The original is excellenteven if Haneke's intention about muh violence in media is a bit cringe, but you death of the author easily applies.
The remake Haneke did is shot-for-shot, essentially just an experiment to see how much a film would change if it's technically the same movie but shot with a different camera, with different actors in another language and with some changes to the setting (only visual ones). I always viewed the point as to see the limits of cinematic form, like at what point something starts to feel different. I know some people who prefer it to the original, but I like the original more personally.
>muh violence in media
That wasn't the intention
The intention was to show the audience how easily they can be manipulated by a film
The whole point is that the movie can get you on the edge of your seat, and then completely shatter all immersion by having a character do something as ridiculous as grabbing a TV remote and rewinding the movie to change the outcome and then 10 minutes later you'll be back on the edge of the seat because your monkey brain is that easy to trick and to play with
The movie repeatedly shows that it will not show even mild violence nevermind graphic violence outside of one singular shot which is only used to then rip that cathartic release away from the viewer
But despite showing this countless times the entire time you're watching you're waiting for that graphic home invasion movie violence and before you know it the movie's over
It's a masterclass in filmmaking and playing the audience like a fiddle
>The whole point is that the movie can get you on the edge of your seat
but it didn't, see
no, didn't even laugh once, not even a chuckle.
I was incapable of making it past 30 minutes or so the two guys play obnoxious far too well
it was just a boring thing, the only manipulation going on is from the silly critics and "cinephiles" who hyped it up as a "masterclass"
I hated the movie from the start because of the dumb intro. I've never ever heard of a family in a Jeep listening to classical music while driving. It was such a mond-boggingly stupid concept. If you wanna listen to classical music while driving you better wear earphones and listen to it at the highest volume.
>I've never ever heard of a family in a Jeep listening to classical music while driving
I agree with everything you said but this is not true. My granddad and my dad did this.
many of them. from what i remember, schubert, beethoven, tchaikovsky, many other i can't remember. for a 6 hour drive my dad usually played entire fricking operas.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
he must've blasted them, either that or you're old and your granddad/father were born in the 20s/50s and never listened to rock/pop
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
what the frick is it with you and loud volume for classical?
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
I don't really understand your question. I'm against listening to music loudly. For classical music a near silent environment is needed for me to enjoy it since it's often uneven in it's melodic volume. If your environment is noisy (like if you drive on a road) you need to turn the volume up more than for other genres of music.
My point is that you don't listen to a soft piece like an opera from Mascagni
when you're in a car, even if the point is to make the family look sophisticated. You let them blast a bombastic tune like Marche Slave or Dance of the Knights.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>he must've blasted them
No? They were car rides and there were children and my aunts and shit.
>see two people one of whom is just making a joke and maybe never even watched the movie and another person who just didn't like how well the two main antagonists played their part as obnoxious weasles
woah you sure showed me anon. I guess that somehow means everything I said about the movie is wrong because two people who haven't seen the movie don't agree with me. >I hated the movie from the start because of the dumb intro
Holy shit how did a movie as simple as Funny Games go over so many people's heads? The picture perfect American TV family being violently cut off by abrasive hardcore didn't register in your brain?
They're supposed to be a caricature of the so sweet they rot your teeth american sitcom family you mouthbreather
>they're germans
Michael Hanneke has always said that he views Funny Games as an inherently American story and a story that could only take place in America. That's the entire reason he did the shot for shot remake because that was his original vision
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
>hmm, I'm a director, hmm, I wanna make a movie about americans but how?? >I know! lets make all the characters speak GERMAN, that will make the audience believe them to be AMERICAN
yup, I see the logic now, it makes perfect sense
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
He was only able to make the movie because of a grant given to him by his government how the frick do you think he was going to actually make the movie in America?
Are you being purposefully dense?
>The picture perfect American TV family being violently cut off by abrasive hardcore didn't register in your brain?
I thought the kid was tired of the opera-shit and switched the cd... Boy, are you dumb or what? It didn't go over my head. "The violent and shocking cut" was just boring and predictable to me. I was hoping that it wouldn't set the tune for the rest of the movie but the whole flick could be summed up with that shitty intro. Haneke should've written a sign after the intro "if you get this intro, then you don't need to waste your time on the rest of my shitty nonsense", I wish he was honest enough to do that, but like most artist of today, he makes money on being as dishonest as possible and playing fiddle for fools like you
>flick could be summed up with that shitty intro.
besides everything else you think about the movie, is that not the perfect into ? A intro tha encapsulates the themes and setting of the movie without literally revealing the plot.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
Not if the movie/concept is pure shit.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
with such detailed opinion one can wonder why you hang out on image boards dedicated to talking about films. Maybe one of those fallout threads is more your speed.
2 weeks ago
Anonymous
let me give you a more detailed answer then
Perfection should be seen as being harmonious with its surrounding. Given that the intro is a piece of the film, a perfect intro can only be perfect if the film itself is perfect. Perhaps the concept can be seen as perfect but that doesn't make the execution perfect. While its a neat idea, compressing the concept does not mean perfection. It has been done throughout the ages in all kind of media.
I don't believe that you should be able to compress the core of the movie into an intro (as easily as Haneke made it) since that implies the rest of the movie isn't important. It's a sign of weakness if the audience is able to grasp the complete movie by just watching the intro (once). Else every single slasher which opens up with a scene where the killer kills someone is "perfect". Action movies gets mocked by critics for doin exactly this. Why is it "perfection" when Haneke creates a shitty opening but garbage when the same concept is screened in Bloodlust or Tango & Cash?
I assume headphones would make it easier to cancel out the sound of the road or the wheels given that they drove through a forest (which I imagine was quite a bumpy road).
I mean, it's not like I don't think people listen to classical music in a car. It just didn't fit the joyful happy family-vacation-trip-vibe. >where on the road, lets pick out a good tune to listen to, lets listen to an italian opera!
Here's a situation where "calm" music fits the plot
>muh violence in media
That wasn't the intention
The intention was to show the audience how easily they can be manipulated by a film
The whole point is that the movie can get you on the edge of your seat, and then completely shatter all immersion by having a character do something as ridiculous as grabbing a TV remote and rewinding the movie to change the outcome and then 10 minutes later you'll be back on the edge of the seat because your monkey brain is that easy to trick and to play with
The movie repeatedly shows that it will not show even mild violence nevermind graphic violence outside of one singular shot which is only used to then rip that cathartic release away from the viewer
But despite showing this countless times the entire time you're watching you're waiting for that graphic home invasion movie violence and before you know it the movie's over
It's a masterclass in filmmaking and playing the audience like a fiddle
>>muh violence in media
pic related did that message way better
absolute kino
I was led to believe Michael Haneke was a fricking master of his craft and one of the best modern filmmakers and then i watched this shit and i will never fricking watch a movie of his ever again. It's capeshit-tier.
All those movies do is show that Haneke has a poor understanding of human nature. Yes, people are vengeful. The movies themselves are vengeful attacks on people who like revenge movies. Haneke has zero self-awareness.
This movie is complete garbage, it has no self awareness whatsoever. I recommend movies like straw dogs, a clockwork orange, deliverance, salo, irreversible etc.
I couldn't take the two villains sriouskt, how is two batty boys anyway threatening? The little kid besting them was the most realistic part of the movie.
This was the most pretentious movie I have ever seen in my life. It is a maker of horror movies lambasting the audience for watching horror movies for two hours straight. And it's also boring as sin.
Didn’t one of these star Adam Sandler?
that was "funny people" which was less funny than funny games
No, they’re pseud schlock that basically amounts it crying about movies being too heckin violent and you being evil for watching them.
The original is excellenteven if Haneke's intention about muh violence in media is a bit cringe, but you death of the author easily applies.
The remake Haneke did is shot-for-shot, essentially just an experiment to see how much a film would change if it's technically the same movie but shot with a different camera, with different actors in another language and with some changes to the setting (only visual ones). I always viewed the point as to see the limits of cinematic form, like at what point something starts to feel different. I know some people who prefer it to the original, but I like the original more personally.
>muh violence in media
That wasn't the intention
The intention was to show the audience how easily they can be manipulated by a film
The whole point is that the movie can get you on the edge of your seat, and then completely shatter all immersion by having a character do something as ridiculous as grabbing a TV remote and rewinding the movie to change the outcome and then 10 minutes later you'll be back on the edge of the seat because your monkey brain is that easy to trick and to play with
The movie repeatedly shows that it will not show even mild violence nevermind graphic violence outside of one singular shot which is only used to then rip that cathartic release away from the viewer
But despite showing this countless times the entire time you're watching you're waiting for that graphic home invasion movie violence and before you know it the movie's over
It's a masterclass in filmmaking and playing the audience like a fiddle
>The whole point is that the movie can get you on the edge of your seat
but it didn't, see
it was just a boring thing, the only manipulation going on is from the silly critics and "cinephiles" who hyped it up as a "masterclass"
I hated the movie from the start because of the dumb intro. I've never ever heard of a family in a Jeep listening to classical music while driving. It was such a mond-boggingly stupid concept. If you wanna listen to classical music while driving you better wear earphones and listen to it at the highest volume.
>I've never ever heard of a family in a Jeep listening to classical music while driving
I agree with everything you said but this is not true. My granddad and my dad did this.
>My granddad and my dad did this
which composer did they listen to?
many of them. from what i remember, schubert, beethoven, tchaikovsky, many other i can't remember. for a 6 hour drive my dad usually played entire fricking operas.
he must've blasted them, either that or you're old and your granddad/father were born in the 20s/50s and never listened to rock/pop
what the frick is it with you and loud volume for classical?
I don't really understand your question. I'm against listening to music loudly. For classical music a near silent environment is needed for me to enjoy it since it's often uneven in it's melodic volume. If your environment is noisy (like if you drive on a road) you need to turn the volume up more than for other genres of music.
My point is that you don't listen to a soft piece like an opera from Mascagni
when you're in a car, even if the point is to make the family look sophisticated. You let them blast a bombastic tune like Marche Slave or Dance of the Knights.
>he must've blasted them
No? They were car rides and there were children and my aunts and shit.
>see two people one of whom is just making a joke and maybe never even watched the movie and another person who just didn't like how well the two main antagonists played their part as obnoxious weasles
woah you sure showed me anon. I guess that somehow means everything I said about the movie is wrong because two people who haven't seen the movie don't agree with me.
>I hated the movie from the start because of the dumb intro
Holy shit how did a movie as simple as Funny Games go over so many people's heads? The picture perfect American TV family being violently cut off by abrasive hardcore didn't register in your brain?
They're supposed to be a caricature of the so sweet they rot your teeth american sitcom family you mouthbreather
>American
they're germans, they're supposed to be the bad guys
>they're germans
Michael Hanneke has always said that he views Funny Games as an inherently American story and a story that could only take place in America. That's the entire reason he did the shot for shot remake because that was his original vision
>hmm, I'm a director, hmm, I wanna make a movie about americans but how??
>I know! lets make all the characters speak GERMAN, that will make the audience believe them to be AMERICAN
yup, I see the logic now, it makes perfect sense
He was only able to make the movie because of a grant given to him by his government how the frick do you think he was going to actually make the movie in America?
Are you being purposefully dense?
>The picture perfect American TV family being violently cut off by abrasive hardcore didn't register in your brain?
I thought the kid was tired of the opera-shit and switched the cd... Boy, are you dumb or what? It didn't go over my head. "The violent and shocking cut" was just boring and predictable to me. I was hoping that it wouldn't set the tune for the rest of the movie but the whole flick could be summed up with that shitty intro. Haneke should've written a sign after the intro "if you get this intro, then you don't need to waste your time on the rest of my shitty nonsense", I wish he was honest enough to do that, but like most artist of today, he makes money on being as dishonest as possible and playing fiddle for fools like you
>flick could be summed up with that shitty intro.
besides everything else you think about the movie, is that not the perfect into ? A intro tha encapsulates the themes and setting of the movie without literally revealing the plot.
Not if the movie/concept is pure shit.
with such detailed opinion one can wonder why you hang out on image boards dedicated to talking about films. Maybe one of those fallout threads is more your speed.
let me give you a more detailed answer then
Perfection should be seen as being harmonious with its surrounding. Given that the intro is a piece of the film, a perfect intro can only be perfect if the film itself is perfect. Perhaps the concept can be seen as perfect but that doesn't make the execution perfect. While its a neat idea, compressing the concept does not mean perfection. It has been done throughout the ages in all kind of media.
I don't believe that you should be able to compress the core of the movie into an intro (as easily as Haneke made it) since that implies the rest of the movie isn't important. It's a sign of weakness if the audience is able to grasp the complete movie by just watching the intro (once). Else every single slasher which opens up with a scene where the killer kills someone is "perfect". Action movies gets mocked by critics for doin exactly this. Why is it "perfection" when Haneke creates a shitty opening but garbage when the same concept is screened in Bloodlust or Tango & Cash?
High volume sure, but why wear headphones and risk your hearing when there's no one around to be annoyed by the music?
I assume headphones would make it easier to cancel out the sound of the road or the wheels given that they drove through a forest (which I imagine was quite a bumpy road).
I mean, it's not like I don't think people listen to classical music in a car. It just didn't fit the joyful happy family-vacation-trip-vibe.
>where on the road, lets pick out a good tune to listen to, lets listen to an italian opera!
Here's a situation where "calm" music fits the plot
>>muh violence in media
pic related did that message way better
absolute kino
I was incapable of making it past 30 minutes or so the two guys play obnoxious far too well
peak wogslop
no, didn't even laugh once, not even a chuckle.
I was led to believe Michael Haneke was a fricking master of his craft and one of the best modern filmmakers and then i watched this shit and i will never fricking watch a movie of his ever again. It's capeshit-tier.
I don't see Haneke anywhere on the credits for Madame Web?
All those movies do is show that Haneke has a poor understanding of human nature. Yes, people are vengeful. The movies themselves are vengeful attacks on people who like revenge movies. Haneke has zero self-awareness.
Yes but you should only bother watching one of them. Pick a language or flip a coin.
This movie is complete garbage, it has no self awareness whatsoever. I recommend movies like straw dogs, a clockwork orange, deliverance, salo, irreversible etc.
>straw dogs, a clockwork orange, deliverance, salo, irreversible etc.
Hm... what do all of those movies have in common
Competent cinematography
same-sexual rape?
>straw dogs, clockwork orange, deliverance, irreversible
Kino, those are awesome
>Salo
have a nice day, homosexual
this movie makes me sad. iirc both main actors suicided themselves after some critics pointed out how unnatural their acting was
I couldn't take the two villains sriouskt, how is two batty boys anyway threatening? The little kid besting them was the most realistic part of the movie.
Why does Cinemaphile hate Funny Games so much? It's a pretty good movie
This was the most pretentious movie I have ever seen in my life. It is a maker of horror movies lambasting the audience for watching horror movies for two hours straight. And it's also boring as sin.
No