Funny Games - Neither Seen Nor Heard - game-webites.net

Funny Games – Neither Seen Nor Heard

Daniel Netzel
Views: 79453
Like: 1544
Michael Haneke’s challenging film offers us a unique take on the horror genre. This video essay breaks down the American version of Funny Games, and how it uses the absence of sound or visuals to its advantage.

(This video contains spoilers)

Support this channel:

Thank you for watching.

Sidenote: The reason I chose this version instead of the 1997 original is pretty simple, I haven’t seen it, and considering it is a shot-for-shot remake, I feel the main points of discussion in this film don’t change between versions.

Keep up with me:

This video was written and edited by Daniel Netzel.

Microphone Used:

Pre-Amp:

Edited Using:

Sound Mixing:

(full disclosure these are affiliate links, if you choose to buy I get a little kickback for you following the link)

122 Comments

  1. Haneke is a genius at creating unbearable tension without the possibility of release as we know it from other same genre movies where in the end the good guys win. This film is painful to watch because it evokes fear that has eaten up all hope right from the start. It also delivers an accurate insight into the abuse and coercion tactics of psychopaths run amok. I watched both, the original Austrian and the American version. Both of them underrated cinematic events. Thanks for uploading, Film Radar !

  2. My brain shat its pants when he rewinded the movie.

  3. just watched this movie and it was absolutely terrific. Didn't like the song choice in the beginning, end and during the scene where Georgie has the gun. Thought it was an obnoxious song, but I guess it was meant to serve as a hint toward Peter and paul's unhinged, chaotic nature?

  4. Loved this film. Michael Pitt was exceptional. Such a diverse actor. From this to Boardwalk empire and even Last Days. Great movie.

  5. Although an interesting take on the film, I found your ending quote a bit underwhelming. I don't think Funny Games's intention is to make people aware they might just be shot at the next street turn. I believe Haneke's involvement in this film wouldn't have made sense if that was it. I believe its ultimate message is product of Haneke's opposition to violence being used as an entertainment in any form of art (in this case, cinema), but particularly in American cinema, which is selling all the world the idea that, since violence is part of life, violence should definitely be depicted on film, which is true, but not in the all glossy and spectacular way American cinema does it. I hope this gets to help you build a much thorough opinion about the film. Very good edition, I should say though!

  6. that is not how u pronounce the directors name

  7. As the remake has some new touches and a better set design, the directing in the original was executed much better. Some scenes in the remake didn't connect the same way the original did, and it's the friendly faces of the German actors which makes the whole film more disturbing and devastating.

  8. yes its hard to explain its like its saying its ok to like horror films your not sick in the head or a manic in fact you more intelligent if you look at Jason or chukey some one like that there like a anti hero and not real yet people frown at people who like them movies but they don't hurt kids and only go out there way of there killing spree to kill people who are not innocent or in power like chukey kills a teacher or a cop Jason kills a doctor etc I think the horror fans its more about the ultimate battle of good and evil but this film saying sick people are every were and they rarely come with mask they come with smile on there faces or when you don't expect them and can happen any time to any one for no real reason so ley of horror classics saying they make you do bad shit which is not true they are just bad people in the world and movies have nothing to do with it . that's what I got from the meaning of the fourth wall bricking seens in this movie any way.

  9. Techtastisch - Experimente und 3D Druck says:

    8:31 I think this scene explaines why they are doing this. It looks like they are the only ones who know how to do this in this world or who can use this "power". So with endless things to do and nearly without consequences they got bored.

  10. I've always wanted to play a role like Paul in a movie for some reason.

  11. i feel like the praise of films like this is much more prevelant today with indie darlings from studios like a24. The Witch has a similar pacing and the long drawn out take is jacked off to today, but this thing came out in 2007. The culture wasnt right for it yet, but now i think it shines. future cult classic.

  12. Both of them did amazing and i think the best part of this film

    No cliche sequel

    But none of the characters could ever seem real unfortunatley due to the remote scene

  13. i wish i could’ve seen the movie like this ! but being as pessimistic as i am, i missed the whole point! i’m always expecting the worst so i knew they’d come back and essentially i knew there was no hope for them.

  14. I think this movie is nothing but torture porn made by a filmmaker and screenwriters, who had no skill and confidence in doing what would have been more challenging.

    Which would have been to just make a very compelling movie about a upper-middle-class family just spending quality time together at thier vacation house. Instead they relied on bread and circuses like obscene spectacles of violence and trauma. Because writing riveting dialog was to difficult for them, I guess…

  15. The movie went from realistic horror to "fuck you" after that "rewind" scene. Seriously that one scene killed the movie. it was taking itself seriously, it was instilling that dread of the inevitable fate and then that scene happens and it just killed the movie. that scene could have continued from there or just cut that scene entirely and nothing of importance would be lost. but after grounding itself in reality, demonstrating the cruelness of life in the world of tormented victims and showing the brutality of a psychopathic killer would gladly kill you with a pleasant smile and a calm demeanor, the movie breaks the immersion and flips off the audience.

  16. Thanks, you've summarized perfectly why I enjoyed the movie. The overall ambiguity and the fact that it's not showing the gore leaving it to our imagination is much more powerful, when done cleverly. I also remember, when they broke the fourth wall, I was like: "Whoa, I'm in for a ride!"

  17. My sister showed me this movie when i was 7, good times

  18. I watched the original version twice–twenty years apart. It is the most disturbing film ever, playing with audience's and the characters' hopes. But the ONLY answer is H O P E L E S S. It made me down for days–sign of a good film of its kind.

  19. Thank you for analysing this underrated gem. It's very misunderstood and Haneke is an extremely meticulous director, making him my favorite!
    Superb analysis and I'll be anticipating more reviews!!!!

  20. These two psychopaths have incredible stamina, torturing three families for 2 or 3 days straight.

  21. The rewind explains how sociopaths think in real lives, they have planned outcomes in their mind without any stress

  22. if the kid was sitting on the left before getting shot by the Gun, how come Naomi has a red right eye. The splatter should have spilled on her left eye?

  23. Even the Chainsaw Massacre doesn't come close to this one here…. It's so terribly "real" in a way👀

  24. listening to this guy defend as bad movie IS unbearable . Charters doing bad scary movie tropes is not new and over played. This movie is terrible. If you want a GOOD movie one over playing violence watch American Psycho or A Clockwork Orange. this movie was STUPID!!

  25. That movie is awesome, I have watched orginal version and wow

  26. Orchestral background music was very unnecessary

  27. 2018, Hereditary: "omg the kid died first, what an original and unexpected twist"

    1997, Funny Games: literally makes fun of us for not expecting it

  28. Meh, this is one of Haneke's worst. Just him wagging his finger and lecturing viewers about their depravity in the least effective way possible. Brilliantly shot and clever but as a film it rings utterly hollow.

  29. What the story means? Why they got scared from two ass holes. One must not be so gentle. Simple & easy way was to just fight back. At 06:00 As one Psycho struck the man first time he must retaliate and struck him back.

  30. I thought the point of the entire film was just to chastise the audience for watching it. The characters warn you that it will not end well, and then gives you exactly what they said they would. At the end you just feel a bit gross for obliging them.

  31. Anyone know why the dad was such a pussy?

  32. 9:14 I mean the difference in game of thrones, at least in the first few seasons, is that the characters earn their deaths through their actions. this is just hopeless for no real reason. also I get the idea that movies don't have to be entertainment but
    9:45 I'd say "the Road" does a much better job at that than this movie.

  33. There are some truly incredible films by one of the very best directors in filmmaking: Cache, The Piano Teacher, White Ribbon, Funny Games, ( I partial to the original), to name a few. Haneke poses a few of the most vital questions in his films, didactic entertainment at its finest.

  34. Brilliant movie. I love how it managed to be disturbing and violent without being gratuitous.

  35. Peter and Paul were hardly "well mannered". In point of fact they were ill-mannered from the very start, with the provocations ratcheting up by the second. What they were is well spoken.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.