User Score
7.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 58 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 44 out of 58
  2. Negative: 6 out of 58
Watch On

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. Mar 13, 2011
    4
    ... its not enough to make a movie mix every kind of violence possible and find that - because violence tends to be shocking - the movie itself will have some impact ...

    the plot of this film is an empty sequence. No point is madeâ
  2. Jan 22, 2013
    5
    Try to be a masterpiece, but to no avail.
  3. Nov 8, 2012
    5
    The fact that Naomi Watts is still able to give one of the year's very best performances in a film that doesn't even deserve her presence proves just how talented she is.
  4. Feb 15, 2014
    5
    The remake (U.S) version of the film is not as good, let alone effective as the first. I found the film disappointing. Maybe because I originally had high expectations for it. I will say if your going to watch the film, lower your expectations a bit.
Metascore
44

Mixed or average reviews - based on 33 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 14 out of 33
  2. Negative: 13 out of 33
  1. Reviewed by: Ken Fox
    Mar 20, 2013
    50
    The film is merciless in its depiction of death and suffering, Pitt and Corbet are perfectly cast, and Watts, who also served as executive producer, gives a disturbingly raw performance.
  2. Reviewed by: Bill Goodykoontz
    Mar 19, 2013
    80
    Brutal, sadistic yet well-made statement about how violence is portrayed in media and our reaction to it.
  3. Reviewed by: Peter Rainer
    Mar 19, 2013
    30
    In the end, the difference between "Funny Games" and Hollywood schlock horror may only be a matter of breeding. Funny Games is "Saw IV" with a PhD.