User Score
4.8

Mixed or average reviews- based on 166 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 79 out of 166
  2. Negative: 79 out of 166

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. VictorM
    Nov 19, 2009
    10
    Beautiful and brilliant. Cinema as an art, at its best. Not for the close-minded.
  2. KrisB.
    Jun 20, 2008
    10
    The fact that people are giving this a movie completely proves the point of the film. They walked into this movie wanting it to wrap up into a nice neat little package. I'm sorry it didn't give you just the right amount of violence and then wrap up with the good guys winning. Sorry guys, but you're just gonna have to go jerk off to hostel for that.
  3. RebeccaB.
    Jul 4, 2008
    10
    Finally some harsh reality instead of a ridiculous happy ending.
  4. NickL.
    Mar 14, 2008
    10
    I am positively shocked at the number of reviewers who are completely missing Haneke's point. Having seen both the original as well as the American remake (at Sundance), I must say: Both films are utter perfection, they aren't meant to be entertaining, they are meant to call into question the artifice of modern torture-porn horror filmaking as well as our penchant for voyeurism. I am positively shocked at the number of reviewers who are completely missing Haneke's point. Having seen both the original as well as the American remake (at Sundance), I must say: Both films are utter perfection, they aren't meant to be entertaining, they are meant to call into question the artifice of modern torture-porn horror filmaking as well as our penchant for voyeurism. If you are trying to choose which version to see, I might recommend the remake because, as Cinematical's James Rocchi points out, "this new iteration isn't merely intellectually faithful to the original but also, in some ways, even more emotionally fearsome. You don't get to, as you did with the original, blunt the fear and terror of the movie by filtering the dialogue through your rational mind as you read the subtitles; instead, with every whimpered plea for mercy and sobbed demand to know why, the panic and fear leaps right into your reptile brain." Expand
  5. ChristianC
    Mar 15, 2008
    9
    Disturbing & brilliant! The entire cast is excellent! Naomi Watts, who is also credited as executive producer continues to show great range and Michael Pitt is also quite effective. Why isn't he used more? Sure it's a bit manipulative, but after the recent onslaught of forgettable Hollywood trash like the Saw & Hostel series', why should we mind?! This one will make ya Disturbing & brilliant! The entire cast is excellent! Naomi Watts, who is also credited as executive producer continues to show great range and Michael Pitt is also quite effective. Why isn't he used more? Sure it's a bit manipulative, but after the recent onslaught of forgettable Hollywood trash like the Saw & Hostel series', why should we mind?! This one will make ya think and you will not forget it anytime soon. Expand
  6. Maurice
    Mar 16, 2008
    10
    Brilliant For intelligent audiences only.
  7. ScottM
    Apr 1, 2008
    9
    Good lord. Haneke's is not a minister preaching hell and damnation to American movie audiences. He gives us what we want, and the film openly acknowledges it. It's not a black or white case where he is either being completely ironic or extremely sadistic, it's both. We as the audience have the power to save the family by turning off the movie or walking out, but Haneke Good lord. Haneke's is not a minister preaching hell and damnation to American movie audiences. He gives us what we want, and the film openly acknowledges it. It's not a black or white case where he is either being completely ironic or extremely sadistic, it's both. We as the audience have the power to save the family by turning off the movie or walking out, but Haneke knows that more than likely we'll keep watching. Impeccably made, flawless for what it is. Expand
  8. JoanneS.
    Aug 22, 2008
    10
    Wonderfully suspenseful thriller. A welcome change from the usual torture porn films of late. The director turns all the usual horror cliches on the head and is full of surprise twists and shocks. Wonderfully acted, if a tad slow in places, this is a surprisingly good addition to the genre. Well worth a look.
  9. CoryG
    Mar 14, 2008
    10
    It kept you guessing until the very end which you would have never known was the end.
  10. MB
    Mar 16, 2008
    10
    The only film this year that isn't out to make you like it by brainwashing you and meeting your highest expectations.
  11. JesusChrist
    Mar 19, 2008
    10
    Not for the morons.
  12. R.Cory!
    Jul 3, 2008
    10
    I thought this was the funniest movie i saw last year. I had to see it when every worthless movie critic begged people to not watch it. A handful of people walked out of the theatre... but I couldn't stop laughing. People say that Funny Games is an exercise in violence... but it's really about a director f'ing with people's expectations.... and that's hilarious.
  13. Maxwell
    Aug 24, 2008
    10
    Dear everyone who gave this film a zero, Thank you for absolutely proving the director's point.
  14. BrandonS.
    Jan 18, 2009
    10
    Excitingly original.
  15. NickO
    Oct 9, 2009
    9
    I think a lot of people have missed the point here.
  16. petros
    Aug 17, 2009
    10
    The comments for this film is proof that this world is divided unevenly in two categories - smart (just a few unfortunately) and unbelievably stupid (the majority) - go watch iron man and don't insult us with your ignorance. the original is the best film ever made, haneke's only mistake was making a remake in order to approach a brader audience. he should know better. what do The comments for this film is proof that this world is divided unevenly in two categories - smart (just a few unfortunately) and unbelievably stupid (the majority) - go watch iron man and don't insult us with your ignorance. the original is the best film ever made, haneke's only mistake was making a remake in order to approach a brader audience. he should know better. what do you expect from people who can't watch films with subtitles. nothing obviously. Expand
  17. Enrique
    Mar 14, 2008
    10
    It is as brilliant as the original German production, both directed by Michael Haneke. He delivers a faithfull version of the first one without making absolutely any concessions to general audiences. This is a masterpiece but certainly not for everyone. If you want a convencional horror movie with the usual thrills, take your crap to a mall multiplex, buy pop-corn and stay away from this movie.
  18. AlbertoB.
    Mar 15, 2008
    9
    Almost as great as the German original thriller.
  19. DanHefko
    Mar 16, 2008
    10
    Anthony Lane implies (New Yorker,
  20. TracyR.
    Mar 16, 2008
    10
    I think you either love this movie or you hate it. This movie isn't for everyone. It says something when the same movie that gets rated a 0 from critics also gets a 100. I'm giving this a 10 because I really think it was amazing filmmaking/acting.
  21. BarryB.
    Apr 25, 2008
    10
    Never have I felt so tense while watching a movie (except maybe Bram Stoker's Dracula, but I was kid then). Haneke made a movie that most action, thriller, and horror movie lovers won't love, because it calls them out on exactly what they crave and why they crave it. In real life, the bad guys usually win. But the Mission Impossibles, the 8MMs, and the Hostels have tried to Never have I felt so tense while watching a movie (except maybe Bram Stoker's Dracula, but I was kid then). Haneke made a movie that most action, thriller, and horror movie lovers won't love, because it calls them out on exactly what they crave and why they crave it. In real life, the bad guys usually win. But the Mission Impossibles, the 8MMs, and the Hostels have tried to teach us that good guys prevail. They don't. Naomi Watts deserves an Oscar nomination. Expand
  22. ToddM.
    Apr 29, 2008
    10
    This is probably the best movie of 2008. it is incredible how it breaks all of the rules of movies. i will admit some parts are unnecessarily long but other than that this is an incredible film.
  23. MarkusB
    May 27, 2008
    9
    As good as the Austrian (!) original.
  24. PaulR.
    Jun 19, 2008
    10
    People of course will not understand the brutal nature of a movie like this cross examining Americas constant lust for violence. I first saw the 1997 Austrian version about 4 years ago and it slammed me up against the wall making me think of violence in a whole new light. This version, also directed by Haneke is a Brilliant film on the exact same malicious level as the original. It is not People of course will not understand the brutal nature of a movie like this cross examining Americas constant lust for violence. I first saw the 1997 Austrian version about 4 years ago and it slammed me up against the wall making me think of violence in a whole new light. This version, also directed by Haneke is a Brilliant film on the exact same malicious level as the original. It is not meant to be a entertaining film experience, it is a lesson in pain. If you want a watered down version of Funny Games watch "The Strangers", which is horrific in how it's made. If you want an experimental horrific movie experience then watch this film. Expand
  25. DavidN.
    Jun 29, 2008
    10
    Clever and imaginative. This is a movie that tells a story about the killers and their sadistic craziness, but instead it compels to make you think the actual story is about an abducted family and their struggle for survival. Never saw that one coming! Its been a while since a movie actually shocked me. All of you 0% voters, go watch Iron Man.
  26. KyleR.
    Jul 21, 2008
    9
    The movie was very clever and the acting is very very good,its like Heath's performance as the joker.i had myself laughing every time Peter And Paul said something and did.I must admit that it was slow in some parts.but that doesn't make a bad movie.in a underline note. If u haven't seen it.take the chance and watch it.
  27. DanS
    Jan 19, 2009
    9
    This is such a great film because it divides viewers into camps. those who think cinema is entertainment and those that think cinema is art. Read what people who rated the film badly have to say. It's always something to the effect of: "this is so boring"; or, "the director must be some kind of sadistic person". They sound like little children who've been brought up on Batman This is such a great film because it divides viewers into camps. those who think cinema is entertainment and those that think cinema is art. Read what people who rated the film badly have to say. It's always something to the effect of: "this is so boring"; or, "the director must be some kind of sadistic person". They sound like little children who've been brought up on Batman and the Saw series. Grow up people. This film is really not much more than an assault on the entertainment diet of most of America (one of the most violent nations in recent times), and a nation that constantly sugar coats its film output to appease all the prudes out there. This film was made because America is in denial about their tastelessness in the arts, period. So called critics who berate this film are the same ones that regularly indulge in poor, titillating representations of violence and Haneke's approach conflicts with their film diet and they're just not ready to concede any praise to the film. It goes against their right to consume crap at the cinema. Collapse
  28. puppup
    Oct 24, 2009
    9
    This is not "natural born killers" or any other gringo film. This is european. We're so bored with the usa violence even gore films. Thiss is true, though we know it's a film. Haneke wants to say: "don't you consider stupid the lot of gringo films of this kind you've seen in your life". I'm spanish so, I think this never happen to me (I'm not sure or this, of This is not "natural born killers" or any other gringo film. This is european. We're so bored with the usa violence even gore films. Thiss is true, though we know it's a film. Haneke wants to say: "don't you consider stupid the lot of gringo films of this kind you've seen in your life". I'm spanish so, I think this never happen to me (I'm not sure or this, of course), but we always know this things only happens if you're a gringo: they consider themselves the best country, the best democracy, they do the best films, they are afraid (fear fear) of averything. We don't. We win. Expand
Metascore
69

Generally favorable reviews - based on 10 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 6 out of 10
  2. Negative: 1 out of 10
  1. Reviewed by: David Rooney
    Mar 20, 2013
    50
    The film is shocking and upsetting, but never truly gets under the skin the way this kind of material often can. Whatever reservations are prompted by Haneke's approach, his direction is controlled and edgy. [20 May 1997, p.52]
  2. Reviewed by: Rene Rodriguez
    Mar 20, 2013
    100
    The movie gives you what you think you want, and then gives you some more, and just when you think things can't get any worse, Haneke swoops in and smashes the wall between fiction and reality, turning the viewer into a direct accomplice to what's transpiring onscreen. It is an astonishing film, sure to be controversial, and quite simply unforgettable. [30 Jan. 1998, p.6G]
  3. Reviewed by: Dave Kehr
    Mar 20, 2013
    40
    Denying us any catharsis, Haneke becomes a stern, finger-wagging lecturer; he seems to mean his movie as punishment, conveniently forgetting his own role in the crime. [11 March 1998, p.38]