A father, mother and son drive gently down the country road, playfully guessing the name and artist of the song on the radio. It's classical music, perfectly complimenting the breezy feel of a regular, happy family's embarking on an idyllic summer holiday. Then out of nowhere, the shrieks of sinister, deafening death metal blast out, drowning out all sound in and around the car. The family seem oblivious to the peril; they keep looking at each other, smiling. We're into disturbing territory.
Funny Games U.S. is a shot-for-shot remake of Michael Haneke's original foreign language film released a decade ago, the effects of it still having not quite worn off to those that saw it. I haven't seen the original, but those that I've spoken to have told me they needed to watch Disney films for a good while to get over it. Along with this intriguing reaction, and the fact that I had Haneke's very good Cache in my collection, I set off to view Funny Games U.S. at the picture house. I didn't expect to enjoy myself, nor did I intend to. The two labels to conjure up in this scenario are arthouse and torture-porn; the former doesn't have entertainment at the top of its priorities, and the latter shouldn't, but unforunately does in this day and age.
Throughout the film we watch the family settle into their holiday home, peeling potatoes and changing the battery on the phone (fun!!!!) before the arrival of two suspicious, yet charming young men who look as though they've just been for a round of golf. Things don't seem right, and soon a request for eggs turns into a bash on the skull with a golf club. Before long, the family is subjected to horrendous torture for the next 90 minutes. It is uncompromising, difficult material.
Funny Games was brought across the pond because Haneke wanted to make a statement about violence in film. While I do have some problems with his execution (I'll get to that), I can't argue with his message. Why do we delight in films such as Saw and Hostel? Why do we derive entertainment from watching people screaming, being cut in half. Here's the thing: Saw is not famed for its plot, its characters or any sort of depth. It is the Home Alone of horror movies, in which the sole attraction is for its audience to wait in anticipation for the next great trap. To sit as voyeurs whilst the next unwilling victim gets their jaw spilt open or their chest ripped off.
You're probably thinking "well, lots of movies are guilty of this", and I'd be inclined to agree with you. Tarantino uses explicit violence in his movies, and Haneke has been outspoken in pointing the finger at him in particular. However, Tarantino's films are of such great quality that there's a lot more to sink your teeth into. Amazing dialogue, great characters. Likewise, with horror films, the intention of the film is to scare me. Sweeney Todd has Grand Guignol levels of mutilation, but its praise lies mostly on its music, and stylish use of gothic black and white throughout. When it boils down to it, there are no redeeming qualities, or an overall aim to the Saw series. The scripts suck and are reliant on cheap twists, the characters are one-dimensional and the stench of money-grabbing executives is all over the franchise. The audience go to see the people maimed and killed, plain and simple. There's something not quite right with that.
What Funny Games U.S. does it subverts the torture-porn genre. It doesn't show us the violence, instead choosing to focus on the consequences. It wants us to feel the pain of the victims, every agonising second of the aftermath. Therein lies the uncomfortable moments of the film, 5-minute long stretches of a bloodied mother rising helplessly to her feet. I viewed the film as one statement, and I knew I wasn't the intended audience. This was meant for those that went into the cinema expecting something in the Saw mould, wishing to be entertained by the pain of others.
While I take Haneke's side, there is an issue with how he goes about constructing his argument. All elements of the film work fine, other than some choice dialogue from the antagonists when breaking the fourth wall. Their lines to the audience drive the condescending nature of the film to new levels, and it is fully expected that even those who tolerate the film will feel as if they are being talked down to.
I didn't enjoy Funny Games U.S., but I can't deny that it was a powerful piece of cinema, and probably my favourite film of 2008 so far, at least before Wall-E and The Dark Knight come along this week and occupy the #1 and #2 spots, whichever way round. Funny Games U.S. has little flaws depending on how you look at it. Are you the disappointed voyeur, or the wrongly patronised? And if you don't like the basic concept of Haneke talking down to you, just remember that Godard had the utmost contempt for his audience, and we all love him to bits.
I have a question. If I buy the DVD, does that make me a sadist?
***1/2
No comments:
Post a Comment