- 10
...has to be one of the most perverse experiments in cinema history -- more so even than Gus Van Sant's Psycho, which at least had the advantage of updating a film that people consider fondly.
—Scott Tobias Onion AV Club
- 8
...a mockingly sadistic and terrifying watch-the-middle-class-writhe-like-stuck-pigs thriller...
—Owen Gleiberman Entertainment Weekly
- 6
...means to kill our pleasure in the very thing we theoretically paid to see: zipless, guilt-free, morally untroubled mayhem.
—Jim Ridley LA Weekly
- 6
...toys with our appetite for and assumptions about violence in movies, a game that seemed far fresher a decade ago than now.
—Leah Rozen People
- 5
...is just a dubious idea fulfilled.
—Michael Phillips Chicago Tribune
- 5
It's virtually a scene-for-scene replica of a movie that wasn't so great to begin with.
—Ken Fox TV Guide
- 5
...a pointlessly lazy shot-for-shot American remake.
—Ed Gonzalez Slant Magazine
- 5
...as shocking and deliberately manipulative as the original movie and -- some may reckon -- even more pointless.
—Derek Elley Variety
- 4
...is every bit as gripping, suspenseful and upsetting as the original. And it's even more of a crock.
—Glenn Kenny Premiere
- 4
There is no way to accurately describe how utterly reprehensible and irredeemable Funny Games is. It's smug and obvious, grandstanding on misguided principles both in front of and behind the camera.
—Bill Gibron Reel
- 3
Are you getting bored? Isn't it about time for something to happen? Do you want to see the worm turn? Or simply wish the movie would end? Professional obligations required that I endure it, but there's no reason why you should.
—J. Hoberman Village Voice
- 3
...basically torture porn every bit as manipulative and reprehensible as Hostel...
—Lou Lumenick New York Post
- 2
There is no way to accurately describe how utterly reprehensible and irredeemable Funny Games is. It's smug and obvious, grandstanding on misguided principles both in front of and behind the camera.
—Bill Gibron filmcritic.com
- 2
To pass the test, you must reject the false premise of the experiment itself (if only on the grounds of insufferable smugness) and walk out. An even better response, theoretically, would be to storm the booth and rip the film out of the projector, thus symbolically declaring your refusal to swallow the force-fed medicinal doses of synthesized abuse the film is administering. And if you really wanted to ace the challenge, you would just not see the movie.
—Jim Emerson Chicago Sun-Times
- 2
It actually knows it's a movie! What a clever, tricky game! What fun! What a fraud.
—A. O. Scott New York Times