(Working on organizing it by similar aesthetic.)
Let the games begin...
When Ann, husband George and son Georgie arrive at their holiday home they are visited by a pair of polite and seemingly pleasant young men. Armed with deceptively sweet smiles and some golf clubs, they proceed to terrorize and torture the tight-knit clan, giving them until the next day to survive.
Review In A Nutshell:
Funny Games is the story of a family being terrorised by two young men.
This film explores the craving and drive that young people have for control. Both men thrive off the fact that the family can't do anything to save themselves and places them into these little games that would further torture them emotionally. The two young men in this film is a symbol of the sick and unsympathetic mind of a director, they see this family as empty vessels that they could play and manipulate with in order to feed their psychological needs; they see it as art while the victims see it as relentless torment. The film does a great job of creating…
Ninth watch of Noir-Vember. I believe Michael Haneke’s Funny Games - this one as well as his 1997 version - to present a commentary, perhaps even a critique, towards the sort of movies that share its non-plot of sole violence (torture porn?) and towards the people who watch them. I believe this is echoed through the film’s self-consciousness, which is amongst other things expressed by the fact that the antagonistic intruders are capable of directly addressing the audience. I do not, however, believe that this attempt justifies yet another revolting piece of such torture porno-esque film-making - at least not in the format presented here. Funny Games shows us how two psychopathic (or overacting) adolescent guys take a family of…
My man Roger Ebert [Edit: I guess it was actually Ebert's editor. Dang. Still good review though] said it best: "This isn't a movie, it's a thesis. "Funny Games" represents the laborious execution of an abstract notion. The concept is the movie, kind of like Andy Warhol's ''Empire'' (1964), an eight-hour stationary shot of the Empire State Building. You don't have to sit through the whole thing to get the point, unless you really want to."
The two stars are for good performances from the 5 main characters. That's it. It's not meant to entertain, but it's not particularly enlightening either. Through all the smugness, I smelled the ending an hour away. I suppose the fact that I…
I thought this would be a comedy.
I don't find a damn thing funny about it.
The words "Fucked up" come to mind.
I saw the this a few weeks ago, but never logged a review for it. Thanks to a conversation with ScreeningNotes, I kind of worked out why I didn't find it very likable.
Overall, I find whatever Funny Games is trying to say unconvincing at best and delivered in a terribly dull package. It's partly that I'm not really a fan of the horror/home invasion genre (even though this is skewering that) and partly that I never gave much credence to the idea that by watching onscreen violence we as an audience are condoning or morally complicit in it. I've also grown largely immune to movie violence so the shocking nature of the acts committed on screen have very little…
"It's easier when things are polite." ~ Paul
I was surprised to discover that this film is a shot-for-shot remake of the 1997 Austrian original. Other than some minor adjustments, such as four pounds of steak instead of three, no mention of a halyard on the sailboat, more modern cell phone technology, Calloway-brand golf clubs, NASCAR on TV, etc., it features the same plot, pacing, camera angles, dialogue, set design, soundtrack and atmosphere. Even the much noted 10-minute single take is intact. It almost seemed like a rewatch rather than a viewing of a new film.
Replacing the original cast are Naomi Watts as vacationing Ann Farber, Tim Roth as her husband George and Devon Gearhart as their son Georgie.…
It's odd I don't really understand it. But I'm no expert. I enjoyed the shits but felt like they dragged out after each scene reaches its climax.
Haters gonna hate, likers gonna like.
it IS the same movie
This review may contain spoilers. I can handle the truth.
Funny Games is one of the few movies that genuinely surprised me. At first, I saw it often used as example when talking about home invasion horror movies. I read up on the plot and it sounded like the exact same plot as The Strangers (2008). So I gave it a watch, sometimes I like to watch these trashy movies just for a cheap thrill.
Not only was I caught off guard but some of the time I couldn't even believe what I was seeing. I was so taken aback that I decided to look into what the director's intent was. Apparently this isn't a horror movie, it's the director making commentary on horror movies with lots of torture and…
This movie is ridiculously smug and Michael Pitt needs to stop playing slight variations of the same character.
This movie is a laugh and a half. So ludicrously tongue-in-cheek and sarcastic that it works.
Haneke you beautiful ass-hole.
This film is pure Michael Haneke- ballsy choices with a serious disdain for the viewer. It exciting stuff the whole way through, with same genuinely terrifying performances. Plus one of the most chilling endings to a thriller I've seen.
This shot-by-shot remake of the original Funny Games (1997) is very loyal to its source material, probably because it's directed by the same director. I can't really complain. I can watch both the original and remake and feel the same...except the remake is completely unnecessary, there's just a few minor changes. Disturbing premise, the suspense is a thrill to watch, long quiet moments, and amazing cinematography. The only problem I have with this movie both the original and remake is the fact you can't really watch it again. I mean, you can,,,but for me watching it again I didn't feel the same thrill and suspense I felt the first time watching it. It's not like Misery where you watch the…
The one thing I do have to say about this movie is that it brings out some serious twats on discussion boards. Basically insulting anyone who doesn't think this movie is the second coming of god because there were a few scenes which required some in depth examination. Never the less, it was a decent movie. Tough to watch given the sadistic nature of it, parts of it reminded me of Seconds Apart, even though that movie had a different edge to it.
The 2016 (2nd) edition of the list. You can see the original and more info here.
With a list of…
Filmes que conciliam um formalismo clássico com o avanço do dispositivo cinematográfico.
Seja pelo uso do digital (Soderbergh, Fincher, Baumbach),…