Funny Games Movie Analysis

The preferred reading from director Michael Haneke gives a lot of insight to wherefore the audience felt the way they did. Hanekes intended message of the hire was irony. All the rules that usually make the viewer go home k at presenting and contented are broken in my film, (Haneke). This is why the film makes audiences so uncomfortable it takes them out of their standard beliefs of what a film should have in it. Haneke breaks these rules several times to give the audience increased spiritings of anxiousness. Theres this unspoken rule that you cant harm animals.What do I do? I kill the dog first amour. The same thing with the boy. Youre not supposed to break the illusion. What do I do? I break the illusion. Its the principle of the whole film. Its a really ironic film, (Haneke) Haneke also displays the irony through the music, Just similar the film is a parody of a classical thriller, John Zorn is a parody of classical heavy metal. The classical music is not a soundtrack in th is moving-picture show. All my music is not meant as a soundtrackis reference of the action, part of the story.The other music, the John Zorn music, is under the titles, and its the ironic colon. OK, now we go to a thriller, (Haneke) Hanekes second message is manipulation, I cherished to show the audience how a great deal they can be manipulated, (Haneke). He purposefully toys with the audience, bringing them to unfamiliar territory. First they think its all an illusion, safe a film, then I do this rewinding and suddenly you go back. I look at the viewer directly, I talk to him, I blinking at him. I do this again and again to show how much one can manipulate.In view of this overriding illusion in movies, its a good idea to create a smaller bit of mistrust in the verite, in the truth of moving pictures. As for Peter and Paul being gay that interpretation was not intended. We perceive it before, but Im very surprised actually. First of all, the actors arent gay, but that woul d be beside the point. I dont know why people think thatbecause they are handsome, or have white uniform on, I dont know, (Haneke). Overall Haneke wanted the audience to timbre a, Slap in the face, and it definitely worked.The negotiated reading for Funny Games describes the movie as, plague that really scared, devastated, and stayed with me long after the final scene was over, (Galina 1). I feel that this is close to what I was thinking after the film and also to some(prenominal) others in the class. The nonchalant nature of Paul and Peter really sticks to you and the disreputable George, Why are you doing this to us? Paul, Why not? is absolutely chilling. This is scarey to most people because the audience is used to a killer that has a direct motive and a back story.Funny Games leaves you with none of that and because this is very uncommon our lack of gap-fill is shocking. I cant easily recall another movie that made me go through the same emotions as the innocent victims in the movie did, to feel the same helplessness, hopelessness, despair, humiliation, and horror, (Galina 1). All of these emotions build up to a realization that the good guys wint win. Most of the time movies revenge evil and let the good prevail but when this doesnt come about audiences are shocked because our gap-fill between good and evil comforted us that there was a chance for the good.After the awareness that evil has won a sense of They are among us, they are nice and polite, well read, shy(p) and ironic, they have the names from the new Testament, Paul and Peter, they talk with the soft comminuted voices but they are monsters nevertheless who have no regard for a human life and who want to play their sadistic funny games to the extreme, sets in (Galina 1). This reception of the movie Funny Games is what I feel most viewers felt.