what the hell are you even rambling about? first of all when viewers watch these kinds of movies their expecting either A i quote "GOOD" plot twist B some sort of justice at the end or C a satisfactory ending that does not leave you hanging… in reality most of those excessive scenes were just used to drawback time in my opinion. It was a good movie but the climactic parts of the movie really friggin sucked ass
Haneke wanted to do an essay on violence in cinema and assimilation by the spectator. And in my opinion, what he bore was one of the saddest stories I've ever seen on film. Helplessness and rage. That's what you feel when you see this almost indigestible film.
I used to say this is the worst film i've ever seen but when i think about it its not THAT bad I like what the director was trying to do but its still a pretty bad movie
This scene confused me. In the next scene when Peter and Paul are on the boat, they talk about fictional universes and if the hero is in fiction, then you can see it in the movie, and it's just as real as reality. I thought that was supposed to imply that Paul (hero) imagined rewinding the movie to save Peter (fiction). And although it's just as real because we can see it, Peter is still dead. And the rest of the communications and actions are made by Paul. However looking on line, no one mentions the connection and I feel I may have thought too hard about it.
I have been trying to understand this scene and have come up with a few solutions that are probably all wrong. One; he saw it play out in his mind before it happened and stopped it. Two; this is all his world, his mind, no one is real, doesn't explain how we saw storyline without them though. Three; at the end of the movie, Paul and Peter are talking about the real world and some other world and they collide. They are talking about Peter's hero who they say is fiction or something like that. Paul is actually his hero. Either way, they were both real. Last, it serves absolutely no purpose and just goes along with Paul talking to the audience.
all of these justifications are not enough … if it was just in Tom's mindthe director wanted to show us the woman is not a hero , that is the worst way to do it. besides, he made the two boys look heroic and everything was easy to them….which IS so "hollywood movie"…so..
Ah…….wasn't the "look out" a bit late? I would even go so far as to say the "look out" shot of the guy yelling the warning should have been before the shot of the guy being hit by the shot gun blast. He was already shot. Editing error?
The killer is showing the audience the violence they enjoy but in a whole different light. We like the thrilling violence where there are stakes, showcased in a thriller-like fashion, but this isn't what we were given. That may have been what we thought in the beginning as cliches were presented to us (like the dog dying first) along with the idea that the family even had a chance at escape, but in the end, the villains were in complete control of everything, so there were no stakes and no thrills. We didn't get the satisfaction of there being a point to it all like we normally do; we just got the violence. I think this is Haneke showing us how unrealistic and disrespectful the Hollywood portrayal of violence is. If typical movie-goers were exposed to what real violence is, it would not be something to be enjoyed.
Instead of the whole remote thing They couldve let it be a an idea that flashed in her mind that she could just grab the gun & shoot Peter, But then when she tried to do it, It didnt work out & Paul stops her.. Makes more sense than rewinding time with a remote.. It was silly, funny but confusing
All the actors are brilliant and nailed all the characters so do the director all are talented. but for me the movie is so dark and unfair thats why it have a lot of negativity… i mean if u wanna create some kind of magical crime like this you must atleast explain how it possible and why its happening… but nahh its done
The editing tricks used to cheat the auto-detect when mixed with the context of this scene and the overall theme of the film is quite hilarious. I hated this movie so much while watching it until this scene. It rocketed into my number 1 spot because of it.
The only Haneke film I could never bring myself to watch in full. It is interesting that the one piece of graphic violence he does show is then reduced to "fictional" by this ultimate act of 4th wall breaking however.
I respect the vision of Funny Games, also the reason which Michael Haneke wanted make this movie. But honestly the original Austrian movie version bored me a lot, as well as I was close to fall asleep with the remake. What I dislike a lot about the remake is just it copies shot by shot, from the original one which makes everything predictable. But the positive note about the remake, is Michael Pitt did a decent performance. He was also really good in I Origins, The Dreamers and Boardwalk Empire.
Peter and Paul are so much fun to watch- when I saw this movie as a kid I really hated it like anyone else. After rewatching it like 10 years later I find myself rooting for Peter and Paul rather than the family. Perspective changes over time
I love all the pretentious people that "understand" the scene and then degrade everyone who hates it. The point of the scene isn't to "show us what we wanted as an audience and then rip it away." It was the director directly showing that the audience loves violence, it's the one time we cheer and the scene is full of blood, but for being a pair of killers all their violence is shown off screen but infuriates the audience.
I hate when movie films try to make the audience feel guilty for liking super violent horror movies. The reason the formula is a person goes through all that pain and comes out as a survivor in the end is to give the people,audience, hope that through shitty and terrific situations that the final girl or main protagonist survives in the end, the showing of human determination. This film was just .. . Moronic
This scene let's everyone know what the outcome of the film will be, we the audience are as much in there hands as the family. A hard film to watch, but both versions, a easy film to admire.
I think the whole point of this moment is that, indeed, it IS a complete cop-out and something that happened out of nowhere- the movie is meant to be incredibly frustrating to watch no matter what sort of movies you enjoy watching.
-All Subtitle Available Stream Now ➣ download : ライブ配信の再編ありがとうです！この日のライブ配信は、かならりやばかったですね！１万人を超える人が見ていたもんね（笑）やっぱり人参最高！まさかのカメラ切り忘れでやら1かしたのもドキドキでした！今後は気を付けないとね. .
![FUNNIEST GAME in the WORLD [Happy Wheels 1]](https://game-webites.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/-_cpsmg_hgemaxresdefault-1024x576.jpg)
![[GOING SEVENTEEN] EP.24 부족오락관 #2 (Tribal Games #2)](https://game-webites.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/pn7rjrgo9a0maxresdefault-1024x576.jpg)
what the hell are you even rambling about? first of all when viewers watch these kinds of movies their expecting either A i quote "GOOD" plot twist B some sort of justice at the end or C a satisfactory ending that does not leave you hanging… in reality most of those excessive scenes were just used to drawback time in my opinion. It was a good movie but the climactic parts of the movie really friggin sucked ass
Haneke wanted to do an essay on violence in cinema and assimilation by the spectator. And in my opinion, what he bore was one of the saddest stories I've ever seen on film. Helplessness and rage. That's what you feel when you see this almost indigestible film.
Terrible, terrible scene. No fucking logic.
So much negativity in the comments.
If you guys dislike this scene so much, why are you looking it up on YouTube?
I used to say this is the worst film i've ever seen but when i think about it its not THAT bad I like what the director was trying to do but its still a pretty bad movie
This scene confused me. In the next scene when Peter and Paul are on the boat, they talk about fictional universes and if the hero is in fiction, then you can see it in the movie, and it's just as real as reality. I thought that was supposed to imply that Paul (hero) imagined rewinding the movie to save Peter (fiction). And although it's just as real because we can see it, Peter is still dead. And the rest of the communications and actions are made by Paul. However looking on line, no one mentions the connection and I feel I may have thought too hard about it.
I have been trying to understand this scene and have come up with a few solutions that are probably all wrong. One; he saw it play out in his mind before it happened and stopped it. Two; this is all his world, his mind, no one is real, doesn't explain how we saw storyline without them though. Three; at the end of the movie, Paul and Peter are talking about the real world and some other world and they collide. They are talking about Peter's hero who they say is fiction or something like that. Paul is actually his hero. Either way, they were both real. Last, it serves absolutely no purpose and just goes along with Paul talking to the audience.
This Movie Is Wack i i i i dont understand …
all of these justifications are not enough … if it was just in Tom's mindthe director wanted to show us the woman is not a hero , that is the worst way to do it.
besides, he made the two boys look heroic and everything was easy to them….which IS so "hollywood movie"…so..
Ah…….wasn't the "look out" a bit late? I would even go so far as to say the "look out" shot of the guy yelling the warning should have been before the shot of the guy being hit by the shot gun blast. He was already shot. Editing error?
only Deadpool could get away with some like this in a movie.
This is the one scene in the movie done better than in the original, in my opinion.
Well played scene, but damn it's a sadistic movie that I would never watch again.
The killer is showing the audience the violence they enjoy but in a whole different light. We like the thrilling violence where there are stakes, showcased in a thriller-like fashion, but this isn't what we were given. That may have been what we thought in the beginning as cliches were presented to us (like the dog dying first) along with the idea that the family even had a chance at escape, but in the end, the villains were in complete control of everything, so there were no stakes and no thrills. We didn't get the satisfaction of there being a point to it all like we normally do; we just got the violence. I think this is Haneke showing us how unrealistic and disrespectful the Hollywood portrayal of violence is. If typical movie-goers were exposed to what real violence is, it would not be something to be enjoyed.
Is this a JoJo refference?
Instead of the whole remote thing They couldve let it be a an idea that flashed in her mind that she could just grab the gun & shoot Peter, But then when she tried to do it, It didnt work out & Paul stops her.. Makes more sense than rewinding time with a remote.. It was silly, funny but confusing
All the actors are brilliant and nailed all the characters so do the director all are talented. but for me the movie is so dark and unfair thats why it have a lot of negativity… i mean if u wanna create some kind of magical crime like this you must atleast explain how it possible and why its happening… but nahh its done
p.s love naomi watts and the movie <3 <3
어이없다…
name?
Excuse me, Have you some eggs?
Nah, it was a really bad movie. The only good scene was this one.
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!! “Look out”!!!! Hahahahahaha
The editing tricks used to cheat the auto-detect when mixed with the context of this scene and the overall theme of the film is quite hilarious. I hated this movie so much while watching it until this scene. It rocketed into my number 1 spot because of it.
How did he do that
Wait? They are not humans? How they turn back time?
If you all actually think this movie is bad and hard to watch, watch Gasper Noe’s Irreversible. This is child’s play compared to that.
The only Haneke film I could never bring myself to watch in full. It is interesting that the one piece of graphic violence he does show is then reduced to "fictional" by this ultimate act of 4th wall breaking however.
I respect the vision of Funny Games, also the reason which Michael Haneke wanted make this movie. But honestly the original Austrian movie version bored me a lot, as well as I was close to fall asleep with the remake. What I dislike a lot about the remake is just it copies shot by shot, from the original one which makes everything predictable. But the positive note about the remake, is Michael Pitt did a decent performance. He was also really good in I Origins, The Dreamers and Boardwalk Empire.
Peter and Paul are so much fun to watch- when I saw this movie as a kid I really hated it like anyone else. After rewatching it like 10 years later I find myself rooting for Peter and Paul rather than the family. Perspective changes over time
I love all the pretentious people that "understand" the scene and then degrade everyone who hates it. The point of the scene isn't to "show us what we wanted as an audience and then rip it away." It was the director directly showing that the audience loves violence, it's the one time we cheer and the scene is full of blood, but for being a pair of killers all their violence is shown off screen but infuriates the audience.
It's social commentary. That's about it.
This is like the opposite of what it feels to play a video game and not dying on after trying lol
This is one of the most upsetting and infuriating moments in any film I’ve ever seen. Good job to whosever idea that was.
I want to know how frequently people walked out of the theater after this scene happened.
Why did he say look out after peter got shot? I feel as though that part was supposed to play before he got shot.
아주 옛날 집에서 비디오를 보면서 충격을 받았었지..ㅋㅋㅋ
I hate when movie films try to make the audience feel guilty for liking super violent horror movies. The reason the formula is a person goes through all that pain and comes out as a survivor in the end is to give the people,audience, hope that through shitty and terrific situations that the final girl or main protagonist survives in the end, the showing of human determination. This film was just .. . Moronic
I like to imagine them jumping universes, and them getting their asses kicked so many times by really strong beings that this doesn’t even phase them
This is the scene viewers should realise that they’re the victims of this movie.
Who wants to explain this?
The smile at 0:34 is pretty much everything you need to know about this sadistic man.
This scene let's everyone know what the outcome of the film will be, we the audience are as much in there hands as the family. A hard film to watch, but both versions, a easy film to admire.
One of the most ingenious and ballsy things ever pulled off in a film imo
I think the whole point of this moment is that, indeed, it IS a complete cop-out and something that happened out of nowhere- the movie is meant to be incredibly frustrating to watch no matter what sort of movies you enjoy watching.
' The Game (1997) f'u"l'l M'o'V'i"E
𝐖𝐚𝐭𝐜𝐡 𝐇𝐞𝐫𝐞 ➽ https://bit.ly/3kaTSWo
-All Subtitle Available
Stream Now ➣
download :
ライブ配信の再編ありがとうです！この日のライブ配信は、かならりやばかったですね！１万人を超える人が見ていたもんね（笑）やっぱり人参最高！まさかのカメラ切り忘れでやら1かしたのもドキドキでした！今後は気を付けないとね. .
! 💖🖤 ❤️#今後は気をライブ配信の再編あり
がとうです！#この日のライブ配信は、#かならりやばかったですね！#１万人を超える人が見ていたもん（#笑）#やっぱり人参最高！#まさかのカメラ切り忘れでやら1かしたのもドキドキでした,.💖🖤 #在整個人類歷史上，#強者，#富人和具有狡猾特質的人捕食部落，#氏族，#城鎮，#城市和鄉村中的弱者，#無`'#守和貧窮成員。#然而，#人類的生存意願迫使那些被拒絕，#被剝奪或摧毀的基本需求的人們找到了一種生活方式，#並繼續將其DNA融入不斷發展的人類社會。.#說到食物，#不要以為那些被拒絕的人只吃垃圾。#相反，#他們學會了在被忽視的肉類和蔬菜中尋找營養。#他們學會了清潔，#切塊，#調味和慢燉慢燉的野菜和肉類，#在食品市場上被忽略的部分家用蔬菜和肉類，#並且學會了使用芳香的木煙（#如山核桃，#山核桃和豆科灌木 #來調味食物煮的時
6
the best movie scene ever. from the great turkish director mahsun kırmızıgül
You shouldn't have done that Anne.
I love this movie because it proves that I am not alone in thinking horror movie fans come off as a little twisted.
This movie is the dumbest fucking movie i've ever scene. Period.
Loved the original German version
To all the dumb People the director prefered 2007 you can all sleep now