated and unknown, but creepy, and the special features make it one of my top 10.
Published 1 month ago by Evan J Engle
5.0 out of 5 stars
michael pitt is great and brings life to a otherwise drab movie
Without giving away the plot, it's a remake of a french horror classic.
The writing is not strong, but is overcome by the performances of NAOMI WATTS AND MICHAEL PITT. Read more
The writing is not strong, but is overcome by the performances of NAOMI WATTS AND MICHAEL PITT. Read more
Published 2 months ago by Lolita Angelique Lee
4.0 out of 5 stars
DVD film review; the USA version....
Love the original foreign version,but also like this USA version....good acting and well cast....kept close to the original,but personally I preferred the cast of the foreign... Read more
Published 3 months ago by roadside gypsy gayle
5.0 out of 5 stars
Michael Pitt!!!!
Another movie with Michael Pitt, Just had to buy it. Only a few bucks for a used copy and it played like new. Very satisfied with my order!!
Published 4 months ago by Beth
5.0 out of 5 stars
Favorite horror in a long time...
This movie, shown to me by a friend, has become my obsession since seeing it 3 years ago. I finally purchased this movie last year from Amazon,and am now just reviewing it. Read more
Published 4 months ago by House
5.0 out of 5 stars
Very nice
I was so looking forward to getting this and it was even better than I expected. The dvd was still wrapped in its protective plastic and the disc played like a dream.
Published 4 months ago by Toni
5.0 out of 5 stars
To crazy for words
To crazy for words. They bet not come my way trying to play this games with because thety will lose
Published 4 months ago by LATISHA RENEE PREDUE
3.0 out of 5 stars
OK
This movie is kind of frustrating, and confusing towards the end. Not exactly what I was looking for, but decent.
Published 4 months ago by bengletiger
Look for Similar Items by Category
|
