|
|
Post by dedwyre on Apr 21, 2008 15:59:28 GMT -5
There's this horror/suspense/dark comedy movie that came out not even a year ago, I think, and I can't for the life of me remember the title. I've only seen the trailer.
It's about this family living in a nice place, and these two guys in white shirts come over, attack the father, and tie them up. One says that they're going to play a game: "We bet that you'll be dead by morning, and you bet that you won't." Then there's some other part where one of the women asks "Why are you doing this?" and the guy replies, "Never underestimate the value of entertainment."
Ring any bells?
|
|
|
|
Post by Noel on Apr 21, 2008 17:34:48 GMT -5
Funny Games! It's Michael Haneke's US remake of his own German film, which is supposed to be a clever exploration of the voyeuristic nature of cinema.
I didn't think all that much of the original (I preferred his other movie "Cache" which dealt with similar themes), but the remake has Naomi Watts so it must surely be worth watching.
|
|
|
|
Post by dedwyre on Apr 21, 2008 22:53:36 GMT -5
He came to the US to remake a film he already did? I figured that only happened when the director of "Ju-On" remade it as "The Grudge." Except he didn't come to America as much.
EDIT: Thank you, by the way.
|
|
|
|
Post by dedwyre on Apr 21, 2008 23:03:12 GMT -5
Just looked both versions up on IMDB. A reviewer said the first one was sickening, and another reviewer said the second one was purposefully void of any visible torture scenes. I think they both mentioned that Haneke's intention for both versions was to examine America's infatuation with violence as entertainment. Both films seem to have different methods, though. Interesting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werewolf on Apr 22, 2008 1:56:17 GMT -5
I saw it advertised in one of my movie magazines. It did say that compared with the original it was tame. But then i'm not a fan of torture movies, Hostel put me off. It's all the screaming and begging. I don't seem to mind when it's a monster but the thought of people doing it to people i find more frightening than any movie monster.
Nice description of the film by the way. The minute you said the whits shirts i knew which one you mean't.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on Apr 22, 2008 3:31:03 GMT -5
At first I thought you were talking about Killers, but then noticed you said it was less than a year old, and the discription didn't match exact.
I saw a trailer for the remake, but don't remember much about it, as it didn't stick to my mind. I'll probably watch it when it comes onto TV rather then going out of my way to watch it.
And I agree with werewolf about not being keen on Torture movies. I also prefer monster ones.
|
|
|
|
Post by Noel on Apr 22, 2008 8:16:45 GMT -5
Well, the whole point of the first film was that the viewer was supposed to be an accomplice to the violence and be rooting for the psychopaths rather than the family, which I thought was a bit presumptuous to say the least. I assume the remake is more or less the same in that respect.
It did have some clever ideas in it, but it was morally vacuous and unconvincingly pessimistic. If I want torture I'll just watch "Love Actually", thank you very much!
|
|
|
|
Post by Werewolf on Apr 22, 2008 13:31:10 GMT -5
Love Actually wasn't that bad! Now Sleepless in Seatle, there's a horror film.
|
|
|
|
Post by dedwyre on Apr 22, 2008 22:37:40 GMT -5
I'm not a fan of torture films, either, but I did make sure to watch Hostel when I had the chance to see it for free, just to prove to myself that it wasn't anything worse than I'd already seen. And it really wasn't, except for when they guy had his ankle tendons cut.
The reason I want to see Funny Games is because I'm planning on making a parody comic of it where the psychos meet their match. Just for fun, of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on Apr 23, 2008 3:35:42 GMT -5
That's what happens in Killers. The psychos that take over the house and hold the family, find out that the family is way worse than they are.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werewolf on Apr 23, 2008 3:44:25 GMT -5
And it really wasn't, except for when they guy had his ankle tendons cut. Wasn't that awful! Made me cringe. |
|
|
|
Post by Marcus on Apr 23, 2008 3:55:55 GMT -5
Didn't find hostel to be anywhere near as bad as the hype made it sound. Didn't think any of the scenes were so "realistic" or "gore fill" above what has already been seen in various other films. They just had more of it going on in hostel.
Part two answered a few questions, like what it was all about, but for the most part I didn't find either particularly entertaining. I don't think the first one had enough story, and the second one had a story, but they just repeated the gore form the first one (well different events/tortures, but you get the what I mean) so lots it's novelty that the first one had.
|
|
|
|
Post by Noel on Apr 23, 2008 7:07:19 GMT -5
Sleepless in Seattle totally kicks Love Actually's arse!
What was this thread about again?
|
|
|
|
Post by dedwyre on Apr 23, 2008 14:57:27 GMT -5
Sleepless in Seattle totally kicks Love Actually's arse! What was this thread about again? My lack of memory. I liked You've Got Mail. |
|
|
|
Post by Werewolf on Apr 23, 2008 15:52:30 GMT -5
Sleepless and Mail were both terrible! At least Love Actually had the fabulous Alan Rickman in it.
|
|
