travispickle
Well-Known Member
I dunno. Isn't the film one of Haneke's typical "look-at-me-I'm-oh-so-smart" cinematic strategies to make some mad philosophical or political point about something really important?
I saw the original Funny Games a few years ago having seen The Piano Teacher, Hidden and Time of the Wolf in that order. I really enjoyed it in the sense that I nearly felt like switching the telly off with the psychological gross-outery. I thought it was a really strong statement. Like, he very carefully constructed a scenario which has its own internal logic, playing off blockbuster slasher genres, which you just buy into or you don't. I think that's part of the film's point, though. All films are like this but conceal the mechanics. ANYWAY...
I couldn't help thinking that he was still developing his techniques when he made the original, so, compared to what came after, it's just OK. It was the film when he changed gears. But going back and making it again doesn't add anything, it's a step backwards for him and I think the film's moment passed 10 years ago.
Totally agree. I saw the original also and was really impressed by it. It lead me to check out everything else. Haneke's one of the very few filmmakers who doesn't patronise his audience and while some may find his approach cold and clinical, you can't help accept that he puts forward more in one scene of a film than others do over whole movies.
While Funny Games is certainly worthwhile, some of his other films deal with similar issues much better (imo),Benny's Video for example. If nothing else, he certainly invites discussion!!
What's the next fillum?