“Funny Games” Review

“Funny Games” is German director Michael Haneke’s remake of his own 1997 film of the same title. It stars Michael Pitt and Brady Corbert as two seriously deranged young men who take a family (Naomi Watts, Tim Roth, and a fierce little child actor named Devon Gearhart) physically and mentally hostage for twelve hours at their summer cabin. The title is appropriate because of the manner of the film’s horror, which comes not from the hunting down and chopping up of the main characters, as in so many other movies of the genre, but from the threat of what might happen and what you don’t see. It is these differences that made the movie so enjoyable.

In many ways, “Funny Games” is the antithesis of an American horror film. Listing all the opposites would take me all day, so I’ll settle for the top few.

The most obvious is the way the film was shot: almost none of the actual violence is shown. The classic suspense directors knew that nothing is more terrifying than something you cannot see, and Haneke capitalizes on that theory to great effect here. Instead of filming a twenty minute chase through the woods, he shoots quiet, unexpected death scenes that are merely heard in the background while the contrasting image of one of the captors rummaging nonchalantly through the refrigerator for food is all we can see.

Nobody ever jumps out at you. No sudden face in the mirror, no “gotcha!” as anyone turns a corner, no scream-inducing popping out of closets or axe-through-the-door moments. As a horror-lover, I expected these things, but the movie was more enjoyable for me because I kept seeing opportunites (a closet or doorway in perfect placement for a jumpy moment) that were never fullfilled. It was like the director was playing a game (haha) with me, and I enjoyed playing along. I think it also gave me a taste of what it might be like in a similar situation. No doubt I would act like Gearhart’s character does at one point - running almost aimlessly around a house, choosing and then forsaking hiding spots, crying - as the lights go on one by one and I hear my captor growing closer and closer.

The horror here is far more psychological. The characters played by Pitt and Corbet are fascinating. Their motives are unknown and never fully revealed in the film, but their creepy combination of sarcastic politeness, awkwardness and ruthlessness is far more terrifying than any howling, rampaging villain-monster of the past ten years. They play intellectual games with their captives, using concealed threats and fear behind a facade of “kindness” to make them do whatever they want. They call it a game, but it is the kind of game children play, were the rules are made up as they go and there is no real way to win.

One complaint I heard from other movie-goers was that there were too many long, drawn-out scenes where nothing happened. I have to completely disagree on this one. One of my favorite scenes in the film has also got to be one of the longest, and it involves nothing more than the Naomi Watts trying to stand while her feet are tied. Yes, it takes a long time (and perhaps that is annoying to some horror movie buffs who enjoy the flash bam of their genre), but what it adds to Watts’s character and to the reality of the plot is invaluable. There are many scenes of this nature. For example, there is another were Roth’s character sits for several minutes almost mindlessly holding a blow-dryer to his water-damaged cellphone. Some might be annoyed at the waste of time, but I was impressed that the director would chose to show this slice of reality rather than opt for the quicker, more commercial and entertainment-savy solution. Actually, it only made me more anxious to watch scenes like these, and more frustrated and terrified (no doubt as the characters would have felt) when the efforts ended in failure.

There is really only one more thing to talk about, and that is the twist. You can’t escape the twist in many recent horror films, but this one is very different from your Sixth Sense sort of “no way!” shocker (there is no way you will see this one coming). When I first watched the film, I was absolutely furious about this moment. There I was watching the most realistic thriller I had seen in years, and Haneke had to go and ruin it all with a moment so far out of the realm of reality that it sacrificed everything he had gained up until that point.

However, after thinking about it for a while, I decided that my anger was likely purposefully engineered: Haneke had played a game with me. A no doubt “funny” game (to him) for which he made all the rules. A game I couldn’t possibly win.

Sound familiar?

With this in mind, it was easier for me to accept the sudden change. Perhaps it was just the director’s way of helping me feel a little of the captives’ fury at being manipulated and the hopelessness of them ever surviving the night.

I will award bonus points for the minimalist-yet-highly-effective score and the acting of all involved. Truthfully, this is one of the most interesting and more riveting horror films I have seen in a long time, and were it not for the very controversial twist it would probably be commercially recognized as an instant classic.

My Rating: A

Other reviews: Owen Glieberman, EW (B+)