6/10 okay
I'm inclined to rate this lower, but for some reason I just can't. As a movie, it's okay. As a movie that I heard was frightening, and disturbing, would stick with you and make you feel complicit in what happens---it's terrible. One Character breaks...
- 25.January.2012
- |
- by: Fluffymonkeyem
- Fluffymonkeyem rated this movie6/10Okay
6/10 okay
I'm inclined to rate this lower, but for some reason I just can't. As a movie, it's okay. As a movie that I heard was frightening, and disturbing, would stick with you and make you feel complicit in what happens---it's terrible. One Character breaks the fourth wall, twice. The movie is pretty unexciting. The violence isn't that violent. A few scenes of leg breaking, among others. We never see the violence, but we hear a little. Despite what I heard, that didn't enhance any feelings of shock, or make me feel disturbed. The movie couldn't do that. It just didn't have it in it. It's an okay story of home invasion, and much like real life situations there is no happy ending. Watching this I had a poker face the whole movie. I had no urge to talk to myself and get annoyed at points like I do with movies. I just watched.
The last 40 minutes has three scenes that are *really* boring. They stay on the same frame with little movement for more than a few minutes. I found my eyes roaming. I can see what they were going for with that---in real life not all is action. It is to make you feel like you are actually there.
Maybe, for you it will work. But for me, all it was was *okay*. nothing exciting, nothing intense, and the only thing that I new I could rely on was the sped up rate of my heart.
6/10 okay
- 25.January.2012
- |
- by: Fluffymonkeyem
What did you think about this review?
Thank you for voting.
Abuse report sent
Report abuse
Close
|
I'm not sure I got out of this movie what director Michael Haneke had in mind. The synopsis for the (unseen by me) American version said he intended "Funny Games" as an indictment of the media's fascination with violence. Really? The FICTIONAL...
- 05.September.2010
- |
- by: ColumboFan
- ColumboFan rated this movie0/10
I'm not sure I got out of this movie what director Michael Haneke had in mind. The synopsis for the (unseen by me) American version said he intended "Funny Games" as an indictment of the media's fascination with violence. Really? The FICTIONAL media? Does that include Shakespearean violence? Oedipus ripping out his eyeballs? Well, good luck there Haneke because I don't give a whit about fictional violence one way or the other and I sure don't want to indict anyone. I've seen some wonderful violent pictures and I've seen some awful pacifist pictures. What was interesting about this film was it's perverse upending of audience expectations. When Haneke is not winking to the camera, the weakest conceit of the film, his oddball shot selections and willful disregard for conventional plot mechanics make this a compelling thriller. You REALLY don't know what is going to happen next. There is a good scene where the camera stays on Susanne Lothars face while something terrible happens off screen. It's held very long, and it's uncomfortable, but watching her face is horrifying. There are quite a few shots that feel like that, and scenes that go on too long, but I didn't think they were pretentious. It gave the movie a realistic vibe, like it was showing you the stuff they leave out of typical horror movies. A broken leg STAYS broken and it's hard to move around with one. Toward the end there is a bizarre twist that's just downright goofy, like an episode of "Scrubs", but I suppose it fits with the deconstructive nature of the film. This movie is called "Funny Games" after all, and guess who those games are being played on? One guess. I didn't feel like indicting the media for their violent tendencies after this picture, so Haneke failed in that regard, but I did learn that when you shake up all the rules of the thriller genre, you can still end up with a very effective, disturbing film. 4 stars.
- 05.September.2010
- |
- by: ColumboFan
What did you think about this review?
Thank you for voting.
Abuse report sent
Report abuse
Close
|
Michael Haneke's condemnation of violence in cinema, while well-acted and directed, is basically 'torture porn', except that it never actually shows the violence on screen, so it's more like 'psychological torture porn'. I've never been a big fan of...
- 17.June.2010
- |
- by: coolerking
- coolerking rated this movie4/10Disappointing
Michael Haneke's condemnation of violence in cinema, while well-acted and directed, is basically 'torture porn', except that it never actually shows the violence on screen, so it's more like 'psychological torture porn'. I've never been a big fan of violence as a form of entertainment unto itself (Bugs Bunny cartoons notwithstanding), but I accept it as a part of storytelling, and I'll even admit to being wowed when an act of violence is combined with an impressive piece of stuntwork (or just when it's really, really funny). But like any other (mostly) rational person, I comprehend the difference between real violence and cartoon violence. I don't need a self-righteous film director almost literally wagging his finger at me, saying 'shame on you for enjoying violence'. Real-life violence is horrific and disturbing, as it is depicted in this film, so essentially Haneke is saying if you enjoy this film, you fail his test and there's something deeply wrong with you. Well, I didn't enjoy it, so I guess I pass.
- 17.June.2010
- |
- by: coolerking
What did you think about this review?
Thank you for voting.
Abuse report sent
Report abuse
Close
|
Mood:
Plot:
Genres:
Time/Period:
Place:
Praise:
Style:
Attitudes:
Flag:
Does this gene fit Funny Games?
