Funny Games 2008 DVD with Naomi Watts, Tim Roth, Michael Pitt (R) +Movie Reviews

As Disturbing as it is Illuminating

Gianmarco Manzione | Tampa, FL USA | 03/31/2008

(4 out of 5 stars)

"Not since "Requiem for a Dream" have I left a theater as speechlessly disturbed as I did when the final credits rolled for this one, the blood-red letters splattered over the deranged face of Michael Pitt's character driving home the relentless cruelty I'd just sat through. And never before had I personally felt so responsible for it. If Michael Haneke's point is that we as an audience become active participants in the violence the second we purchase our ticket for a film like this, his point is made rather forcefully. In the hands of the abundantly talented Naomi Watts and Tim Roth, who evoke pain and humiliation with grimaces and tears so compelling that they turn to daggers aimed at the audience itself, the film strips violence of any glamor it may have possessed as entirely as possible in a culture that shovels out billions every year in its name. Toying with the audience's conflicted emotions--the desire to witness cruelty mixing with a desperate hope that its victims will make it out alive--the movie feels like a murder mystery in which YOU, the reader, are guilty of the crime. "You," by paying to sit with your popcorn and 50-gallon soda to watch a film you knew contained unmitigated torture and death, are responsible for the victims' plight. The lasting irony of this profoundly disturbing film is that, through its own indulgence of extreme violence, it makes the most impassioned plea to the better side of our nature to hit the silver screen since Harvey Keitel's "Three Seasons." I recommend the film with great reservation, but I recommend it no less strongly--this is a film every human being must find the courage to confront.

Visit my blog at http://culturespill.com

"

'Funny' as in 'Strange', NOT as in 'Ha-Ha'

Grady Harp | Los Angeles, CA United States | 06/15/2008

(2 out of 5 stars)

"FUNNY GAMES is Michael Haneke's English language remake of his own German success from 1997 by the same name. While is takes some interesting twist and turns as far as technique of filmmaking goes, the story lies somewhere between repulsive and prolonged boring, and is not a film this viewer would watch again.

We first meet Ann (Naomi Watts), husband George (Tim Roth), and son Georgie (Devon Gearhart) as they drive to their vacation spot playing games of guessing arias and opera singer identities from CDs in their car. But immediately on arriving to their lakeside home they are visited by a strange young lad Peter (Brady Corbet) who asks to borrow eggs for their next-door neighbor. Soon Peter's mishaps are magnified when his friend Paul (Michael Pitt) joins him in a rather preposterous game of arguing over trite situations that result in Peter and Paul (malignantly sterile in appearance in white shorts and shirts and gloves) moving into the 'funny games ' that are aimed at total destruction of Ann, George and Georgie. It is not funny, it is not credible, and yes, it does become annoying in the manner in which the writing for Ann and George makes them into fools for going along with the 'games' as long as they do.

Watts and Roth are wasted in this film but Pitt and Corbet manage performances that kick us in the gut - as these oily creatures are meant to do. Not a film to be recommended for general viewing, but one that will please those who love the torture genre. Grady Harp, June 08"

Psuedo anything you want to call it....

Archmaker | California | 08/19/2008

(1 out of 5 stars)

"Attempting to criticize this movie for its structure or theme or whatever is pointless. This isn't a film, it isn't even any kind of credible story. It is a psuedo intellectual exercise that becomes increasingly annoying as it progresses. Ooooh, we, the bad audience, really want to see a revenge picture, where the terrorized family strikes back, which I, Michael Haneke, will not give you the satisfaction of seeing. I likewise will not give my characters any sensible reactions to what is happening while I make my villains both omnipotent and totally unreal. I will draw you in as a viewer with good actors and make you care about my characters, I will touch that part of the psyche terrified by home invasion and threats to one's family, only to point the finger at you and demean you as voyeurs for watching the premise I have created.

This is dissing the audience in the worst form of snobbish intellectual rubbish. You create a mood of terror and tension and then show nothing but contempt for the audience for buying into it. There is nothing inherently wrong with surprising the audiences expectations, but if you can't see the author's sneer here, you aren't paying attention. I glanced at some of the reviews which found great depth in this crap, but I for one resent a filmmaker who sets me up only to give me the finger for buying into that same setup. Haneke can go fly a kite!

All film watching is by definition voyeurism. So if that was the great point made here, it is pretty redundant. It likewise offered nothing new or insightful about violence and/or the portrayal of violence in film. This was as empty and contemptuous an exercise in the banality of using film technique to evoke emotion while undercutting and deriding those same emotions as I've seen. This is elitest finger-wagging while employing all the troopes it supposedly is dismaying.

I am astounded that this thoroughly unpleasant and dishonest film has been made twice. Good Heavens, one version of this nasty little tidbit was more than enough."

You might feel unimpressed by this film but it holds some gr

Jenny J.J.I. | That Lives in Carolinas | 09/08/2008

(4 out of 5 stars)

"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.

"

Not for Everyone, But a Very Intelligent, Thought-Provoking

Joshua Miller | Coeur d'Alene,ID | 04/05/2009

(4 out of 5 stars)

"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+

"

Search - Funny Games (2008) on DVD

Movie Details

Similar Movies

Similarly Requested DVDs

Member Movie Reviews

Movie Reviews

	Funny Games 2008 Actors: Naomi Watts, Tim Roth, Michael Pitt Genres: Drama, Mystery & Suspense R 2008 1hr 52min Genre: Suspense Rating: R Release Date: 10-JUN-2008 Media Type: DVD
41 Larger Image