Log in / Sign up
 
    Share this page

    Funny Games

    Reviewed by
    adamwatchesmovies@

    With terrible films like “Epic Movie” or “Mummy Maniac”, I am still able to walk away and find at least one thing that amused me, even if everything else absolutely sucks. I have never felt like I wasted my time as much as I did with “Funny Games”: a dull, predictable wannabe-shocking horror/thriller that is cheaply made and completely redundant.

    Ann (Naomi Watts) and George Farber (Tim Roth) are a happy couple vacationing with their son George Jr. (Devon Gearhart) when they are taken hostage by two sadistic teenagers, Paul (Michael Pitt) and Peter (Brady Corbet) The killers make a bet with the family, that by 9 am the next day, the family will be dead, while the family “wager” that they will live. The Farbers have quite a struggle ahead of them as Paul is able to break the fourth wall.

    As soon as you get what the movie is about, it becomes tiresome. The villains have no personalities. We are not given a reason for why they want to torture this family. They’re on-screen to make a comment about violence in the media. Oh no! Violence in a horror movie?! Stop the presses! In addition to their ability to break the fourth wall, their genre savvyness makes them basically invincible. Not only did they pick the stupidest batch of victims on the planet, the movie cheats and makes it impossible for the heroes to win. The “catch” here is that the film doesn’t play to any of the audience’s expectations or demands in an attempt to be unpredictable. The problem is that by always doing the opposite of what you expect, “Funny Games” telegraphs it’s next move every single time. Let’s say you have three heroes, and that you have an hour left in the movie. One is too weak to struggle against the interlopers, another is permanently disabled and the third is perfectly fine. Which of the three do you think will make it to the climax?

    Even the film’s red herrings are not effective. Once again, by having the characters break the fourth wall multiple times and having them explicitly say that they will not allow the plot to move in a way that is standard for horror/thrillers, you are quickly able to figure out each and every development ahead of time. When the bad guys tell the family that they will be dead by 9 am and the clock reads 1:00, you know the movie isn’t over regardless of what the camera is telling you. Just from the condescending attitude that the villains have, you know ahead of time what the ultimate fate of each character is, even the minor ones. You'll recognize that “Funny Games” is too busy padding itself on the back to care about being entertaining or realize that cheap special effects and a recycled plot swirled around a little doesn’t mean the wheel is being reinvented.

    Here’s a lesson to all of you people out there that love the term “torture porn” and throw it around to describe films like “Hostel” or “Saw” without having seen them. Those movies are not about seeing people gutted or dismembered; it’s about exploring a fear from a comfortable place, like a roller coaster. In the case of the “Saw” franchise, there were multiple reasons why people came back besides the blood & guts. There was a tight continuity, creative set pieces, a mystery to be solved, and a twist to keep you guessing. Yes, a lot of people died, but most were “bad” people. You saw them experience horrific physical trauma, a form of immediate punishment for their sins. In the case of the heroes, you wanted them to survive. You were on the edge of your seat waiting to see if they were going to make it or not. It’s not about the violence, it’s about the people. No, I don’t think any of those films are masterpieces, and only a few of them could even be called good movies, but for the audience that was watching them, they were effective and to dismiss them from up high on your pedestal isn’t smart, it’s arrogant.

    “Funny Games” could have actually taken some notes from some of the films it is critiquing because the horror movies that people enjoy have several key components: characters that you like, memorable villains, iconic kills and compelling stories that honed in on primal fears. Yes, many slasher films eventually devolved into an excuse to chop up promiscuous teenagers, but people didn’t embrace them like the pioneers of the genre. Everyone remembers Sydney from “Scream” and Clarice from “Silence of the Lambs” because you related to them, you sympathized with their plight. You felt tense, hoping that they would triumph in the end, you admired their resolve, or lamented the fact that they suffered. You will not remember a single character from “Funny Games” because no one here has more than a couple of lines that describe their personalities. We’re talking about a film that runs nearly two hours but is more interested in slapping you in the face and wagging its finger at its audience than actually entertaining anyone. If it wasn’t for the fact that this movie is regurgitating the same message that we’ve heard over and over from newscasters and politicians who are looking for a scapegoat, it would not have garnered any praise whatsoever.

    Watching “Funny Games” is like watching turd get flushed down the toilet. It takes way too long, it’s unpleasant and you know what’s going to happen in the end despite what anyone may say. You may film it, put it on a DVD and call it defiant, even artsy, but it’s still just a piece of sh*t. (On DVD, January 4th, 2014)

    1
    HelpfulNot helpful  Reply
    adamwatchesmovies@  15.11.2016 age: 26-35 2,867 reviews

    Show all reviews for this movie
    Note: The movie review posted on this page reflects a personal opinion of one user. We are not responsible for its content.

    Did you see ''Funny Games''?

    There is a problem with your e-mail address and we are unable to communicate with you. Please go to My Account to update your email.

    How do you rate this movie?

    Select stars from 1 to 10.
    10 - A masterpiece, go, see it now
    9 - Excellent movie, a must see
    8 - Great movie, don't miss it
    7 - Good movie, worth seeing
    6 - Not bad, could be much better
    5 - So so, okay if you don't pay
    4 - Not good, even if you don't pay
    3 - Poor movie, not recommended
    2 - Very bad, forget about it
    1 - Worst ever, avoid at all costs

    Please explain. Write your comment here:

    Please choose a username to sign your comments. Only letters, digits, dash - or period. Minimum 4 characters.

    Your age and sex:

    We publish all comments, except abusive, at our discretion.