Funny Games (1998)

Featured Audience Ratings

• Bob S

  
  I am a loser until I review this movie.

• Daniel P

  
  The 2004 DVD release of this film has an interview at the end with Michael Haneke that I think is essential. In it, he says that "People watch this film for as long as they have to." If you've never been the type to watch violent films, you'll turn this off right… More
  The 2004 DVD release of this film has an interview at the end with Michael Haneke that I think is essential. In it, he says that "People watch this film for as long as they have to." If you've never been the type to watch violent films, you'll turn this off right away... and if you're always watching them, you'll very likely get to the end. As Haneke puts it, you'll only get to the end if you need to. So what is it? Basically, a couple and their son (about 10 years old) travel to a summer home, where they become victims of a home invasion, in which the two villains narrate their actions, playing a form of twisted game in order to exploit, humiliate and eventually harm them. The story and the violence are carried off in a winking way, however, made to make you question what exactly you're watching, how you're watching it, and why. Hard to say more without ruining the effect. Provocative stuff.

• paul o

  
  Hard to watch. Strong, violent, and full of controlled aggression! The way that haneke makes us wait for any hope of enthusiasm but then breaks our spirits with a rewind makes our stomach churn and can make some truly despise this film. Something truly different!

• Melvin W

  
  Paul: We're not up to feature film length yet.  Warning: Explicit content coming. You know what? Fuck this movie and fuck Michael Haneke. You are a giant fucking pussy. Oh you don't like movies that show violence as being "cool" or "funny." Nobody gives… More
  Paul: We're not up to feature film length yet.  Warning: Explicit content coming. You know what? Fuck this movie and fuck Michael Haneke. You are a giant fucking pussy. Oh you don't like movies that show violence as being "cool" or "funny." Nobody gives a shit. Your annoying piece of shit film is a testament to tedious, annoying, in your face, manipulative garbage. I absolutely hated this movie, but I figure you have guessed that by now.  This film takes its message to such an annoying level that I can't believe I was able to sit through the whole thing. Haneke is so pretentious that he even felt to remake the movie in English with big names like Naomi Watts and Tim Roth. We sit through winks at the camera and the annoying as hell villains talking about what the audience is expecting. Haneke continues to hit you over the head with his self righteous bullshit.  Now to move on to the plot. For being labeled a sadistic, disturbing horror film; it's surprisingly dull. First off, it's in no way disturbing or scary. The director is too big a pussy to make it disturbing or scary. Two annoying villains take a family of three over and "torture them physically and mentally" or at least that's what I've been told. To me it's just some skinny fuck calling his partner "Fatty" and then Fatty replying, "Quit calling me Fatty" with a whimper. It's violence is offscreen as Haneke obviously wants all movies to do.  One more time for good measure... Fuck You Michael Haneke!!

• Sophie B

  
  A brilliant an bleak film. Acted perfectly and shot in a great way. I don't really understand the whole rewind bit and breaking the fourth wall. If not for this it would be 5 star. No need for an American remake.

• Cynthia S

  
  Definitely sick and twisted with capital S and T! A really excellent catalyst to insure that people are left paranoid, and very uneasy, around strangers. Very disturbing, but interesting movie. A better movie than the American remake. Not for the faint of heart.

• Bruce B

  
  .This movie is another from a long list of movies that played at the 1997 Toronto International Film Festival. A German Thriller, and my first question is, are there any couples in Germany that are this stupid. What we have here is a film of two young men who go from rich homes in a… More
  .This movie is another from a long list of movies that played at the 1997 Toronto International Film Festival. A German Thriller, and my first question is, are there any couples in Germany that are this stupid. What we have here is a film of two young men who go from rich homes in a holiday area killing those within the homes one by one. The big surprise to me was the shotgun killing of the child. Second was the great acting of terror and shock by Susanne Lothar, she must have stayed up a week to look like she did near the end of this movie. Full of suspense and twist, like the added flirt with the remote control. Its a hidden unheard of film here in this country and one that all should see if you like thrillers, mystery and killing. Must warn you audio in German with English Subtitles, not to be confused with the 2008 version released by Americans. 4 Stars

• Lady D

  
  Without a doubt, I should have watched this version (the original) first, as I try to do with most films as I would like to have agreed with the majority and called this as the better version, in truth I think whichever version you see first will feel like the better version as both… More
  Without a doubt, I should have watched this version (the original) first, as I try to do with most films as I would like to have agreed with the majority and called this as the better version, in truth I think whichever version you see first will feel like the better version as both are so identical, the second viewing however is let down by knowing where the film is heading. The shock element of reality in some parts is pretty disturbing, yet it also offers a little creativity in regards to the "remote control" part of the film.

• Chris W

  
  Despite the level of violence being low, and almost all of it off screen, this is a horror film in the true sense of the word, and one of the most unrelenting and unsettling films I've ever seen. This film is so creepy because it is minimalist in content and plot, but milks… More
  Despite the level of violence being low, and almost all of it off screen, this is a horror film in the true sense of the word, and one of the most unrelenting and unsettling films I've ever seen. This film is so creepy because it is minimalist in content and plot, but milks what's there for all it's worth. The film is extremely realistic too, save for a few meta moments which are necessary to get the director's point across, which was to show just how unglamorous and horrible, and uncool violence is. It's a jab at the media, and one that is almost too effective. Flourishes such as numerous uses of extended long takes and almost exclusive diegetic music both add to the realism, and make the film that much more of a grueling experience. I recommend the film, but this is one I don't want to see very often just because it is so intense, yet so slow and subtle in the way it plays out. This one is definitely worthy of intellectual discussion, which I think was one of the intentions anyway.

• Carlos M

  
  A brilliant film that cleverly plays with the conventions of the mainstream cinema in order to create a cruel and merciless experience for the audience, who is forced to face their own taste for violence in this unbearably tense thriller and is refused any type of relief.

• Anthony L

  
  This is a real poke in the eye and a two fingered salute to Hollywood. Good! Funny Games is not a particularly original story, that's kind of the point, it's been done many a time before but not quite like this. The beginning sequence?s music (the only part of the film with… More
  This is a real poke in the eye and a two fingered salute to Hollywood. Good! Funny Games is not a particularly original story, that's kind of the point, it's been done many a time before but not quite like this. The beginning sequence?s music (the only part of the film with music) suggests that there is a much darker side to this film. This is pure horror but this isn't a horror film in the sense that it's all blood and guts, you actually never see any of the violence, Peter and Paul are actually more frightening when you don't see them. It?s really questioning how far is too far, both as a film and also as a society. We all know there are some real sick people out there, there are some real sick films out there too to be honest, Haneke is suggesting that the media should take some responsibility for this. A bit contradictory? That?s where it gets clever, the interaction with the audience from one of the bad guys shouldn?t have worked but it does, brilliantly. For example, Paul says the line "We're not up to feature film length yet" at exactly the 95-minute mark of the movie. He also rewinds the film when the film starts to go down a familiar ?Hollywood? style road and continues the film with even more cruelty and brutality. Often awkward to watch but at the same time technically brilliant (Not many directors film 10 minute takes!) Funny Games is a breath of fresh air and a kick in the ass to modern cinema. My kind of film. Why he remade it into English, I have no idea but I won?t comment until I see it! I suggest those of you interested should watch this one, the original, first though!

• Cassandra M

  
  First things first, Michael Haneke HATES Quentin Tarantino's films. He hates the way violence and death are shown as being 'cool' - Cool gangsters executing their enemies whilst saying cool lines (And you will know, that my name is the Lord! etc,etc)with a cool song… More
  First things first, Michael Haneke HATES Quentin Tarantino's films. He hates the way violence and death are shown as being 'cool' - Cool gangsters executing their enemies whilst saying cool lines (And you will know, that my name is the Lord! etc,etc)with a cool song playing in the background. This is not how violence is in the real world, violence is a horrible fact of life, not a glamourous thing for youths to copy but I like Tarantino, and I think Haneke intended Funny Games to show it how it really is. I watched Funny Games without the slightest clue what the film was about, so I just had to sit back and take it as it comes. At first, I wasn't too impressed. I thought the scenes were too long and dragged out, yet at the same time, I felt a strange feeling of suspense. The incredibly long camera shots leave you that bored, that you think "Something bad is going to happen soon, I can tell...". The suspense also lasts right through the film 'til the very end. You don't want to watch it, but at the same time, you feel hypnotised by it. I will not detail any events of the film, to save spoiling the atmosphere, but I will note one thing that people tend to be confused about:- "Why did the family let them into the house in the first place?" The two characters of Peter and Paul are let to walk all over the family because of one flaw in the bourgios psyche - 'The more polite a person is, the better a person they are.' This absurd way of thinking is played on by Peter and Paul and they obviously score, plus 'getting into the house without breaking in' is also one of their 'games'.For those who haven't seen the film, I definitely wouldn't recommend this for a night in with the parents/girlfriend, but I definitely would for people who want to see the difference between death and Tarantino-glam. Prepare for a highly suspenseful yet sickeningly violent, non-Hollywood, edge-of-the-seat piece of art.

• Arash X

  
  Pretentious, manipulative & preachy

• Sarah G

  
  <u>Director:</u>Michael Haneke <u>Released:</u> 1997 <u>Stars:</u>Susanne Lothar, Ulrich Muhe, Arno Frisch and Frank Giering <u>Genre:</u> Drama, Thriller <u>Country:</u> Austria <br> <a… More
  <u>Director:</u>Michael Haneke <u>Released:</u> 1997 <u>Stars:</u>Susanne Lothar, Ulrich Muhe, Arno Frisch and Frank Giering <u>Genre:</u> Drama, Thriller <u>Country:</u> Austria <br> <a href="http://s137.photobucket.com/albums/q202/sarah88_uk/?action=view¤t=FunnyGames.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="http://i137.photobucket.com/albums/q202/sarah88_uk/FunnyGames.jpg" border="0"alt="Photobucket"></a> <br> Two psychotic young men take a mother, father, and son hostage in their vacation cabin and force them to play sadistic "games" with one another for their own amusement. Funny Games is another one of those films everybody bare me has seen. Finally I found it in my supermarket this afternoon and just finished watching it. I have to admit that it toally blew me away. Funny Games is far more than a Horror, it's also a depiction of just how often Media violence is in our society and how much we take it for granted and almost let ourselved be entertained by this. Pure genuis! The film opens up with a helicopter shot of the family arriving at their holiday home on the motorway. While watching this we are shown just how close the family, setting us up for one hell of a ride. This voyeristic technique makes us wonder why we are sitting here watching this and almost feel slightly instrusive on the family. That's the genuis of Haneke. I must admit that I didn't go too much on Hidden but this is abosolutly amazing. I can see some similarities in the two films there. I know a lot of people will either love or hate this film I can see why but there are many different menaings to this film. For instance as I said beofre why, as a viewer you are sitting down to watch this and also questioning the viewing public as a whole. It also shows us parts which you might not fully be shown in an American film and almost plays upon that. Haneke uses emotions of the family almost as bait. The two men constantly play upon why the couple are crying and feeling this way and twisting it for their own amusement. There's no manipulation here as you might often find in a US film, you are given the opotunity to switch off, as one character says and question just how much violence you can take. Which I think is why this film is NOT pointless as some people have written here. The characterisation in Funny Games is brilliant and key to the viewers understanding of the film. Both of the two main leads; Anna and Georg Snr are a middle class couple and very likeable indeed. As a viewer you can instantly releate to them and their son Georg. The film's path is not what you would expect as you really do warm to the characters. Oddly the representation of the two men: Paul and Peter are ones of such charm and sophistication that you don't feel that they're the villian on some stages. I'm going to admit that I did find the character of Paul very attractive indeed and didn't for a second think anything less-but that's another story entirely! Incidently Peter is also a man full of charm but is presented as less intelligent and an odd character.-we see this when Peter continuously calls him "fatty" which he hates. Funny Games is also intelligently written and well paced. 1 hr and 40 mins flew by and left me utterly speechless afterwards, which of course is genuis on Haneke's part. Funny Games cleverly plays with the conventions of filmaking and asks the audience: <i>We're not up to feature film length yet. You want a real ending with plausible plot development". </i> Also has Paul looking at the camear and talking to the audience, which also gives the character as sense of arrogance to him and almost tells the audiene that he's in charge. What was the most clever thing about this film was the re-wind scene which did leave me slightly disturbed at what I had just watched. Funny Games is one of the most disturbing films that I have seen and so cleverly written and filmed it's unbelievable. It'll leave you feeling horrified at what you've just watched and leave you wondering the why you watch violence in the media. Funny Games is a clever film and one which I highly recomend.

• _kelly .

  
  Better than its remake by a sliver. Slower (hard for that to be possible) than its tightened remake, and at times does feel a little more clunkily directed in this static shot style (as in the director didn't have 10 years to plan every single shot). All the acting is better to… More
  Better than its remake by a sliver. Slower (hard for that to be possible) than its tightened remake, and at times does feel a little more clunkily directed in this static shot style (as in the director didn't have 10 years to plan every single shot). All the acting is better to me. The actor playing the mom is more convincing and these kids are genuine fully developed psychos whereas the remake kids feel like little pricks without any psychological depth. I watched these in reverse order, the remake first. I regret that because it makes it difficult for me to like again the same shots I liked from the first version I saw (most notable is when the wife ventures into the road at night to hail a car for help). The differences are very minute between this and the remake in terms of dialogue and shot composition. The lack of gore is the same, but the shotgun shell to Paul's chest looks more natural as it was not CGIed. It's too similar to its remake to really warrant a thorough breakdown. I'll say that I'm artificially more inclined to take Haneke's message in this movie more seriously because it is in another spoken language (I have a strong anti-Hollywood bias). The main thing is the two bad rich kids; this version of them is just way more intimidating. I feel like they are an embodiment of mindless middle class cravings for violence, whereas the actors in the remake look like they'd be down and out after one lame punch because that's how flaccid they are as a representation of sadism.

• Luke B

  
  Michael Haneke's disturbing suburban nightmare is one of the most uneasy and unapologetically depraved films you will ever see. Haneke first decides to make the film contain virtually no violence, that is to say the majority happens off screen. The film suggests that all… More
  Michael Haneke's disturbing suburban nightmare is one of the most uneasy and unapologetically depraved films you will ever see. Haneke first decides to make the film contain virtually no violence, that is to say the majority happens off screen. The film suggests that all violence, even fictional, may have a negative affect. In fact in many ways fictional violence can be more destructive than real life violence on the news, as film-makers and writers can selectively present emotional situations to build a connection. Funny Games also engages its audience by breaking the fourth wall, asking us questions personally. It works surprisingly well and happens so out of the blue creates even more uncomfortable situations. The climax is simply perfect, giving us the ending we all want and then tearing it away from us. Heart-pounding and fucking terrifying.

• Mark H

  
  Unsettling film about a couple of sociopaths who hold a family hostage. Although most of the violence occurs off-screen, it still makes the experience difficult to watch. Compelling and gut-wrenching all at once.

• Tsubaki S

  
  Dont bite the snobish "for smart people only" bait that some will throw to promote this junk, FG is nothing but a manipulative hackery of a film. Haneke is a cinematic wanker of the highest order.

• Shauna R

  
  Unsettling, disturbing, gripping film. Haneke's masterful direction constructs an original, shocking and clever film. The film is very controversial, and I still can't understand why it is called a failure because it conveys violence in a whole new light. The acting was… More
  Unsettling, disturbing, gripping film. Haneke's masterful direction constructs an original, shocking and clever film. The film is very controversial, and I still can't understand why it is called a failure because it conveys violence in a whole new light. The acting was flawless, Susanne Lothar's screams of terror were really human and made you forget you were watching a film. Arno Frisch and Frank Giering are terrific as sadistic psychopaths. The script is incredible. This film is not without it's dark humor, the way Paul addresses the audience on a few occassions was amusing yet terrifying. Highly recommended film, but it is NOT for everyone.

• Ken S

  
  I am so disturbed. It's like Kubrick meets Polanski via Godard in German

Read all 20 featured audience ratings