Movies, with a TWIST! Part 2 - Funny Games

So I'm back home after a long (wet) weekend camping in the Adirondacks, providing you with the second part of the Movies, with a TWIST! trilogy. This edition takes a look at Funny Games, a 2007 Indie film remake of a 1997 German film.

This film, which I would probably categorize in the horror genre, is tough to distinguish. I'm not sure I would suggest it, because it definitely is a "cup of tea" type of movie (where it's not for everybody, even more so than most horror flicks). For that matter, more than any of the other moves in this trilogy, I would discourage reading the spoilers if you have any desire whatsoever of seeing it. Because, I promise, you will NOT see this twist coming. Not in a million years. I guess the best thing I can do is tell you that if you enjoyed The Strangers, you'll probably like most of this movie as well.

I don't think it's fair to label Funny Games as "unconventional." To create my own word, I consider this movie "anti-conventional," because it actively attempts to go AGAINST every expectation you might have of a traditional horror movie. And that's all I'm going to say, before telling you that the rest of my review (with spoilers) can be read by clicking the "Read More" link below....

So what do I mean when I say that this movie ignores the typical "horror movie rules"?

The first method, which is a trap I admit that I walked in on, is that the movie doesn't show ANY violence whatsoever. Throughout the beginning of the movie, I noticed that the camera would pan away from every violent act, and I would say to myself, "Well, that's pretty lame." Of course, the twist later on makes it clear that this is the point: Despite what the audience insists about how they root for the protagonist, they really do want to see the victims get tortured. And when they don't get to actually VIEW that violence, they feel like they've been ripped off.

Another anti-convention of Funny Games is that the protagonists never do anything particularly heroic. Except for one moment (and more on that later), the victims never truly fight back. They're completely powerless throughout the entire film. There aren't any moments of tremendous bravery or bloodthirsty revenge (more on that) that the victims -- and audience -- have "earned" by surviving the intruders' dastardly deeds.

The next surprising action was who got killed, or rather who wasn't protected. The first victim was the family dog. Traditionally, animals (especially pets) have been spared. While viewers seemingly have no problem watching human beings get butchered, it's cruel seeing the same thing happen to a man's best friend. So when the dog was bludgeoned by a golf club, I was a bit surprised. Even more shocking, however, was the first human victim: THE COUPLE'S TEN YEAR OLD SON!

And then, of course, there's the twist. Near the conclusion of the movie, the main protagonist -- played by Naomi Watts -- manages to grab hold of the rifle and shoots one of the killers in the chest. The remaining killer begins to panic, yelling "where's the remote?" as he starts tearing apart the living room. Upon finding it, the killer literally REWINDS THE VERY SCENE WE HAD JUST WATCHED and replays it. Except this time, he prevents her from getting hold of the gun, and instead kills her husband.

At this point, the big "FUCK YOU" became clear. All of these anti-conventions have been a game, of sorts. It was as if the director was saying, "You want to see violence? Well too bad! You want the victims to fight back? Sorry, it's not happening!" And that one scene, for better or worse, was the director GIVING us something we were eagerly awaiting, and then taking it away.

After checking out the IMDb.com message board, I (unsurprisingly) discovered that some people found that twist brilliant, while others found it moronic. I personally found it clever to a certain extent, but I will confess that it also made me feel like much of what I had already watched was a waste. I feel like part of the intention was to get people to watch it again in order to catch all of those winks and nods acknowledging that the killers recognize that this is just a movie, and I'm not sure that it did. I didn't end up watching it a second time.

However, there were flaws outside of the movie simply not being your desired cup of tea. The biggest of which was that, in my opinion, the killers were supposed to be portrayed as charming (at least initially). Except I never found them charming. Since the moment we first laid eyes on them, I found to be creepy, awkward, and very unlikeable. Along with that, the movie was incredibly slow, almost unbearably so, on more than a few occasions.

As such, this is a particularly difficult movie to rate. I suppose I would recommend it to anybody who enjoys films that think outside the box. Horror movie fanboys (and gals) will probably either love it or hate it.

Come to think of it, you're probably better off just waiting until The Strangers comes out on DVD.