“Funny Games” is the kind of movie that makes you want to tale a shower as soon as it is over. You feel begrimed by nasty stuff and you don’t want it to stick. I felt so disturbed I had to take Tylenol PM in order to get to sleep. It is not a viewer-friendly movie. If you plan to see it, be sure to gird yourself, for it is a tough, tough movie to watch.
“Funny Games” is almost an exact replica of Michael Haneke’s 1997 German language film of the same name. Apparently, Haneke is interested in reaching an American audience, especially the people who won’t see a movie with subtitles. I think he is kidding himself; reviewers and word of mouth will keep the audience limited. The casual moviegoer in this country wants to be entertained, not beat over the head for 90 minutes. I ‘d say this film, which is well done, as Haneke has formal skill in abundance, is to be endured not enjoyed. We can learn how a cynical and sadistic European Director views the themes of terror and violence in American movies.
Haneke wanted to make a statement about those things because he sees our film industry as the main purveyor of violence as fun and this film is designed to counter that attitude. There’s no doubt he’s right, as a walk through any Multiplex or Blockbuster’s would make clear. Americans thrive on vicarious violence. Blood, gore, and explosions are mainlined by our youth as a matter of course. Action flicks like the new “Rambo” and the comic book tales such as “Hellboy II,” “Iron man,” and “Batman / Joker” are immensely popular. This is not to say all violence is bad in films. That would be to ignore the world we live in. But it can’t be an end in itself. The night before I saw “Funny Games” I saw “Stop-Loss,” one more film about the War in Iraq and what the violence there is doing to our troops. There is an opening gunfight in the narrow streets of Baghdad and it is quite bloody and gruesome as civilians are killed and three members of the squad die too. The violence is a reflection of what is happening in Iraq; there is a psychological and political dimension to the action and deaths; it is intended to be provocative, to make you think, not have fun with the spilling of blood. The violence hits home and has terrible repercussions, then, now, and in the future. “Funny Games” may or may not have redeemable qualities. People who see the film will have to make up their own mind about that. I think it does, but just barely.
“Funny Games” is the story of two pathological young men who view home invasion as their favorite sport; with perfect manners, twisted minds, and vile intentions, they aggressively and piteously attack unsuspecting bourgeois families at their summer homes by a lovely lake. (To Haneke being bourgeois is the kiss of death.) The movie’s focus is on one family that has just arrived with their sailboat in tow. There is George, the husband (Tim Roth), Ann, the wife (Naomi Watts) and Georgie, their ten-year-old son. The boys invade the home on the pretext of borrowing some eggs and disable George by breaking his leg and then begin to terrorize the three of them. Peter (Michael Pitt) is the clear leader and does most of the talking. Paul (Brady Corbet) is his psychotic sidekick. They call each other by other names too, like Beavis and Butthead, and Tom and Jerry. The combination of their preppy clothes, all in white, including white gloves, which signals nothing to the family, their exaggerated politeness and careful manners, their brittle intellectualism and ruthless treatment of innocent victims, brought Leopold and Loeb to my mind. Like them, they are some variety of experimental nihilists with superior airs. Both boys leave no doubt that evil exists. Also, the way they structure their hideous brutality with games made me recall that monster Anton Chigurh and his coin-flips with his hapless victims. Peter wants George and Ann to bet with him. His bet was they would not be alive at 9 o’clock in the morning. He also offers them a choice to die by knife or gunshot. Be prepared: This movie has no miraculous reversal of fortune. Haneke doesn’t believe in happy endings.
Two of the actors stand out, Watts and Pitt. Watts has to strip naked for the boys and she agonizes throughout the film as her husband fades into the background due to his injury. She is the emotional center for the put-upon family. It was no doubt a daunting role for her. Michael Pitt is evil incarnate, a deadly viper with pure sadism as his gospel.
Haneke has some nice touches here and there in the movie. The one I’ll remember the most is the TV screen splattered with blood with a NASCAR race on the tube, with a broadcaster talking hysterically at top volume. It was a set piece that expressed in capsule form the horror of what happened in this vacation hideaway.
No comments:
Post a Comment