Funny Games (Theatre) - Ashleigh & Matt

The previews for this film make Funny Games out to be another torture porn movie that attempts to make the audiences squeamish with close-ups of dismemberment and murder. However, this is not an altogether accurate portrait that has been painted. Funny Games shows no actual violence on screen (other than one hit with a golf club to the knee). In fact, if it weren’t for the psychologically violent scenes this movie would be rather tame when compared with Hollywood’s recent fascination with blood and guts. And, this is to say nothing of the most fascinating aspect of this film.

The film begins with a mundane scene; a top down shot contains a family vehicle that is making its way to its summer house. George (Tim Roth) and Anne (Naomi Watts) are playing "guess the composer" as their son Georgie (Devon Gearhart) and his dog sit and listen. The strings ebb and flow along with George’s incorrect answer to Anne’s choice of symphony in their game and the whole family smiles, a happy upper-class family. A jarring scream rips through the theatre as John Zorn and Yamantaka Eyes replaces the peaceful classical music George and Anne are listening to and the title card is shown, the family continues to smile as the animalistic shrieks bleat through the theatre's sound system – truly an offsetting scene. The family reaches their distention and the games begin. Michael Pitt and his creepy, puffed-out-version-of-Leonardo-Dicaprio-self plays a disturbing ringmaster to the family circus that is about to take place and his companion Peter, played by the equally creepy and unibrowed Brady Corbet, begins the action with a seemingly neighborly request to borrow eggs. The boys use this ploy to eventually escalate an argument with George Sr. This argument ends in George slapping one of the boys and seemingly in retaliation the boys attack George with a golf club, again the only real violence shown on screen. As things progress Peter and Paul take the family into the living room and prepare them for the game they are about to play. Paul makes a bet with the family that they will not live to see the next morning. The family is eventually murdered one-by-one and by nine a.m. Peter and Paul take the family’s boat to another pier and knock on the door. They ask the neighbor who answers if they could borrow some eggs.

The unique twist of this film is Paul knowledge of the theatre’s audience. He “breaks the forth wall” multiple times either to goad the audience or to explain to Peter why different methods of murdering are more entertaining to the audience watching the film. If the son remains alive, argues Paul, then the drama will be more intense. The director of the film uses the usual tricks that horror films evoke and dismisses them just as easily. Case in point, the films sets up that a knife has been accidently left on board the boat, but when the murders take the last surviving family member out to the boat and a last chance effort at survival for the family member could be made, Paul and Peter simply take the knife and throw it overboard in an anticlimactic snub to the theatre audience wanting some sort of justice for the dead family members. As an audience member it is believed that evil will be triumphed over by the end of the film, or at least some sign of retribution will be present by the last frame and Funny Games does not deliver on this and as Peter and Paul point out by the end of the film, this is not usual. Haneke, the director, peppers this device in just the right amount. But, I did have one problem with Haneke’s methods. At one point in time Paul rewinds the film in an attempt to undo some action he deems unsatisfactory. I felt that that was a little too much in terms of meta-entertainment. But overall I loved the self-aware shtick. The soundtrack was delightfully stark causing scenes as innocuous as borrowing eggs to have an edge. And the performances by the actors were brilliant; I believe Pitt was born to play Paul. I don't really understand why Haneke felt like he had to recreate his 1997 thriller, but I enjoyed the effort.

8 out of 10: a delightful addition to a tired genre, dare I say, a new Psycho?