Twice the funny games

Well I just watched Funny Games U.S. and for an obvious reason I have to put both versions up here, so lets start with the original.



Funny Games (1997)

This is Michael Haneke's crown jewel so to say, at least by his own words. A movie that is closest to the themes of A Clockwork Orange out of all the movies that try to capture it's feel. It's a story of an upper class family's nightmare when two young men take the family hostage and put them through a sadistical, violent ordeal. This movie is disturbing, brutal, freaky and not in the entertaining way. It's a statement against the violence in entertainment and how it blurs the viewers mind. When people are offered everything, nothing is enough. Just for the basic message it's a movie worth watching. But there's a bit more to it than that, it's also quite brilliantly made. The cast is superb and hadle their hard roles really well. Especially the mother played by Susanne Lothar makes a striking performance. Some scenes are pure perfection with long uncomfortable takes without release. Also the idea of not showing the violence but letting the viewer hear what's happening is so brutal it's scary. Again proves the point what you can't see is worse than what you can. This is a kind of movie you watch once and never go back to it as it's going to loose it's effect after the first viewing.
85%



Funny Games U.S. (2007)
Haneke did a remake of the original for the American market. And I have to wonder why? It's the same movie from scene to scene only the actors are English and American and the dog is a different breed. He didn't change anything from the original. In a way I understand it, if the original is perfect what's there to improve and since it's the same director of course he's not going to change anything as he himsef has said it's his best work. That raises the question why make a remake then if it's going to be exactly the same movie? Only thing I can think of is to take the money from the average illiterate American. And that is not a good thing. Don't get me wrong it's not worse than the original, it's the same with pretty much every detail. It's still as effective, shocking and brutal, with the same statement. Also the cast, especially Naomi Watts, make stellar performances. But there's just no need for this remake and even if Haneke had the good intentions to bring his work to a broader audience, it feels like he's pissing in the eye of the original fans. I honestly can't decide how to rate this one, easiest would be to give it 0 since it's completely unnecessary movie for me personally and it has that "let's take the money away from people" feeling. But as it is in the end the same as the original, meaning a very good movie, I should go for 85 percent here too. Oh well I guess I won't let commercialism win. If you're American and can't read subtitles, watch this movie, everyone else watch the original.
0%