The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight (2008)



Directed by: Christopher Nolan

Starring: Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart

Other Actors of Note: Maggie Gyllenhaal, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, Cillian Murphy, Michael Caine, Eric Roberts, Anthony Michael Hall, and Nestor Carbonell

Plot: Batman raises the stakes in his war on crime. With the help of Lieutenant Jim Gordon and District Attorney Harvey Dent, Batman sets out to dismantle the remaining criminal organizations that plague the city streets. The partnership proves to be effective, but they soon find themselves prey to a reign of chaos unleashed by a rising criminal mastermind known to the terrified citizens of Gotham as The Joker. Taken from www.imdb.com.

The Joker as portrayed by Courtney Love

Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) is trying to clean up Gotham City, if he succeeds it could mean that there's no more need for Batman, something Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) happily accepts. But a new criminal mastermind known as The Joker (Heath Ledger) will make it as hard for both as he possibly can.

"I simmer with generic rage!"

Christian Bale as before proves that he is the best Bruce Wayne that the character has ever seen. However his Batman voice (which sounds like he has strep throat with a side of throat cancer) which was at best ignorable and at worst hilarious in the first film is between is horrific in this film and at times hard to understand. Here's a transcript from one scene:

Batman wannabe: "What's the difference between you and me?"

Batman: "IM NOB WERRING HOGGY PABS!!!" (I'm not wearing hockey pads)

One of his final speeches sounds like Batman is about to sneeze. So as the series progresses it appears that Bales "scary" voice will be the campiest thing Batman has ever done this side of the Batusi.

Aaron Eckhart works very well as Harvey Dent, though having only the memory of Tommy Lee Jones' performance in "Batman Forever" to compare it to, it's not hard to top that. Still Eckhart is good, except for toward the end which I can't mention to great extent without spoiling.

Of course Heath Ledger is the big star of this movie and ensures that everybody regrets his untimely death. The Joker is the sickest version this side of Alan Moore's "The Killing Joke" and "Batman Beyond: The Return of the Joker." He manages to actually be funny in a very dark way, from the point when he "makes a pencil dissappear" after, I was mystified with his performance.

Gary Oldman gets more of a chance to shine this time as James Gordon. Though he is absent for a large portion of the movie, what he is in makes great use of his time.

Maggie Gyllenhaal is this movie's weak link of this movie. The character of Rachel Dawes was always un-neccesary in the first movie where she took much needed screen time from Gary Oldman, but at least with Katie Holmes as the chracter she was well acted. Gyllenhaal tries to seem charming and funny but comes across more like she's a dumpy 30-something housewise with an abusive husband. Fortunately we don't have to put up with her very much.

Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine are more of the same, Anthony Michael Hall is wasted as a newscaster, Eric Roberts is pretty okay as a mob boss, Cillian Murphy makes a cameo reprising his role as Jonathan Crane from the first film, and Nestor Carbonell A.K.A. Batmanuel from Fox's "The Tick" plays the mayor, which is awesome.

Normally when a man dressed all in black leather and a cape stands behind another man wearing smeared make-up it means something entirely different.

Batman is a hard-core crime thriller that just happens to feature Batman. Some claim it tries too hard (which in the case of Batman and Eckhart's latter performance I would agree) but it does very well, far surpassing the mediocrity that was "Batman Begins."

Much like with "Hellboy II" the problem is that the title chracter has relatively little tiem in his own movie. This is more a Harvey Dent/Joker movie than a Batman movie.

Of course it makes up for this with a well-done and entirely new type of comic book film. For all intense purposes "The Dark Knight" is a movie like "Heat" with a slight superhero theme. To be quite honest it's an R rated movie that is made PG-13 only by the fact that it never actually shows a single drop of blood despite all the incredibly violent content.

Ultimately a lot of the same mistakes that were made with "Spider-Man 3" are made here. The movie tries to take on too much at once which manages to work for a little bit but by the time we've passed the 2 hour mark the film becomes a bit tedious and a storyline that should have been saved for another movie is tacked onto the last hour. Of course the movie manages to overcome it, but Christopher Nolan still seems to be flying a bit close to the sun with this one.

Also the speech at the end, while profound, is still pretty cheesy and reflects the one delivered at the end of Daredevil a bit much.

"Brum. Brum. I has a motorbikes!"

"The Dark Knight" is probably the most original, entertaining, and well put together movie since "Spider-Man 2" and though it's not perfect and has some glaring flaws in design it's still a shockingly good movie.

I give "The Dark Knight" a 5 out of 5. It doesn't quite live up to the hype but it's close enough.

Hellboy II: The Golden Army

Hellboy II: The Golden Army (2008)

Directed by: Guillermo Del Toro

Starring: Ron Perlman, Doug Jones, Selma Blair, and Seth MacFarlane

Other Actors of Note: Jeffrey Tambor and John Hurt

Plot: The mythical world starts a rebellion against humanity in order to rule the Earth, so as Hellboy and his team returns they must save the world from the rebellious creatures. Now, as the creatures who inhabit the spiritual realm gear-up for an all out attack on the human plane, the only one capable of saving the Earth is a tough-talking hellspawn rejected by both worlds. Taken from http://www.imdb.com/.

Oh Hellboy, do you even have a weapon that isn't comically oversized? You card!

"Hellboy II" picks up pretty much where the first movie left off. Liz and Hellboy are now living together but not happily, he's still a slob with way too many cats and on top of this Liz is peeping at pregnancy tests. (Being half-demon and half-Selma Blair that's going to be one ugly kid)

Well apparently thousands of years ago there was a war and the elves created a powerful army that pretty much won the war for them. And then King Balor, rightfully thinking that an unstoppable army which can pretty much destroy the world is probably something that could end up going south on him, he splits the crown that controls them into pieces, one for the elves, one for the humans, 9 for the Dwarven kings, and one to rule them all or some such shit...

So when the B.P.R.D. get called to an auction house where all of the patrons have been reduced to human mush, they get tied up in an Elven prince's quest to awaken the golden army and destroy the world.

What is Alpha 5 doing in this movie? And why does he have a German accent?

As usual Ron Perlman owns the movie. That is, during the portions of the movie which he actually manages to be in.

Doug Jones finally gets to voice the part of Abe this time as well as plays The Angel of Death. Both roles are played amazingly, due in no small part to the special effects. It doesn't take long to adjust to Jones' voice as Abe from David Hyde Pierce's from the first.

Selma Blair and Jeffrey Tambor are reduced to almost bit parts but both play them passibly. The key to remember is that Selma Blair is moody and Jeffrey Tambor is stressed.

The best non-Perlman/Jones part is surprisingly enough Seth MacFarlane, though he's not the actual guy in the suit, even though you can hear definite hints of Stewie in his voice he suits the part of Johann Krauss very well. If a third movie is made, MacFarlane is my hope to reprise the role.

"This is for what you did to me in 'Blade 2!'"

The special effects are, as is always the case with Guillermo Del Toro's movies, beautifully done. Most of the creatures are done with conventional effects with minimal CGI. Only a CG horde of small "tooth fairy" creatures, a giant green Forest Elemental, and the Golden Army itself comprise the bulk of the CG in the film.

While Hellboy and Abe are about the same as before and Johan Krauss looks like a steam punk version of Alpha 5 from "Power Rangers", the Angel of Death and Wink the Troll are two of most well done movie monsters I have ever seen. A legless goblin is also rather interestingly done.

"We don't belong in this movie"

The story is well done, the problem is, it seems out of place. The story, developed by director Guillermo Del Toro and series creator Mike Mignola, seems to be a sort of fairly tale/epic movie somewhere between Neil Gaiman's "Neverwhere" and J.R.R. Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings."

While the Hellboy series is no stranger to fantasy and folklore it's always resided more in the realm of darker fantasy such as Robert E. Howard's "Conan the Cimmerian" and H.P. Lovecraft's Cthulhu mythos.

Hellboy and crew which are more on the supernatural end of things seem to be guest stars in a seperate series here. In fact Hellboy himself has relatively little screen time in his own movie. The movie tends to focus more on Abe and the twin elf siblings with Hellboy popping in every now and then to say one liners and blow shit up.

Toward the end, the story gets convoluted and you wonder why Hellboy and crew are even there at all. This is "Hellboy II's" biggest problem. It's not a bad story, just out of place.

EPIC!

All in all "Hellboy II" is a well made movie, but it leaves something to be desired.

I give "Hellboy II: The Golden Army" a 4 out of 5.

Hancock

Hancock (2008)


Directed by: Peter Berg

Starring: Will Smith, Charlize Theron, Jason Bateman

Plot: A hard-living superhero who has fallen out of favor with the public enters into a questionable relationship with the wife of the public relations professional who's trying to repair his image. Taken from www.imdb.com.

"Wow this looks so much better on me than it did on Anna Paquin!"

Upon seeing previews of "Hancock" I was struck with a powerful sense of indifference and said "That's probably going to be shit." But the fact that "The Dark Knight" was sold out, and "Get Smart" wasn't going to be playing for another hour, and "Journey of the Center of the Earth" wasn't playing in 3-D lowered my standards enough to go see it!

The story is simple. Will Smith is John Hancock, a homeless alcoholic asshole with super powers who ends up doing more harm than good when he does good deeds. But when he saves the publicist Ray Embrey, played by Jason Bateman, Ray decides to give Hancock a better public image and help him get the praise that he deserves. Meanwhile Ray's wife Mary, played by Charlize Theron, is a total bitch. Lets get on with the review!

Hey look! It's "Teen Wolf Too" star Jason Bateman!

Will Smith plays the homeless apathetic drunken superhero wonderfully and is quite funny in the role. Smith's performance becomes weak about the same time the plot of the movie does, particularly when it gets more serious. The tonal shift kills Smith's performance dead at the 50 minute mark.

Jason Bateman... welll... he's Jason Bateman. He plays a quirky everyman with a nervous tick and an awkward somewhat nerdy disposition. But hey, he's great.

Charlize Theron plays one of the bitchiest women in the history of bitchy female characters in motion pictures. I can see why many people point to her as the villain of the piece though she tries to make up for it in the last 30 minutes but the damage has already been done.

Will Smith during the time in his career between "Fresh Prince of Bel Air" and "Men in Black."

The special effects are fairly well done, about as well as in "My Super Ex-Girlfriend," but they all seem a bit gimmicky. Like they're just there to justify the budget.

The story is okay. It's big problem is it starts out a comedy and ends a drama and the two don't mix at all, there is a very bold dividing line between the two opposite acts of the movie and there's no crossover.

However while this change is definitely confusing it doesn't ruin the movie, the story is good just not particularly well put together.

We need an excuse to do another special effect!

"Hancock" is a pretty okay superhero movie that just doesn't quite know what it wants to do with itself.

I give "Hancock" a 3 out of 5. Rent it.

Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson

Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson (2008)


Directed by: Alex Gibney

Starring: Hunter S. Thompson (archive footage) and Johnny Depp

Plot: A portrait of the late gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson. Taken from www.imdb.com.


Ever since I saw "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas" years ago I have been fascinated with the legend that is gonzo journalist Dr. Hunter S. Thompson. When I heard there was a documentary of his life being made I was immediately interested.

The problem with biographies of a famous person's life is that even the most interesting person can have a boring story if told by the wrong people.

"Gonzo" does a fairly good job of keeping things interesting. It starts on a fairly dull note with Hunter's humble beginnings with his first book "Hell's Angels" and his regular journalism in the early days.

Fortunately the movie picks up from this point, going more into telling about Hunter's campaign for Sheriff in Aspen, Colorado, his family life, his friendship with Ralph Steadman, his trip to Las Vegas, the 1972 Presidential Campaign, his artistic and mental decline in the 80s and 90s, and his eventual suicide.

The people brought in to comment on the journalists life are interesting and often funny. Though some of the appearances, Jimmy Buffett and Pat Buchanan in particular, seem a bit out of place and random.

Aside from the first 20-30 minutes' dull chronicling of Thompson's early years, the film also dwells for far too long on the 1972 presidential campaign, while it was a big part of his fame it seems the movie is more about Thompson's career with bits and pieces of his actual life spliced in every few minutes to validate the extra noun in the title. And with a running time of nearly two hours one can't help but wonder if the movie could have done a little less about the legend and more about the man.


"Gonzo" isn't the best documentary or biography ever made. It suffers from several issues and is a little bloated with a few unnecessary bits, but it succeeds in being informative, entertaining, and funny throughout.

I give "Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson" a 4 out of 5. It's worth the trouble looking for and checking out.

Falling Down

Falling Down (1993)
Directed by: Joel Schumacher

Starring: Michael Douglas, Robert DuVall

Plot: William (D-FENS) just wants to get home to see his daughter on her birthday. Unfortunately, nothing seems to be going right for him. First there's the traffic jam, then the unhelpful Korean shopkeeper who "doesn't give change". D-FENS begins to crack and starts to fight back against the every day "injustices" he encounters on his journey home. The film has a story running in parallel about a desk-bound cop who is about to retire. He's retiring for his wife's sake, and obviously isn't happy about it. The cop tracks down D-FENS and in the final scene..... Taken from www.imdb.com

Latino Gangbanger dropped something! D-Fens found an UZI! *Triumphant music* Would D-Fens like to equip UZI?

It's mid-day in Los Angeles, traffic is slowed to a halt due to road construction and this is where we meet our hero D-Fens (Michael Douglas, technically his name is William but I'll call him D-Fens because it's the only name we know him as for a while and it makes him sound like a rapper.)

The problem is, D-Fens has the temper of Dirty Harry on a really really bad day and a constant scowl that sticks with him through the whole movie. So fed up he gets out of his car and makes a beeline across the city to get to his daughter's birthday part.

Along the way he adopts a system of survival normally confined to RPGs. So here without further adieu is the "Falling Down" RPG.

>>D-Fens enters store
>>Korean shopkeeper tries to charge 85 cents for a can of coca cola
>>D-Fens uses passive aggressive racism! It's not very affective.
>>Korean shopkeeper uses baseball bat! But it missed...
>>D-Fens overpowers Korean shopkeeper
>>Korean Shopkeeper has fainted
>>D-Fens found a baseball bat!
>>Does D-Fens want to equip baseball bat?

I tell you, it would sell millions. So anyway he does this and the ironic thing is throughout the course of the movie, he never actually uses the same weapon twice.

Anyhow, Detective Pendergast (Robert DuVall), who has one of the bitchiest wives in cinematic history, is there in the traffic jam and soon becomes wrapped up in the trail of chaos D-Fens leaves behind him as he serves to protect the world from gang bangers, burger employees, telephone booths, and skinhead army/navy store owners.

Does anybody ever actually threaten somebody with a knife like this?

Okay you already know what performances I'm going to point out to here. Robert DuVall is as always wonderful as the aging detective who's being forced into early retirement by his bitchy needy psycho wife.

Michael Douglas is the true star here as D-Fens who starts out as some sort of urban hero at first, writing small wrongs and doing what honestly a lot of us would like to do. But at one point in the story we realize that D-Fens is actually just fucking crazy. The man has clearly had a nervous breakdown and needs help. He goes from awesome to scary in no time and manages to be a very sad and tragic figure. Even as he's exacting revenge on all those who have done him wrong he seems tired and unsure of himself, not sure where he's going or what he's doing.

Man, Michael Douglas really likes pointing guns at things.

The story is a well put together yarn of a regular man that's just been pushed to the edge and finally snapped. He's both a hero and a villain and more tragic than anything. At one point toward the end Douglas says "I'm the bad guy? When did that happen?" and indeed you do wonder.

Robert Duvall's character contrasts Douglas' nicely, as a man put into a similar position. Threatened of being swallowed up and forgotten himself, you do really feel that the only thing separating Detective Pendergast and D-Fens is one bad day.

The story comes together nicely at the end and it ends in the best way it possibly could. It's a beautiful social commentary that says a lot about the human condition.

One of the things I really enjoyed were the bits of black humor sprinkled in, some of Douglas' lines are hilarious and moments when he asks a burger joint at gunpoint why the food looks so much better in pictures than in reality and the camera pans to the crowd of frightened onlookers as a small child slowly and warily raises his hand.

Stare at this picture and tell me the first words that pop into your head aren't "French fried potaters"

"Falling Down" is a much passed over classic of the 90s. One that got critical acclaim but was overlooked by most people. It is a great movie and you owe it to yourself to see it.

I give "Falling Down" a 5 out of 5. Buy it.

Atlantis: The Lost Empire

Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001)

Directed by: Gary Trousdale and Kirk Wise

Starring: Michael J. Fox, Cree Summer, James Garner

Other Actors of Note: James Varney, Florence Stanley, and Leonard Nimoy

Plot: Set in 1914, young linguist orphan named Milo Thatch buries himself in books trying to unlock the secret to the destruction of Atlantis. Althouth his theories are ridiculed by his colleagues he is persistent in his dreams of one day discovering the lost isle. His dreams are realized when he is given a spot in an expedition, financed by a friend of his grandfather, to go in search of Atlantis following Milo's guide: The Shepard's Journal. But the Guardians of Atlantis await the explorers putting them in danger at every turn. And the deadly truth about Atlantis's demise puts Milo, the royal family, and all of Atlantis in mortal jeopardy. Taken from www.imdb.com.


Atlantis wasn't the first animated film to take a more serious approach to a once "kiddy" genre. "Titan A.E." the year before its release and "The Iron Giant" before that showed a new side to the animated film that had never really come to the mainstream before. A serious movie with a serious story, a movie that played out less as a "cartoon" and more as a film that just happened to be animated. Disney at this time was on its way up in the animation department with this movie and "Treasure Planet" the following year before being cut off at the knees by the new surge of computer animated movies that pushed classical 2 dimensional animated films to straight-to-video travesties and Disney hasn't made a good animated film that didn't have Pixar's name attached since.

With their feud with Pixar and the fact that a good Disney movie without the name "of the Caribbean" in the title for the last 6 years makes it hard to remember why Disney used to be an animated film juggernaut. Sure a lot of their early pieces like "Bambi", "Snow White", "Cinderella", "The Hunchback of Notre Dame", "The Little Mermaid", and "Pocahontas" were shallow stories with poor story lines that relied more on good musical numbers than actual film quality Disney managed to do fairly well along the way with stand-outs like "The Lion King", "Aladdin" (Probably the only Disney series that actually grew better with sequels), "Mulan", "The Emperor's New Groove", and "Hercules." Of course all the potential Disney was showing was quickly swept away by the 3D animation movement and these films became lost.

One of the movies that was lost in the shuffle from 2D to 3D was Disney's "Atlantis the Lost Empire" it was never that it was a bad movie it was just the old style and didn't have the young kid appeal of say "Lilo and Stitch"

It's the story of Milo Thatcher (Michael J. Fox) a young linguist who believes he can find the lost city of Atlantis. His grandfather spend years searching for a book that gave exact details and unbeknownst to him a friend of his grandfather's has found the book and is planning on funding an expedition to find the city.

So Milo sets off with a crew of experts to find Atlantis. Of course along the way they run into several problems that end up killing over 9/10 of the group he has brought along leaving on a handful of men to assist. But what they find in Atlantis is more than Milo ever could have imagined.


Performances in this movie are all wonderfully done. Michael J. Fox works well as the skinny, fidgety, bookish Milo. Serving perfectly as a nervous and mousy man with a desire to impress those around him without knowing how to do it.

As usual James Garner is great as the tall overbearing military type, grey headed but still built like an ox, too consumed with the sound of his own voice to listen to reason.

This was also the last great performance of two great entertainers the late James Varney, best known for his portrayal as the character Earnest P. Worell and Florence Stanley who was best known for her deep and raspy voice as well as her cantankerous characters. Both are very well suited in the roles of ship cook "Cookie and radio officer "Packard" respectively. Florence went on to reprise her role in the horrible direct-to-video sequel but Jim Varney had already passed on at this point. It was a nice send-off for both actors and one final show to remind us what we're truly missing out on.


The animation is done beautifully and it leaves one a bit whistful of the inborn beauty of 2D animation that just can't be captured by its 3D counterpart. The characters are all well designed and exaggerated just enough to be acceptably "cartoony." The animatoin style can be credited to comic artist and writer Mike Mignola of "Hellboy" fame who's first question upon being contacted by Disney about working on the film was "How did you get my number?"

Going away from the Disney tradition of musicals and princess stories (though the former was more prominent at the time than the latter) it's an action/adventure movie with a surprisingly dark for the time tone. Many people end up dying and it's one of the first Disney animated features where I've seen blood (albeit briefly.)

The story is any 10-12-year-old boy's dream come true. A beautifully crafted storyline that combines the likes of Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, and Arthur Conan Doyle's stories (Particularly "Journey to the Center of the Earth", "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea", "The Time Machine", and "The Lost World") with the adventurous nature of films like the "Indiana Jones" movies and even the film "Stargate" (which holds many many parallels to "Atlantis", in fact Kurt Russell himself was considered for the part of Rourke before James Garner got the part) the musical score that reeks of a Universal studios adventure film completes the picture perfectly.

It is a wonderful adventure movie that pays homage to so many other classics both literary and film. It's a movie that speaks to the adventurous child in all of us and should be held as a classic up there with many of Disney's other titles.


"Atlantis: The Lost Empire" is not only a lost classic but one of Disney's best animated films. It deserves far more popularity then it has and it's my sincere hope that this review will ignite some interest in it.

I give "Atlantis: The Lost Empire" a 5 out of 5. No matter what your age, buy it.

Funny Games

Funny Games (2007) With some comparison to the 1997 original



Directed by: Michael Haneke

Starring: Tim Roth, Naomi Watts, Michael Pitt, and Brady Corbet

Plot:In this exploration of our violent society and how depictions of violence reflect and shape our culture, a middle-class family submits both physically and mentally to the torture, violence, and death foisted upon them by two young, unexpected, white-gloved visitors at their vacation retreat near a lake. Taken from www.imdb.com.

You're probably going to hate this movie. I'm going to be straight with you right now, you're probably going to despise this movie and in connection me for this review. So I remind you while sticks and stones may break my bones, words will shatter my fragile ego like sugar glass and cause me to go into a downward spiral of cheap booze and prescription medication that will end with my eventual death in a Bangkok hotel room surrounded by pill bottles and the word "Rosebud" carved into my forehead with an X-acto knife.

"Funny Games" is about a family composed of Anne (Naomi Watts), George (Tim Roth), and Georgie (Devon Gearheart) an obviously upper-class family going out to stay at their luxurious lake house.

Soon Peter (Brady Corbett) and Paul (Michael Pitt) show up, reminding me far far too much of the McPoyle brothers from "It's Always Sunny In Philadelphia," and then a metaphorical depiction of excrement colliding with a rotating bladed device meant to cause air movement occurs.


Okay so the acting in this film is convincing and well done. Though I feel stacking on actors like Naomi Watts and Tim Roth on roles like Anne and George is like using napalm to start a camp fire. The roles don't really give them much of a chance to do more than cry, scream, and act in pain.

The two great parts here are Peter and Paul. These guys are probably the biggest sociopaths I have ever seen this side of Rutger Hauer's portrayal of John Ryder in the original "Hitcher." Their casual tone and lack of any real motivation makes them two of the most chilling screen villains ever. Pitt and Corbet were far better suited for this role than Arno Frisch and Frank Giering in the original, not to downplay their performance but Pitt and Corbet look and act the part of neatly dressed white upper-class sociopaths much more convincingly and powerfully.

I told you you're going to hate this movie. Now I'll tell you why. "Funny Games" is every bit as sadistic as its antagonists. "But Baytor you studly gleaming pillar of godlike manliness (Shh, remember... sugar glass, bangkok hotel room, rosebud) I've seen sadistic, why I've watched movies like 'Saw', 'Hostel', and 'Glitter.'"

Well that's just adorable, your reasoning skills, and really I'm proud of you but that doesn't change the fact that you're WRONG!

Reason number one why you will hate it, "Funny Games" never misses a chance to cockblock you. 99.9% of the violence occurs off-screen and I'll get to the other .1% in a minute. Everything you're used to in movies will be decimated, the camera pulls away at something as mundane as someone punching another person. The biggest bit of on-screen violence is Tim Roth slapping Michael Pitt in the face.

Reason number two why you will hate it. It's slow. Many scenes drag on forever of something like Tim Roth trying to get up for 10 minutes, or Tim Roth sitting in a chair blow drying a cell phone battery so he can call the police, or Tim Roth sitting on the couch making his angry face.

This is all part of the sadism, this movie punishes you by making you watch a loooooooong act 2 that pretty much goes nowhere and just more or less gives you absolutely no hope whatsoever. This also becomes worse as the two most interesting characters, Peter and Paul are gone for pretty much all of the middle third leaving us with Anne and George crying and being scared.

Reason number three why you will hate it, and this will be the deal sealer for everyone, it breaks the forth wall. On several occasions Paul either looks at the screen and gives a sly grin or knowing wink or actually directly addresses the audience with questions like "You're on their side aren't you? You would be." or "Do you think it's enough? You want a real ending, right?" which leads me directly into number four, which is a mild spoiler so skip the next paragraph if you want to go into this thing blind, it's not going to reveal anything big but you still may not want to know.

There is one moment of vindication in this movie where your hopes come true and the audience cheers and the movie looks down from you from on high and cackles a malicious knowing laugh and rewinds the film for a do-over and then giggles happily whilst pissing in your cheerios.

However, if this movie has managed to piss you off and send you into a fury of rage and hatred, then it has succeeded! The brilliance that comes from this movie is it knows what we expect, it knows we want violence and revenge, and we get neither, and it delights in this fact. It truly is a deconstruction of us as moviegoers' love of violence in media and it is done perfectly with fixed camera angles for every shot in this movie taking away much of the excitement, never letting you see something violent actually happen. It also dances around the issue of sex in movies being worse than violence by most peoples' standards as at one point they cover Georgie's head with a pillowcase when asking Anne to remove her clothes to help "preserve purity."

My one big complaint is that it was too fucking quiet and at many times it was nigh-impossible to make out was being said, I had to put on earphones and press them deep into my ears just to try and get an idea and even then it was near silent.

Now there's also been some people bitching and moaning because this is a remake. Let me make this as clear as humanly possible. The director and writer Michael Haneke wanted to make an American movie because this movie depicting the breakdown of violence typically shown in media was even in 1997 more apt for this country than any other. Unfortunately in 1997 we were still lighting cigars with one-hundred dollar bills and talking about how awesome "Batman and Robin" was going to be. So after "Batman and Robin" cock slapped some sense into us the movie industry decided maybe we should be letting good movies into the country so Michael Heneke decided to remake his movie in English with American actors (and Tim Roth), make the setting more picturesque and sterile looking, and improve upon his original work.

This isn't a play at making more money, it's not bastardizing on an original, it's not even trying to do anything the other didn't. This is just a case of an artist wanting to improve upon something he felt was flawed so all you pretentious dick weasels who won't stop complaining about how this "ruined" the original I invite you to shut your cock holsters and return back to imdb to talk about how "wicked sick" "The Transporter" was before I skull fuck you with a jackhammer! Thank you.

The movie was shot scene-for-scene to look, sound, and pretty much be like the original. Look below you at the stills from the 2007 version and of the 1997 version.

Michael Pitt (2007)

Arno Frisch (1997)

So yes, this movie will trounce all over you happily licking the tears from your cheeks and growing more powerful from your hatred. If you see where this film is coming from it's wonderful and well worth a watch.

I give "Funny Games" a 5 out of 5 but you must watch it first to make sure you agree before you want to buy it!

(P.S. You don't get to point out I ripped off Yahtzee Croshaw up there. That's the rules.)