Customer Reviews

Funny Games

5 star:		(54)
4 star:		(42)
3 star:		(15)
2 star:		(17)
1 star:		(25)

 

 

It is a good idea to know something about this film before watching it.

On the surface it is that familiar thriller where strangers terrorize a family.

But really it is about how you, the viewer, are complicit in on-screen violence. This is the film's priority and it is not afraid to abandon its original, more traditional plot line - however bizarrely - whenever it feels right to emphasize this.

Remember. All these horrible things are happening because you won't switch off. Overly violent films only get made because people keep paying to go and see them.

The skill of the director of Funny Games is that he makes his point without resorting to hardly any on screen violence, unlike many of the films he parodying.

I strongly recommend this film but be warned - it is not a "date movie". See it on your own because it is impossible to know how people will react to it. If you like this film your friends may think you are SICK. You are not. But Funny Games brings home to you just how many films are.

I never realized the extent to which big-budget American action films condition audiences into savoring and craving "justifiable" acts of violence until I saw this fascinating and deeply disturbing Austrian movie from noted German director Michael Haneke. I couldn't sleep after seeing it, but after about a week had passed, I was very glad that I'd seen it. I'm now "immune" from being manipulated into enjoying onscreen violence, because the movie made me keenly aware of when I AM being manipulated ... and of the "commandments" that movies featuring cathartically satisfying acts of vengeance are built upon and dare not violate.

The storyline is sort of a hybrid of THE DESPERATE HOURS and CAPE FEAR, with two very Aryan-looking young men invading the summer cottage of an upper-middle-class family of three and sadistically playing "funny games" with them. But there's much more than the surface story at work here ... Haneke has some clever tricks up his sleeve when it comes to exercising his total control over the "rules" that the movie plays by. He keeps the audience off-balance by repeatedly violating movie conventions and confounding conditioned expectations as to how events will unfold.

Amazingly, there's only ONE act of on-screen violence in the entire movie ... and it's a classic example of the 100% acceptable, "justifiable" sort that American audiences so crave and Hollywood so obligingly provides on a regular basis. But just as your "rush" kicks in, Haneke pulls the carpet out from underneath you with one of his sleight-of-hand tricks, flip-flopping your pleasure into an equivalent amount of pain. And as for the RESULTS of the OFF-screen violence ... well, you're on your own.

Special kudos should go out to actors Arno Frisch and Frank Giering, for being willing to play what must be the creepiest, most contemptible crime duo in movie history. (The hillbillies in DELIVERANCE have NOTHING on them!) It takes fearlessness to make yourself a target for audience detestation at this level, and the film wouldn't work if the roles hadn't been so capably filled.

Know going in that the "See it if you dare" challenge on the DVD cover is not to be taken lightly. But know also that if you DO take the challenge, you'll emerge from the experience shaken but wiser - in possession of a whole new perspective on the bogusness of traditional Hollywood crowd-pleasing violence.

One word comes to mind after viewing this film... Mindblowing. You probably have never and will never see anything like this again. I purchased this DVD after reading Fangorias book on ''100 Horror Films Youve never seen''- I dont know if I could classify this as strictly horror, it goes beyond that.

This is a whole other realm thats never been touched... At least not to this severity.. Ive seen many horror/psychological terror films and after watching the likes of Maniac or Gummo I didnt think anything could outdo it, but this beats them all. Gummo was disturbing but it had no merit to it; this film has more to it than the sadistic violence and ''funny games'' the characters play. Ive never seen anything like this. The director takes a more original approach, during the film the killers actually look and talk to the camera at times, not often; but they even play the ''games'' with the audience.

Plot- a couple, their child and dog go to their vacation home. Soon after that the couple is visited by a pair of clean cut young men who soon turn ruthless and brutal. When they first introduce themselves they look like normal polite people, but when one comes over to the house asking to ''borrow eggs'' you know something is coming., You just dont know when and you are anticipating when this guy is going to lose it. You keep rooting for the victims as the film drags on, hoping that somehow they will make it..at least one of them. It goes on and on, the games dont stop, not even at the end.

This film is cruel, brutal, cold, radical, provocative with unbelievable psychological games and horror. A real eye-opener. Its not a family movie of course, it's something you would want to watch alone or in the company of someone very open-minded. You will probably be angry, depressed and astonished at the same time...as you witness the events that unfold in front of your eyes.

Recomended if you think you can handle this... It makes Cape Fear look like Bambi.

"Funny Games" takes the violent thriller genre and turns it not so much on its head as inside out, exposing its internal workings and forcing us to consider what it's really about. The story premise is simple enough. A rich and likeable family of three head to their lake house for a summer break. Everything seems normal until into the house come two intruders: the flabby and childlike Peter, and his suavely arrogant friend, Paul. The young men stage-manage a small domestic misunderstanding then escalate it into shocking violence. We soon realise they have a sadistic agenda and we, the audience, are to be taken along for a repulsive but mesmerizing ride. The most generous explanation for this harrowing and at times almost unwatchable film is that it's attempting to explore the very nature of film violence. Writer/director Haneke has his villains address us directly, trying to nod-and-wink us into complicity, and his screenplay thwarts every one of our expectations about foreshadowing, thriller plot structure, character arcs, and deus-ex-machina endings. In doing so, he impressively demonstrates how contrived, unrealistic and ultimately non-frightening almost all supposedly "violent" films actually are. "Funny Games" exposes the formula by refusing to follow it. So what? Well, beneath the artifice I think there is a serious point Haneke is making here. He forces us to ask some interestingly uncomfortable questions. Are the formulaic, unrealistic, cartoonish thrillers we usually label "violent" really only an attempt to TAME violence by forcing it into story patterns where the innocent are saved and the villains are destroyed? Do we watch these films because they teach us that violence has a happy ending, that the bad guys of the world always get what they deserve? Why else do we cheer uncontrollably and feel such visceral relief at the only actual moment of graphic violence in this film (all the rest happen off camera) - the one which Haneke immediately, maddeningly retracts? Because it's the way we want the world to be, and the way Hollywood would have it. "Funny Games" is interesting because it makes us consider these things. It's far from entertaining, though, and I presume that's part of the point: why should violence be the joke Hollywood makes of it? Watch this back-to-back with something like "Panic Room" or "The Hand That Rocks The Cradle" (or anything else from Hollywood's Yuppies-In-Peril cycle of the early 1990s) and you'll see what "Funny Games" is getting at.

Funny games is a sobering film about two youths who invite themselves into a family's home, seemingly innocently, and gradually began to torment, torture and brutalize the family. It is directed by Austrian director Michael Haneke who went on to direct The Piano Teacher--another disturbing film, although not as brutal as Funny Games. The movie is in German with English subtitles. It has very little music and what music is there is--John Zorn's extreme rock band Naked City--is violent and abrupt and very fitting.

I saw this movie one night on the independant film channel. I had missed the first 20 minutes. I hate coming into the middle of a movie I've never seen. But this time I watched the rest and quickly researched when it would be on again so I could record it.
This movie is utterly terrifying. It shakes you down and, like I've read in other reviews, makes you stare blankly at the screen well after it's over.
The things that make this so shocking are not easily noticed. It wasn't until I tried describing this movie to a friend that I realized that the reason the anti-heroes were so effective in their reign over the victimized family, is that, with all their brutality, the two youths were extremely polite.
They asked politely for everything--using words like please and thank you and, at least initially, most of the brutality happened when the victims didn't comply with the antagonist's relatively simple requests. After several easy requests, the orders become more and more difficult and traumatic. But never do the two antagonists scream, yell or otherwise verbally assault their victims. In fact, they often ask why the victims drove them to cause such destructive results.
These character were not cardboard cut-outs that are typical of most movies of this sort. They show thought, as demented as it is. They know what makes the victims squirm and Michael Haneke makes the audience squirm along with them.
A lot of people have problems with some of the cinematic gimmicks that are employed in the film, but this is a cinematic commentary on social violence, not a mockumentary. And, while not perfect, these techniques are to show the viewers that they themselves are part of all this.
The viewer has as much power as the killers. They may turn it off at any time. They may stop the _movie_ that the two antagonists fully realize they are a part (proof shown by the rewind scene). Yes. These characters realize they are in a movie. The victims, however, do not. The viewer is as much under attack as the victims. As much power as the viewers have to make it stop, they have no power to alter the outcomes if they choose to continue watching.
It's a tough accomplishment to play both sides as a filmmaker. Hitchcock employed techniques not unlike this. Hitchcock made his villains sympathetic. You wanted them to get away with it. In Psycho, every tenses up when the car won't sink into the river. Why do they tense? Because they want it to.
Haneke does not make his villains sympathetic. But he does make you the viewer want to know what they are going to do next. The villains know you are watching them. At one point he even winks at you. They know that you are curious as to what is going to happen next.
They are there to entertain you.
They are there to torture you.
Michael Haneke is pulling the strings of the audience and when the show is over, you feel it. You feel played. Like someone has had their way with you. That's what Haneke wanted. He accomplished his goal and therefore has made a very effective film.

"Funny Games" is one of the scariest, darkest, most disturbing films I've ever managed to sit through (and I've seen "Troll 2"). What makes it remarkable is that it's not just an exercise in cinematic sickness, but a satire, one that gleefully and often shatters the fourth wall to show you the bag of tricks at its disposal. Somehow, though, instead of breaking the spell, the surreal and satiric moments add an intensely disturbing level of horror to the goings-on.

The plot is simple - after a slow but oddly tension-filled opening (punctuated none-too-subtly by the sudden appearance of oppressive metal music over the credits), two yuppie killers invade the home of a family and systematically terrorize them. They have a secret, however - they seem to know they're in a movie. This movie, to be precise. And they know you're watching. When one of them turns to the camera, smiles, and winks - well, if that doesn't make you feel unclean, you're the wrong audience for this thing.

Or maybe the right audience. The director, Haneke, is making a point here about the exploitation of violence and terror as entertainment. However, look at his past - and future - works, and you have to wonder how much of his anger is directed at himself. Haneke is ashamed and angry at his own fascination with brutality, which creates a spiral of satire and pain that makes for one of the rawest experiences you'll have watching a movie.

As other viewers have pointed out, there's almost no on-screen violence. And when there is, well, Haneke pulls the rug out from under it. And yet "Funny Games" is remembered as one of the most violent films in recent years, which only goes to show that psychological violence is infinitely more damaging than a few rounds of squibs and a gallon or two of fake blood.

Well made movies are supposed to stir up emotions and intense feelings. That would make Funny Games extremely well made because watching it was like putting my feelings into a Cuisinart and turning it on full blast. Funny Games made me feel awful; AWFUL. I brooded and moped and felt depressed for a long time after the movie ended. This movie soaks your emotions in cruelty then slaps you with some biting satire; the end had me feeling so bad I wished I had never seen the movie.

I love movies that explore the dark side and Funny Games succeeded and took me there; however, it's hard to come back to the light after watching this truely disturbing film.

Watch it if you must but you have been warned. Even though it's very well made I only gave it 3 stars. It made me feel things I would rather not feel.

Believe it or not there is only ONE graphic scene of violence in Michael Haneke's Funny Games but this scene is also the only flaw that this piece of experimental cinema has. That scene is also followed by another flawed scene involving a remote control. Now these two scenes when put together is HANEKE telling the viewer what the film is really about, but it is the opinion of most critics and this reviewer that he did not need to do that and that is why the film looses a star. So apart from this little "strange" element to the whole film it stands out as a film that does not depict screen violence but does depict the off-screen psychological impact of violence that a film can have on the viewer. HANEKE is a director who likes to play with your mind and here he does it like it has never been before. This film is truly original from start to finish and leaves you mortified and offended.

HANEKE has made an offensive film, but it is not exploitative, graphically violent or has nudity or any other taboo element that would automatically make a film offensive. The topic of this film is Sociopaths who perform very intrusive antisocial behaviour on a family that is spending their holiday by a house near a lake. Two sociopaths entire their lives and proceed to violate their privacy and standards of community morals. This starts off by being very subtle at first in a scene depicting a man knocking on the door looking for eggs. The slow build up is extreme and you end up hating the "bad guys" for their stupidity and down-right selfish and ignorant behaviour. The film then becomes more extreme and the pair's anti-social behaviour develops into taking advantage of the family, abuse and even murder. Towards the end of the film the "bad guys" are virtually the most horrific screen duo even witnessed for their narcissism and unrelenting cruelty towards human beings. They almost appear as Nazis and you just hate them - hate them to pieces and want to see them dead. Yet HANEKE does all this to you with mostly dialogue and psychological manipulation and the fact that he is able to do this is testimony to why the man has gone on to do better things.

You will not like this film, but you will enjoy the direction and how this piece of cinema has been presented to you. You will come away after it feeling that you have "experienced" something new and although you did not like it you will give this film every piece of credit that it deserves for doing it to you. Even the most peaceful and calm of viewers will find themselves seething in rage. Even Mother Teresa would like to wrap her hands around the villain's necks. It certainly does play with you, no doubt about that.

So go enjoy HANEKE's little experimental piece of aggression. It certainly does work.

I have seen a lot of bizarre cinema in my time, especially within the last year or so, but very few match "Funny Games." An Austrian film from director Michael Haneke, "Funny Games" is sure to leave an indelible mark on your memory long after you watch it. Unfortunately, this film lost a bit of its impact because I have the bad habit of reading reviews about films before I see them. "Funny Games" is the sort of experience best assimilated when you know absolutely nothing about it going in. If I ever watch this film again, and I cannot say I will because it is so grim and depressing, I must bring along a poor soul who knows nothing about what he/she will see. While I cannot recapture the experience of watching Haneke's wicked little film for the first time, I can gain some measure of satisfaction by viewing the expressions of horror and disgust flickering across the mug of an uninitiated victim. Man oh man! Just thinking about this movie again gives me shivers.

"Funny Games" is about, well, decidedly unfunny games. You get the impression rather quickly that this movie is going to be a tad different: a family of three--mother Anna, father Georg, and their son--cruise down a highway headed for a nice vacation at their lakeside cabin. The three barely settle in when a strange young man appears at the screen door asking Anna if he can borrow some eggs. Seeing no problem with such a mundane request, mom lets the man in and proceeds to assist him. This guy is incredibly clumsy, constantly dropping eggs and asking for more. Then another chap shows up asking about his friend. The two verbally spar with Anna, quickly reducing her to a flustered mess anxious to see the two men leave. When Georg shows up to see what all the commotion is about, the games begin. One of these guys, in the course of the ensuing conversation, smashes Georg's knee in with a golf club. The unsettling feeling churning in the pit of our stomachs now assumes a greater urgency. Something is definitely wrong here, and the rest of the film proceeds to show us, in sickeningly slow and agonizing detail, exactly what that is.

These two guys are definitely sociopaths, a condition that becomes markedly clear as they haul the family upstairs, force them to sit on a couch, and proceed to verbally and physically assault them. The "games" include forcing Anna to disrobe in front of her husband and child, asking numerous questions pregnant with ominous meanings, and continually making subtle threats against the family members. As much as the two thugs torment the family, director Haneke plays a few games with his audience as well. At several points throughout the film, one of the thugs turns to face the camera and makes various comments about what is going on or what the two are about to do. If you have even an iota of sympathy for the victims here, and you will, Haneke's techniques instill a deep sense of dread about what is going on. You want to watch onscreen violence for entertainment? Well, "Funny Games" makes sure you participate to the fullest in the horrors unfolding against Georg, Anna, and their son. Moreover, Haneke insists we know our role here. If we want to watch violence, we are at the complete mercy of those onscreen. Want to see the family pull it out in the end and free themselves from these two goons? O.K., there you go...but wait a minute! Haneke refuses to play by the rules! There are rules in these types of movies, right? Wrong. Remember, we wanted to see some excruciating onscreen violence. We get a taste of cathartic revenge before "Funny Games" decides to mix it up a little in order to carry the game all the way to its nasty conclusion. Yes, the movie cheats in many ways to devastating effect.

"Funny Games" is just downright disturbing. The violence is definitely not the over the top type of stuff, but what we do get coldly and boldly breaks taboos. In place of the typical "a few slashes and they are dead" violence seen in nearly every horror film, Haneke's horrific scenes carry deep psychological connotations. At one point in the film the thugs suddenly leave after committing a terrible act of violence against Anna and Georg's son. We find ourselves hoping that this signals the end of the nightmare, but such an easy out is not in the cards. Besides, a sudden conclusion wouldn't give us our dose of violence. Actually, repeated attempts to get out of this mess only create more problems for Anna and Georg. It is at this point, after the two goons leave and Anna attempts to seek help, that I saw a few problems with the movie. I found it difficult to believe that Anna couldn't find help, as there are many people at the lake who know the family. Sure, it is nighttime. Sure, I buy the idea that the cell phone doesn't work properly. But I don't buy all of these coincidences together. Of course, Anna's sense of desperation that she cannot find anyone to help her and Georg is simply another aspect of Haneke's heartless manipulation of the audience, but STILL. Throw us a rope somewhere!

The DVD version of "Funny Games" is sparse in the extras department. All the dialogue is in German, obviously, so the subtitles are greatly appreciated. The widescreen picture transfer is nice, but the only other extra we get here is a trailer. Oh well, the movie's downbeat, claustrophobic atmosphere should overcome the lack of any commentaries or behind the scenes stuff. Watch out for "Funny Games." It's got a nasty streak a mile wide.

Why watch Godfather for the 27th time? Haven't you seen the Matrix enough times over the last year? Both great movies but here's something interesting... Buy this video for a heck of a visceral ride. In the same disturbing vain as Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, Man Bites Dog, Santa Sangre.

The director uses "real time" in some weird and effective ways in this movie. One small example: (Don't worry, I'm not giving anything away here by describing this scene), but there's a scene where the family is forced to lay still on the floor as the bad boys go away and you watch in real time, in tension filled agony, with one eye open and teeth clenching, as the family is terrified and afraid to move for a good 5-10 minutes before they slowly get up, instead of the usual hollywood tension-less time-warp cut to the next scene.

The director is a bit indulgent with the whole viewer-as-part-of-the-crime-rewind scene, but there is a strong voyeuristic charge you get from watching this uncomfortable and tense movie, very much like rubbernecking at the scene of a violent car crash -- it's base and aweful for you to look, but you just can't help yourself...

The acting is top-notch. No formula actors here. The plot/situation is pretty simple, but intelligently executed. Some great super-dark humor here. They could have done a better job with the subtitles (sometimes hard to see).

Keep the kiddies and the Romantic-Comedy-"Pretty Woman"-lovers away from this one. One of the more interesting foreign films to come around in the "Disturbing" genre.