More Funny Games

The remake is one of cinema’s greatest faux pas’. Some directors’ suggest their film is a re-imagining or possibly a revamp of the original. However, all of this could be seen as simple regurgitation. Now Michel Haneke is turning this point of view on its head…

It is no industry secret that remakes are an easy way to make money. It is also a quick route to work with some of the most revered actors: plus they get to step into a legendary role (see Sly Stallone in the 2000 version of “Get Carter”). It isn’t all sunshine when you think that remakes are constantly in the line of proverbial fire. They may be big money makers but critics barely see past the original, putting the majority into a metaphorical paper bag and setting it on fire. But it is unfair to put all remakes into the same category. Foreign films can often find success after the release of its American counterpart. This was certainly the case of Hong Kong’s “Infernal Affairs” when it became the Oscar-winning “The Departed”. However, the spate of remakes that appeared in the early 90’s (The Assassin, Sommersby) deserved the negative reaction that it got.

So when minimalist auteur Michel Haneke announced his next project would be a shot-for-shot remake of his 1997 film “Funny Games”, it shocked critics who took the often chosen standpoint that remakes are the dregs of the industry. It took the director a few months before the films’ release to elaborate on the proposed remake stating directly that Funny Games was always meant to be set in America. Just as the film is set to be released in UK in April, criticism is drifting over the Atlantic. It seems that critics have been alienated by Haneke’s attempts at remaking his own film. Remarks that it is for “kinky S&M enthusiasts” and that “Naomi Watts might want to fire her agent for attaching her to this infuriating fiasco”, suggest that comments will be mainly negative. However, this could just as easily be a misunderstanding of where the director is coming from, with most critics comparing it to Gus Van Sant’s Psycho experiment. Either way, it is nice to finally get a fresh perspective on the remake. Even if the original was better.

Originally posted 17/03/2008