Funny Games
Anna (Naomi Watts) and George (Tim Roth) are enjoying a vacation with their son when a pair of sadistic young men, Paul (Michael Pitt) and Peter (Brady Corbet), breaks into their cabin and holds the family hostage. The psychotic duo plays twisted games with their prisoners, forcing them to comply to stay alive. Director Michael Haneke remakes his chilling 1997 German-language film as an indictment of the media's fascination with violence.
Feedgeist
» Currently at the homes of 8 people
» Queued up by 425 people
gar 17694 wsp 426378 EB 1063598 qmi 298100 SV 1678533 flm.snb AK 1351093 DW 734981 hcv 1342662 zzb 1850146 qbz 130798 MK 290312 JR 1728047 LL 126991 JB 547152 MA 420008 JK 1962638 AM 1477323 JF 473089 David West laineylain AK 806382 xwz 1328261 nekidBob LS 1468014 JF 1506963 EK 132307 fbp 1093733 Wargazm HaggieSF wss 504064 inu 1768223 uuy 1105843 DUTCHMAN lal 1143694 AP 1602073 EF 1944462 Starlight pov yas 1506509 ipv 1464289 LF 1329600 sbf 607438 ZS 405524 Murdoc MP KL 935956 kds 143800 rol 1188213 SL 1697301 Turducken k-0s odh 653615 Up to 50 people shown» Reviewed by 15 people
I was expecting more from this and I feel like it failed to deliver. I have not seen the original, but have heard it is better even though it's the same writer/director, so I may give that one a chance, but probably not.- TReding
Oh boy. the only redeeming factor is that Tim Roth was in it. Naomi Watts did a pretty good job too. but the movie wasn't scary, thrilling, or mysterious at all. the acting was good, the material was terrible.
- Mari
There is nothing funny about this movie. Don't get me wrong I enjoyed every second of it. It is harsh and the "games" that are played may not even be for anybody's amusement. Michael Haneke's shot for shot remake of his 1997 film Funny Games is as brilliant as the original. The cast was well picked and the "Boys" who visit seemingly fit those roles as if they actually do that when not acting in films. You can't go wrong with a shot by shot remake of your own film when you have Naomi Watts and Tim Roth to play key parts. My suggestion skip The Strangers and watch Funny Games if you want to see the way to handle movies of this genre. Yes it may be hard to compare the too because The Strangers seems to be a by the numbers Slasher waiting to happen. BTW It never does. If you compare it to the true brutal nature of Funny Games you see that The Strangers plays with kid gloves while Haneke is a Knock Out King. Summary: Great soundtrack, excellent use of pacing, props and backgrounds. Excellent all around cast even the young child shines amongst the sea of excellent talent. If you enjoy thrillers with a message you'll love Funny Games.
- Firetoad
This movie seriously sucks!! If it werent for Naomi Watts and Tim Roth, I would not have minded, but having two recognized actors in such a mindnumbing movie really sucked! I watched 80% of it in fast foward, thinking at the end, I could catch payback... but... SUCKED!
- DW 1315998
That was quite possible....err I'm the WORST movie I have seen in my entire life...and I've seen alot of movies....DO NOT WASTE A SPOT ON YOUR QUEUE FOR THIS CRAPPPPPPPP
- movie_dave
This movie is total garbage and definately in the top 3 worst movies I have ever seen. They cut the previews up to make it look funny, dark humorous, maybe mildly entertaining. However, in the end, you just look to your wife, shrug, and say "It looked good on Netf1ix." Trust me (or don't), this movie sucks!
- CJ 1497388
Reading through some of the reviews I have seen the term "intellectual" pop up on numerous occasions. There is nothing intellectual about this movie. It really just made me feel sick to my stomach. I guess if I had to say something positive here it would be that the film accomplished what it set out to do. It leaves you feeling disturbed and wondering what the point was.
- Trishha
Congratulations on having read the professional critics' reviews. Now you all know what to say in you comments.
- ED 1968090
Sadistic is an understatement...down right disturbing at times to say the least. This movie follows a typical rich family as they head to their mansion size cabin for a little r&r Soon Peter & Paul arrive to take them hostage for a night of degrading and sadistic torment. All for a "funny game" The couple and their young son are a subjected to many twisted games and all they can do is submit to the two captures. A short film but its very well done. It has a very REAL quality to it. I wouldn't say its GREAT but definitely interesting. A good one for if your not sure what you want to watch.
- *~*Sullivans*~*
This movie is completely overrated. 20 minutes into it I wanted everyone to die so it would be over. First off you have the nagging bossy wife Naomi Watts (I was hoping they would kill her first). Then you have the two killers. I'm sorry but I would of laugh my butt off if these two came to my home and try to do this. I think the son could of takin both of them on. Last you have Tim Roth. At first he was the only character I wanted to see live, but as the movie goes on I was tired of listening to him whine. I can only hope this is a case of where the remake doesn't do the original justice. I guess I will have to see the first one now to find out.
- Hellnight138
No doubt about it. This is one of the more polarizing movies out there. The director, Michael Haneke, has a talent for making movies that are supposed to be a lot deeper than what is seen at the surface. I personally hate this and thought his last film, Cache, was horrible. But what do I know, I am not French or Algerian, so I do not know fully of the politics over there. Anyway, Funny Games is not suppose to be entertaining. It is a very disturbing movie. There is no set up like normal movies. Things just "happen" - like real life. Please do not rent this if you are a Naomi Watts or Tim Roth "fan". This is a film that is made to get to your core emotions. To make you think "who would do such a thing?" I also think the director was trying to top "Clockwork Orange" (which is nearly impossible). To the curious, check out the original and nearly identical 1998 version done by the same director. 3.5 stars and only recommended to film snobs, students of film, and gore/horror fans.
- T-Bone
I saw the original and wasn't thrilled with it either. I gave this movie a try because of several reviews that were positive. I felt the movie moved so slowly. There were several moments where the camera was on a scene for 15 to 30 seconds with NOTHING happening. The movie dragged badly. The acting was fine and all characters were believable in their roles. I just didn't feel any kind of connection to any of the characters to really care what happened to them and you can blame that on character development. There were scenes that were silly, like the "rewind" scene... you will know what I mean when you see it. A couple of times the Michael Pitt character looked into the camera and talked to the audience... that did not fit the movie at all and made it hard for me to take any more of it seriously. There was tension and no real gore at all, which wouldn't have made a difference with me any way. 2 stars... being kind.
- frgodbeyjr
Im coming late to this film. Hundreds of reviews are already posted and the ratings are all over the place so Ill add but a brief note to the cacophony. That a director would consent to remake his own film virtually shot for shot is strange to me. Ive seen the original so I have a basis for comparison and thats strange too. They are the same but different. The original didnt have Naomi Watts and Tim Roth or Michael Pitt. Nor was it specifically produced for an American audience. This production is like an actors workshop on film. I give Funny Games four stars for the performance and not so much for the disturbing story. I hope my thoughts are helpful 06/28/08 ~~~Wingz
- Wingz
There was nothing for me to like about this. Even though I haven't seen the original, I know that had to be better. The synopsis says this is an indictment of the media's fascination with violence. Where did that come from? I don't see it. All I see is a bad movie. The two bad guys never had me convinced. Their characters were not believable to me, which meant they were not scary. The movie had no plot other than "two guys torture a family". Who were they? Why were they like that? Why were they like clones of each other? We will never know. I realize other viewers may see this differently, and this is my subjective point of view. One thing I give it, it's disgusting. For me it went from disgusting to boring about half way through then back to disgusting. It's not the torture that bothered me. Torture is fine but add some context to it. Naomi Watts and Tim Roth did a good job but for such great actors it's more like second nature and not anything special. It's possible I missed something but I'm not going to watch it again to try and find it. I will let you give it a try. It might work for you. For me it didn't even come close to working.
- couchdog53
Remade for an American audience, Funny Games is a series of sadistic mind-trips and voyeuristic violent episodes thrust upon a family undeserving of such treatment. It is admittedly well-made but also intentionally unpleasant - most will *not* like this as it is not your typical Hollywood genre film. And as such, Funny Games attempts to challenge what you expect to see in films of this type. To say it succeeds depends on how open you are to the self-questioning, why do we watch such violence, academic message. To some it may even feel like condemnation. For those blissfully unaware of the message however, the acting and production values result in a satisfactory experience but there's surprisingly little gore and I doubt many enjoy the ending. My personal feelings are still unresolved as I am a fan of the sort of movies Funny Games attempts to question. I also find it annoying that the film takes a judgmental approach when it is itself pandering to the genre fans it questions. Obviously opinions will vary but my guess is most will hate this movie. My best advice is to see it yourself; 2.5 stars.
- Creeper