Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.

A Spy Sees FUNNY GAMES In Hollywood Tonight!

first by bluepizza	Jun 15th, 2007 12:59:55 AM
first
WILL HE GET FIRED TOO! by THE KNIGHT	Jun 15th, 2007 01:08:16 AM
Fox suits are a buncha cunts...
SPEAKING OF HORROR by THE KNIGHT	Jun 15th, 2007 01:09:38 AM
Just watched the original Texas Chainsaw... Boy is leatherface a sicko! That girl screamed so much my damn dv nearly exploded!
PLANT by thehellhoundgang	Jun 15th, 2007 01:11:35 AM
The subject says it all! The film sounds GREAT anyway! I'll see it 4 sure.
FIRE HIM by supercowbell 4 cant stop the cowbell	Jun 15th, 2007 01:13:56 AM
no opinions allowed!
At least the move got a reaction by kingoflight	Jun 15th, 2007 01:14:33 AM
Sounds like a good film even if it is not a great genre of choice seen as it sounds like a fresh approch i'll have to check it out. Whats a waste films are when they are monotone and cause no reaction, as long as its a human response i like it, by the sound of the review its you thats missed the point not the audience!
Torture is in Season!!! by datachasm	Jun 15th, 2007 01:17:59 AM
its the latest craze sweeping the nation!
PLEASE AICN!! by BadMrWonka	Jun 15th, 2007 01:20:37 AM
you GOTTA extend the number of articles that are on the front page. if news is slow, and a couple days go by with just 1 or 2 new articles, it's fine. but when a rush of stuff comes in, well, it regularly happens that an article will get posted at 10pm on one day, and by 10pm the next day, it's off the front page! and if someone didn't check out AICN that day (not me, I check it everyday, like the geek I am), they wouldn't even have any idea it existed. and since the only way to search for old articles is to know what you're searching for (no way to look at "yesterday's articles" or "last week's articles"), no one will ever see it! I love the site, and I just hate it when sometimes I'm busy and skip a day, and it happens to be a busy one news-wise, and I miss out. can't you just extend the main section a bit? or god forbid install something to let people go back a little ways to recent articles that are just out of range to end up on the front page?
Plant Part2 by thehellhoundgang	Jun 15th, 2007 01:25:17 AM
Ok, ok, ok...I was projecting. Weather or not the reviewer was an impartial opinion is a total unknown. I DO however appreciate an upfront tone and in reality have no reason to doubt the information conveyed by the reviewer...but it's so taboo to say, hey I served as(fill in the blank) on said production and here's what I liked/loved about it...maybe you would as well. Fuck I'm jaded:(
Saw the original by SJBKAT	Jun 15th, 2007 01:31:36 AM
Really intense movie. The "remote control" part in the original made the people I watched it with very angry, but in a good way. You think the victim gets the upper hand, but not after a quick tap of the rewind button. Very original and very intense. Plus the remake has Naomi Watts? I am there.
Damn remakes...... by srdidymus	Jun 15th, 2007 01:34:20 AM
Getting kind of tired of 'em. Holy balls, the original Funny Games is awesome. It still makes my butt clench.
Hellhoundgang... by TheRealMoriarty	Jun 15th, 2007 01:38:49 AM
... I'm not sure what you're talking about. The intro and the review are not by the same person, and neither of us worked on FUNNY GAMES. I think you may have simply glanced at this article and then overreacted.
"all we asked for is some eggs...no need to be rude" by Romoehlio	Jun 15th, 2007 02:17:44 AM
some of the all time best sickos in movie history!!
Moriarty by thehellhoundgang	Jun 15th, 2007 02:27:03 AM
Oh..totally. I get the AICN format, I was straight up accusing the author of the review...NOT you...of being a plant. And that said...more power to them if they were. The flick sounds dope and I'm very glad you posted news on it. Hey, I wish I saw it! Best regards...and 'infinity+1 thanks' for the goods!!!!
Well you can straight up by llephen	Jun 15th, 2007 02:47:03 AM
Well you can straight up accuse yourself. straight up the ass, buddy.
llephen by thehellhoundgang	Jun 15th, 2007 02:55:34 AM
And you'd like that?
I LIKE the RealMoriarty but I Don't LIKE the realMoriar by thehellhoundgang	Jun 15th, 2007 02:59:22 AM
So be cool. Or don't... It's YOUR cyberlife.
Re: Inappropriate laughter by Bobo_Vision	Jun 15th, 2007 03:01:09 AM
The whole Idiocracy inappropriate laughter comment is so true. Its like sitcoms with their canned laugh tracks have trained people to let them know when they're supposed to laugh, so when they hear people laugh in a theatre, they blindly follow even if its not even remotely funny. When I saw "Pan's Labrynth", there was a stoner sitting at the back who began laughing hysterically everytime that cricket appeared near the start of the movie. There was nothing funny about it, he was just high, but idiots would start laughing too. Eventually they realized he was a retard and stopped following his lead.
SPOILERISH That "remote control" scene..SPOILERISH by BenBraddock	Jun 15th, 2007 03:15:46 AM
I hated it the first time I saw the film (original version), thought it really cheated the audience. It was the deliberate removal of the (almost) last ray of hope for the "goodies" to escape the horrendous situation they were in, and to give us viewers the much-anticipated and (had this been a normal Hollywood movie) much-expected payback scene, where those 2 intruder fuckers get what was coming to them.. And when it disappeared, it just totally broke the audiences spirits.. it was all downhill for the family after that, and I left the theatre DEPRESSED. But, looking back, it's one of the stand-out scenes, and it absoutely made a point and I have actually re-evaluated the film for the better. I still think it was totally depressing but very well made, and it makes you ask yourself a lot of questions. Not a lot of movies do that. Tension from start to finish, but no gore for the sake of it. Eli Roth should take copious notes.
Sounds like an interesting flick. by Pompoulus	Jun 15th, 2007 03:54:42 AM
And also one I really don't want to deal with.
Laughter by Mr Gorilla	Jun 15th, 2007 04:20:46 AM
When I saw Fellowship of the Ring, on its first night in London, there was an idiot next to me who started laughing during the wizards duel. McKellen and Lee facing off, and this idiot girl starts giggling. Because, uh, they're old men fighting. There is nothing, NOTHING we ca do about those fucking hyenas.
Hidden / Cache by Mr Gorilla	Jun 15th, 2007 04:21:52 AM
Is really good, if anyone's not seen it. Definitely worth catching, probably on video so there aren't dumbasses laughing at it.
The point of the remake is... by Jinxo	Jun 15th, 2007 05:45:09 AM
... a lot of people won't sit through a subtitled flick. The film has intense and intriguing premise and if you do an English remake you will get more eyes to see it and make more $$$. Seriously, anyone who... is like the right word? Anyone who liked the original will likely want to see the remake just to compare. Then on top of that, new viewers. I thought it was "funny" that the reviewer was shocked and appalled by the audience laughing at questionable things. As he says, some people will laugh as a tension release. But the point of the film is to make you question and be uncomfortable with paying money to enjoy people being tortured and killed. Any audience will likely have a percentage of people who will miss the point and react that way. And, to me, that's part of the experience. Maybe even planned to be a part of it. Real people around you laughing at atrocities heightens the point. It's one thing to be distrubed by and question if you are no better than the pyscho killer in the movie for wanting to enjoy his evil deeds. It's another uncomfortable step to realize you might be the only person in theater to get that delighting in someone else's defilement is wrong. That feeling of, "Holy crap! In a room of a hundred people, is everyone else except me morally twisted?" It don't get more unnerving and powerful than that.
Loved the original... by Jakes Nel	Jun 15th, 2007 08:30:44 AM
Check out Code Unknown and The Piano Teacher( it will make you feel uneasy for days). As for the inappropriate laughing... well, it's a sad truth. People laughed when they saw characters fly during Crouching Tiger. Why? Because they weren't wearing bright coloured tights? Because the effects looked different from the usual ILM fare? I don't know. Maybe they are just umcomfortable and don't know how to cope with new tones and concepts.
Good point by jimbo86	Jun 15th, 2007 08:38:22 AM
Nice one Jinxo really good point. I'm actually looking forward to seeing this in the pictures for the reasons you stated. It is obvious fans of "Saw" and "hostel" type movies will go to see this and totally miss the point and that is all part of the message behind this wonderful movie. I just hope Watts isn't as annoying as she usualy is.
I really have a dislike for movies... by mr.underwater	Jun 15th, 2007 08:40:43 AM
...That make you sit through a parade of awful, horrible things, then scold you for doing so (ie the original Funny Games, and from the sound of it, this remake). "You are a terrible person for giving me your money and should be ashamed of yourself for doing so!"
Inapproprate laughter by fish tacos	Jun 15th, 2007 09:18:24 AM
Weirdest example of that for me was at Fellowship of the Rings as well. At the part where Cate Blanchett's character is introduced, this gang of thugs at the back of the theater fucking lost it. Those assholes were laughing their asses off at Blanchett. Both the original Funny Games and The Piano Teacher are fantastic. I can't wait to see the remake. Nothing is as horrifying as home invasion, and I can't imagine a more tense and disturbing take than Funny Games. It's downright oppressive how real and shocking it is. Makes me squirm just thinking about a few of those scenes...
Hidden/Cache is...a masterpiece. by dekionplexis	Jun 15th, 2007 10:26:44 AM
Hanneke is a genius. That is all.
Haneke is THE genius of our time by curtbainer	Jun 15th, 2007 10:57:21 AM
ALL OF YOU GO SEE "THE SEVENTH CONTINENT" RIGHT NOW!!!! IF YOU'RE NOT DEVASTATED FOR DAYS, YOU NEED A HEART TRANSPLANT!!!
Although.... by curtbainer	Jun 15th, 2007 10:59:02 AM
why is he doing what sounds like a shot-for-shot (and song-for-song) remake of his own film? I just don't get it! I thought Richard Linklater was the only one who thought Van Sant's Psycho was a good idea. Why does genius have to be so incomprehensible to us commoners?
The original Funny Games is a damn fine film... by Sledge Hammer	Jun 15th, 2007 10:59:59 AM
...for what it is. This remake I'm only really interested in to see if Heneke does a better job of remaking his own film than George Sluizer did back in the day when he remade The Vanishing.
And from this picture...... by curtbainer	Jun 15th, 2007 11:19:04 AM
http://www.shocktillyoudrop.co m/news/topnews.php?id=526 THE EXACT SAME SET?!?!?!?!?
I was at the Arclight too... by DonkeyTron	Jun 15th, 2007 12:51:43 PM
And I gotta say, I think it sucked. It starts out well enough and then drags through, what seemed like an eternity, the sadistic tormenter? simpering victim thing for the rest of the film. No story arc. no character development. Nada. Nothin. Zilch. The director is so self consciously pointing your attention to the fact that this is not a Hollywood movie and none of the usual conventions apply that he forgets to make it entertaining. And when the brief moments of levity and creativity show up their so jarring and out of place that whatever meager investment you had in the thing quickly evaporates. The acting is good if only to support a bunch of 2 dimensional characters and the cinematography shined as well. For a movie that obviously prides itself on being unconventional and different it winds up being very one note and thoroughly depressing.
So a guy was laughing at Naomi Watts hopping & tied up by Blud	Jun 15th, 2007 01:29:35 PM
But was Kurt Russell laughing?
This isn't like Van Sant's Psycho by mr.underwater	Jun 15th, 2007 01:52:22 PM
More like the Vanishing and Nightwatch remakes. In other words, it will flop. When will someone realize that this particular formula (foreign directors remaking their own films for America) doesn't work?
Excuse to enjoy torture disguised as a "comment" by Phantom Einstein	Jun 15th, 2007 01:56:05 PM
You know what would be really creative? Finding a way to comment on society's obsession with violence without dressing the so-called comment up in torture porn. 'Cause I'm finding it to be less of an examination of the issue than it is an excuse to watch some torture porn.
The original Funny Games is brilliant, not torture porn by Lovecraftfan	Jun 15th, 2007 03:37:55 PM
And if it is it's surprisngly non-violent torture porn. The violence is kept mostly off screen. The film unlike Hostel, Saw and may other horror films here is genuinely disturbing and filled with amazing directorial touches. The way he build the suspense is unbearable.
Funny Games is quite anti-Hollywood by CuervoJones	Jun 15th, 2007 04:00:38 PM
and "anti-torture porn"
Great original - that remote scene by Larry of Arabia	Jun 15th, 2007 04:00:45 PM
(SPOILER) Yes, it removes the last shred of hope. The director is saying two things. First, that in real life the "Hollywood Ending" we are expecting doesn't happen. Second, that we didn't pay to see the bad guys get theirs. We are really paying to see people tortured (Hostel, The Hills Have Eyes II) and the bad guys are the heroes. We don't watch Friday the 13th to see how Jason is defeated each time, we watch it to see the kills. Here you go, he says, here is the logical progression of what you pay for each time you see a slasher movie. Your "real" heroes have won. Live with it.
Lovecraftfan's point is by Blud	Jun 15th, 2007 04:31:22 PM
that he understands Funny Games and other films of its likeness PURPORT to be anti-torture porn, but this explanation is a hollow one when you see how much graphic violence composes said films. If any of these directors actually believe their anti-violence message is going to do anything but add to the decadence, they're delusional. So what the torture films with 'a message' ultimately become are the films that topped the worst ones preceding them and the hollow 'messages' are discarded. Me personally, I'm looking forward to Naomi Watts' first bound and gagged scene.
I call it the Jackass effect by MaxCalifornia.	Jun 15th, 2007 05:36:54 PM
The inappropriate laughter thing. I first became aware of it during RED DRAGON where you see the Philip Seymour Hoffman reporter character, in a wheelchair and on fire, whooshing right towards you. That is HORRIFYING. And people LAUGHED, I couldn't believe it. My theory is that long term exposure to Jackass and other 'prank' type shows causes this. If people's brains are geared towards laughing at seeing physical pain being inflicted on others, then after a while they aren't able to differentiate between what's a really disturbing on-screen injury and that Knoxville person shoving a firework up his ass, or whatever. Then again, sometimes you just get fucknuts in the audience for no reason. I saw Mr.Brooks last week and some guy was giggling at stuff all the way through, some of it was for the humorous moments, but he was also laughing at the scene where Brooks' daughter tells him she's pregnant and they're discussing abortion. A HA HA HA HA HA! indeed.
Splatter movies can be by blue7	Jun 15th, 2007 07:12:44 PM
Splatter movies can be great. Nothing that really serves the same purpose as regular old porn, but what the hell. Funny Games is not torture porn, if you're prone to using that label. At least watch the fucking movie before you think you have anything to say about it.
I just want to bring up again that the original is not by Lovecraftfan	Jun 15th, 2007 07:27:57 PM
graphically violent. I think the orginal Funny Games is one of the most disturbing and horryfying things I've ever seen. BUT it didn't freak me out because it showed a lot of violence as there was actually little violence in it. It disturbed me becuase of it's correct but disheartning message, it's nihilism, the absolutely unbearable tension, and two of the nicest most polite psychos to ever hit the big screen. The scene where he's chasing the little kid through the neighbors house had me on the edge of my seat. When I got done watching this I actually had trouble sleeping thats how bad it got to. I know silly but true.
True by Jinxo	Jun 15th, 2007 09:02:41 PM
The original does a really great job of being horrifying and torturous without being graphic. Part of what is so freaky is that sometimes when bad things happen you don't see it. The camera will be pointed elsewhere and you only hear what is going on. Or the one death where you do not see the death happen but you do see the aftermath. There is blood but it's not some freakshow of gore. They don't focus in on a gore tight shot or anything. Just a long shot of the aftermath. But they stay on that shot so long, making you consider it until it just becomes so unbearable. I do think the original film managed to comment on the issue at hand, be harrowing but not fall into a gore-fest.
ArcLight audience! by stammerhappy	Jun 15th, 2007 10:45:14 PM
I was there too and I don't know where you were sitting but I was near the worst of the audience. They were laughing and cracking jokes, pretty much ruining the movie for me and a friend. We yelled 'shut up' once or twice. People are CATTLE! And, you know what? This movie will not make a cent. It's too sophisticated for most people. I never saw the original like my friend did but he told me it's the same film shot for shot. I thought all the performances were terrific. I disagree with the pacing in the middle. It was excrutiating! Every second, I was dreading the return of the two killers so it worked for me. I attend screenings on a regular basis (mostly for the industry) and I have to say that this audience sucked. I expect the scores will low.
Mr. Underwater by Pompoulus	Jun 16th, 2007 01:15:32 AM
Groucho Marx said it best, "I'd never join a club that would have me as a member." Also, unrelated, I'm getting sick of people trotting out the term 'torture-porn' as if that word magically articulates their position for them. Nobody really knows what that means. It's not a solid term, stop using it in place of argument.
i don't get all these puritans sniffing their noses by slappy jones	Aug 22nd, 2007 12:57:07 AM
at these supposed "torture porn" films. You all sound exactly like the typeof dickheads who were moaning and complaining and trying to ban texas chainsaw massacre and the evil dead. I am not saying any of these new wave of films are as good as these classics but you sound like the moral majority who were against all those old classics we love so much.... I mean evil dead a film we all pretty much love has a tree fucking raping a woman and if texas chainsaw massacre isn't a film about torture I don't know what is. And spare me the "you don;t see anything" argument because the film is afucking horrific and you see plenty. fullon gore? not really but marilyn burns character is tortured throughout the fucking thing and TCM that is considered a classic so seriously all you fuckers get off your high horses. So what if these new films are based around concept I just don;t see the differ3ence between these and any slasher film ..its just the means to an end......for the record I really only like the hostel movies myself. thought the saw films were terrible and cpativity was awful but not because of the subject matter...I mean buffalo bill tortured his victims really and no one whines. it just fucks meoff to see oall these snooty mother fuckers sounding exactly like the puritans who hated films we now know as classics.

Talkbacks

A Spy Sees FUNNY GAMES In Hollywood Tonight!

User login

Quick Talkback

Talkbacks