Movie: "Funny Games u.s" WTF?**Spoiler alert***?!
Question: Movie: "Funny Games u!.s" WTF!?**Spoiler alert***!?
okay, so a very good friend of mine and I had a movie night last night!. We rented the movie " Funny Games" with Naomii Watts!. As the movie went on we kind of were bored because we wondered why the family was so afraid of these two pipsqweek dorkuses, why they did not fight back!. well, at a climatic part of the film when Naomii Watts, gets a hold of the shot gun and blows one of the guys away, the one guy gets the remote and rewinds!. then he goes off and kills the rest of the family members easily!. now in the boat the two killers spoke of not knowing reality from fantasy!. and such!.
can anyone tell me what the hell this movie was suppose to be!? was it all in their heads!? was it all a fantasy!? this movie was so upsetting because it just made no sence to either of us, and we were just irked!. if anyone can please enlighten me that would be awesome!. thanks in advance!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
can anyone tell me what the hell this movie was suppose to be!? was it all in their heads!? was it all a fantasy!? this movie was so upsetting because it just made no sence to either of us, and we were just irked!. if anyone can please enlighten me that would be awesome!. thanks in advance!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Answers:
I watched this movie too and I didn't really understand it either!. I'm not totally sure but I'll give it a shot!.
This version was a shot-for-shot remake (and translation, I think) of an older film from 1997: http://en!.wikipedia!.org/wiki/Funny_Games!.!.!. !. Using this link for reference, I guess!.
It's never clearly stated up front whether or not the whole thing is fantasy or reality!. It could be one of those things that the creators wanted you to think about and decide on your own!. Though I suppose it might hint at it all being reality!.
There was a focus on how Paul (the guy who got the remote) is in control of everything!. For one, he is the leader of the two, since he's always bossing Peter (his partner) around!. He is also in a position of power over the family, quite obviously!. But in addition, he seems to be in control of his environment too, in a way - he breaks the fourth wall several times by turning towards the camera and smiling, speaking to the audience, etc!. Then, of course, there is the instance where he reverses the shooting of Peter!.
The comment he makes in the boat that says something like "fiction that is observed is just as real as anything else" (quoted from the Wikipedia article) is justification for his self-awareness, I think!. So I guess what he's saying means that there is no fiction and that everything is real, from movies like this to books and so on!. Because he believes (knows!?) that he seems to be able to manipulate and control everything in the story to his will!.
In conclusion, I suppose I would personally have to say!.!.!. everything that happened in the film - even all the weird, almost supernatural stuff - was indeed real!.
If it was all a fantasy then I guess the filmmakers would show that somehow, like with the terrible 'waking up from a really bad dream' thing!. Still it's hard to say exactly, and I'm just speculating here!. (also, something in the article said that the writer's focus was to make a message about violence or something actually!.)
Anyway I hope everything I said makes some sort of sense, and I hope I sorta helped!. That's just what I got out of the information I have, hahah!. Www@Enter-QA@Com
This version was a shot-for-shot remake (and translation, I think) of an older film from 1997: http://en!.wikipedia!.org/wiki/Funny_Games!.!.!. !. Using this link for reference, I guess!.
It's never clearly stated up front whether or not the whole thing is fantasy or reality!. It could be one of those things that the creators wanted you to think about and decide on your own!. Though I suppose it might hint at it all being reality!.
There was a focus on how Paul (the guy who got the remote) is in control of everything!. For one, he is the leader of the two, since he's always bossing Peter (his partner) around!. He is also in a position of power over the family, quite obviously!. But in addition, he seems to be in control of his environment too, in a way - he breaks the fourth wall several times by turning towards the camera and smiling, speaking to the audience, etc!. Then, of course, there is the instance where he reverses the shooting of Peter!.
The comment he makes in the boat that says something like "fiction that is observed is just as real as anything else" (quoted from the Wikipedia article) is justification for his self-awareness, I think!. So I guess what he's saying means that there is no fiction and that everything is real, from movies like this to books and so on!. Because he believes (knows!?) that he seems to be able to manipulate and control everything in the story to his will!.
In conclusion, I suppose I would personally have to say!.!.!. everything that happened in the film - even all the weird, almost supernatural stuff - was indeed real!.
If it was all a fantasy then I guess the filmmakers would show that somehow, like with the terrible 'waking up from a really bad dream' thing!. Still it's hard to say exactly, and I'm just speculating here!. (also, something in the article said that the writer's focus was to make a message about violence or something actually!.)
Anyway I hope everything I said makes some sort of sense, and I hope I sorta helped!. That's just what I got out of the information I have, hahah!. Www@Enter-QA@Com
The film is meant to be a commentary on violence in movies!. The director (Michael Haneke) makes a point of never giving us (the audience) what we want or expect!. For example, all the violence is off-camera, so we never get the explicit bloodshed that we expect from a horror movie!.
Haneke also knows that we are hoping the family will somehow get the upper hand over the punks!. He acknowledges this in the scene where the wife grabs the gun and shoots one of the punks!. It's what we expect - and want - to happen!. By then rewinding the scene and having it end differently, the director is telling us that he knows what we want and he is not going to give it to us!.
The whole picture is meant to subvert the audience's expectations and thirst for blood!.Www@Enter-QA@Com
Haneke also knows that we are hoping the family will somehow get the upper hand over the punks!. He acknowledges this in the scene where the wife grabs the gun and shoots one of the punks!. It's what we expect - and want - to happen!. By then rewinding the scene and having it end differently, the director is telling us that he knows what we want and he is not going to give it to us!.
The whole picture is meant to subvert the audience's expectations and thirst for blood!.Www@Enter-QA@Com