I actually agree about Funny Games, which was a deeply unpleasant experience in the original, but I hope it doesn't turn you off Haneke completely. Cache, for instance, was just utterly brilliant, an exercise in Hitchcockian paranoia and existential dread.
'Out Of Gas'
Buffista Movies 6: lies and videotape
A place to talk about movies--old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
I actually agree about Funny Games, which was a deeply unpleasant experience in the original, but I hope it doesn't turn you off Haneke completely. Cache, for instance, was just utterly brilliant, an exercise in Hitchcockian paranoia and existential dread.
I suspect Hitchcock would have appreciated FUNNY GAMES a lot, since in its deeply unpleasant way it is brilliantly directed. What you don't see is far far worse than if you had seen it, I think. I admire the movie a lot, but only from a completely academic point of view. It has zero value as entertainment. That said, I hope the new version draws in some of the folks who are making the HOSTELs and SAWs such big box office (though from what I've read the most recent sequels haven't done as well) because it's an unpleasure they deserve. I may have to see it simply for comparison reasons.
And honestly, as unpleasant as it was, it was nowhere near as unpleasant as IRREVERSIBLE or TROUBLE EVERY DAY.
I really need to see CACHE' and TIME OF THE WOLF.
I'd been kind of interested in seeing Trouble Every day before my Vincent Gallo loathing rocketed into the stratosphere. Is it entirely bereft of entertainment value?
I'd been kind of interested in seeing Trouble Every day before my Vincent Gallo loathing rocketed into the stratosphere. Is it entirely bereft of entertainment value?
Of the three, it's the one I'd be interested in ever seeing again (apart from the FUNNY GAMES remake), but Vincent Gallo was so miscast it wasn't even funny. I mean, he has the psycho part down, but it needed somebody who looked like they took an occasional shower and shave for it to work (James Spader would have rocked). Beatrice Dalle was scary in the extreme; I mean that as a complement. Also, as far as I know, it's still not available on domestic DVD, so seeing it may be a moot point (I caught it at a Cambridge repatory theater). I absolutely ADORE the soundtrack album, even though certain songs bring to mind seriously unpleasant images.
Cache, for instance, was just utterly brilliant, an exercise in Hitchcockian paranoia and existential dread.
Oh, is that the same guy? I have it on my DVR.
Same guy. And I guess I agree with Frank that I understood and appreciated Funny Games as an academic exercise (and yeah, Haneke's a brilliant director), but I would have gladly gnawed off one of my limbs to quit watching it.
it was nowhere near as unpleasant as IRREVERSIBLE or TROUBLE EVERY DAY.
Never saw either, but I figured those were abhorrent from the reviews. Actually, I've never seen either of the Hostels or any of the Saw movies for much the same reason.
Incidentally, last night we watched Apocalypto, which had an appalling interest in filming the dynamics of blunt instruments puncturing human flesh. I liked the sets and costumes in the Mayan city, although I've read they were extremely ahistorical. I did not like the manipulative use of children in peril or the aforementioned obsession with the mechanics of physical human frailty. And the blocking was utterly ridiculous. How does a group of armed men run in a perfect V with only inches between them?
Actually, I've never seen either of the Hostels or any of the Saw movies for much the same reason.
The first two Saw movies are pretty good, actually. Not what I expected. A little graphic, but the fun is more in the mind games. The first movie especially is much more of a psychological thriller; there isn't all that much graphic violence.
I'm pretty committed to avoiding them at present. Life's pretty short, and there's a whole lot of great movies I haven't seen.
I liked the first Saw movie. There's surprisingly little graphic violence in it, and it really fucks with your head. I didn't see the rest, as I don't tend to enjoy torture as a franchise. I believe in characters going through extreme events to learn about the characters; not characters going through extreme events as the entertainment value.