Michael Haneke's challenging film offers us a unique take on the horror genre. This video essay breaks down the American version of Funny Games, and how it uses the absence of sound or visuals to its advantage.
(This video contains spoilers)
Support this channel: https://www.patreon.com/filmradar
Thank you for watching.
Sidenote: The reason I chose this version instead of the 1997 original is pretty simple, I haven't seen it, and considering it is a shot-for-shot remake, I feel the main points of discussion in this film don't change between versions.
Keep up with me:
This video was written and edited by Daniel Netzel.
(full disclosure these are affiliate links, if you choose to buy I get a little kickback for you following the link)
i feel like the praise of films like this is much more prevelant today with indie darlings from studios like a24. The Witch has a similar pacing and the long drawn out take is jacked off to today, but this thing came out in 2007. The culture wasnt right for it yet, but now i think it shines. future cult classic.
8:31 I think this scene explaines why they are doing this. It looks like they are the only ones who know how to do this in this world or who can use this "power". So with endless things to do and nearly without consequences they got bored.
yes its hard to explain its like its saying its ok to like horror films your not sick in the head or a manic in fact you more intelligent if you look at Jason or chukey some one like that there like a anti hero and not real yet people frown at people who like them movies but they don't hurt kids and only go out there way of there killing spree to kill people who are not innocent or in power like chukey kills a teacher or a cop Jason kills a doctor etc I think the horror fans its more about the ultimate battle of good and evil but this film saying sick people are every were and they rarely come with mask they come with smile on there faces or when you don't expect them and can happen any time to any one for no real reason so ley of horror classics saying they make you do bad shit which is not true they are just bad people in the world and movies have nothing to do with it . that's what I got from the meaning of the fourth wall bricking seens in this movie any way.
As the remake has some new touches and a better set design, the directing in the original was executed much better. Some scenes in the remake didn't connect the same way the original did, and it's the friendly faces of the German actors which makes the whole film more disturbing and devastating.
Although an interesting take on the film, I found your ending quote a bit underwhelming. I don't think Funny Games's intention is to make people aware they might just be shot at the next street turn. I believe Haneke's involvement in this film wouldn't have made sense if that was it. I believe its ultimate message is product of Haneke's opposition to violence being used as an entertainment in any form of art (in this case, cinema), but particularly in American cinema, which is selling all the world the idea that, since violence is part of life, violence should definitely be depicted on film, which is true, but not in the all glossy and spectacular way American cinema does it. I hope this gets to help you build a much thorough opinion about the film. Very good edition, I should say though!
That's a fair point, but I guess I didn't really mean Haneke's intention if that makes sense. That was just what I walked away from the film feeling, so I included it in my video. But you're right, and I did remember reading stuff about that, I just ultimately don't think it matters all that much what the filmmaker wanted, I think it's up to every viewer to decide what a film means to them.
just watched this movie and it was absolutely terrific. Didn't like the song choice in the beginning, end and during the scene where Georgie has the gun. Thought it was an obnoxious song, but I guess it was meant to serve as a hint toward Peter and paul's unhinged, chaotic nature?
Haneke is a genius at creating unbearable tension without the possibility of release as we know it from other same genre movies where in the end the good guys win. This film is painful to watch because it evokes fear that has eaten up all hope right from the start. It also delivers an accurate insight into the abuse and coercion tactics of psychopaths run amok. I watched both, the original Austrian and the American version. Both of them underrated cinematic events. Thanks for uploading, Film Radar !
BORING GAMES, more like. I really wanted to like this movie because I like Michael Pitt and Brady as the villains however this movie was way too slow completely unrealistic and the mother had so many opportunities to save her family. The only person in this movie with any balls to try to escape was the little boy the only one I felt sorry for in the only one who invoked any kind of emotion out of me to care about the family at all. The whole statement about violence I think is b******* I think Michael haneke use that as an excuse because he made a boring-ass movie
You're forgetting that before things at all got serious or frightening that the father was already injured, could hardly walk. The whole point is that their mannerisms and outfits are disarming. No one expects a criminal to look like that, or to be so polite. So when one is already injured, and they're still at the time thinking that these people are likely just after their money, they figure they'll play along because that's their best chance of survival. If someone pointed a gun in your face and asked for your purse/wallet, you'd probably just hand it over, because trying to fight might get you killed. I think they believed they would survive if they just did what they were told, until it was too late.
+Film Radar two losers with a golf club? Really? I highly doubt a father would piss his pants over that and allow these two yuppies to take over their family so easily there's no way your maternal instincts would kick in along with your survival instincts but this family just bent over and took it
I find the movie to be nothing more than pretentious. The director tries so hard by trying to make it realistic by making it boring, which i find to be a lazy way to say something is “realistic”. Then to worsen it, he seems to pick and choose which parts are realistic and which aren’t. The family has no common sense and has multiple opportunities to escape, but instead picks the stupidest option available. The videos narrator also says this movie goes against tropes, when the family itself is one of the biggest horror movie tropes of all time! The oblivious family who ignores all warning signs! The movie cant seem to decide what it wants to be or what its point is? Stick to realism? Or have the character rewind time and talk to the camera? Seems like the movie was so bad, people can only interpret it was bad on purpose and that somehow it was actually good.
cullumcorner I agree, it's a trash movie. I've never seen a more retarded family in my life. Everything happens to them because they allow it to which is frustrating, makes me stop feeling bad for them immediately & makes me extremely angry at them. They had so many opportunities to do SOMETHING but did nothing, the entire movie wexists due to their stupidity & I'm supposed to think that's deep & a piece of work??
The movie is absolutely an amazing piece of art.I watched it like a dozen times and every single time I question ann for not pushing paul into the water when she was talking with her friends on the dock lol
This film is brutal , harrowing and merciless .But life is more similar to this movie than people want to admit. In the real world, innocent people get preyed upon, evil overwhelms good and often a lot of evil people get off Scot free and their evil deeds go unpunished.
Nunu Rats finally someone says it, it was such a trash movie, I was extremely angry the entire movie because every character was so fucking stupid, not because it was a well crafted movie. Why the fuck did the kid run back mid way after almost jumping the gate? How the fuck do they own a vacation home which they're not occupying for most of the time & not have any type of security system installed? How the fuck do you only have one 2 cellphones & no home phone especially during a time where having a home phone was extremely common unlike now? Why the fuck were the parents so calm after their kid got shot & killed in front of them? They don't even go & check on him or hug him or anything? And why did they take for fucking ever to get the fuck up & out of the house to find some help after their kid was shot? The bitch spent 30 minutes, wandering around the house, looking for a blow dryer, trying to fix the phone, accommodating her husband when they know the two guys can be a back any second, let's say the weren't, still why would you not be fucking desperate to leave & have the nightmare be over. God, I can go on forever. The entire family were push over retards that allowed everything to happen, I stopped caring if they died or not half way through because they were being so painfully stupid.
I discussed the original Austrian version with someone, and the repeatedly returned to the "but I just don't see where the fun is in torturing random people?" I think that's the exact question the director is trying to pose.
One very interesting point to mention would the rewinding scene.
Before Ann shots Peter, Paul wants her to repeat the pray backward.
Now, when the scene is rewinding it stops right before when she says the pray which would have been backward, and she would have won.
This gives a false hope to the audience to think that there might be a chance of winning of any kind for the characters.
Thank god Youtube exists so I get tons of information on things I’ll never go through myself. I mean it’s always great when someone creates a genuinely different story but to me, the idea here is spread too thin to make viewers suffer for a whole duration of a feature film. Also I think punishing audience is a rather arrogant approach to moviemaking, while I don’t expect all art to be joyful, at least it has to be satisfying. If I had to endure this film, I’d be very angry at the director. Yes, unfair things like that may occur in reality, but the reason we watch movies isn’t exactly to see more of the gruesome reality that surrounds us. I may be wrong but to me, only a masochist can enjoy this movie and only a sadist could have made it. Which isn’t necessarily a bad thing, if it’s between two consenting adults and no one was fooled by false advertising :)
It makes perfect sense.
I agree that we love horror movies for that sweet moment when the lights are on again and we know it's over. Normally I have no problem with all characters dying. I guess the rewind scene is what would make me angry even though I get the director's intention. This movie as you explained it definitely has artistic value. I meant that I wouldn't want to watch it and thanks to you I don't have to :)
Life is too short. Many people wouldn't understand it but sometimes I like film analysis more than actual movies. Especially when it comes to violent stuff. Instead of suffering through the film, I got to hear your thoughts on it. I only spent 10 minutes watching the video and several more talking to you which I find much more satisfying.
I would definitely not consider myself a masochist, and I love this film. My perspective on it, is that sure, most of the time we watch movies it's not to get more of the gruesome reality but rather to escape it. But I think it's important to visit these sorts of topics, it's like why we play survival horror games. You get to the end of the film with this weird sense of catharsis, like, I have to live my life because these things happen to people all the time and now they don't get to. It makes you appreciate what you have right in front of you because it could all be taken away in a moment's notice. What started out as a lovely family get away at their lake cabin turned into the most harrowing experience any of them had ever seen, and none of them make it out alive.
I think it's important to visit these dark spaces sometimes, because then when you return to the light, it's brighter than ever. If that makes sense.
Excruciating movie experience. Very well done as well. Cache is my favorite Haneke film. It was so strange and absorbing; the ultimate thriller/mystery. Funny Games is the most punishing movie experience I've ever endured, even more than Martyrs. It made me completely disregard the evening news stations. They really dehumanize tragedy and I think a big reason I get nauseous from these news stories is because of seeing this movie.
The film toys with us and then kills us off. When Naomi got into the boat we think there's going to be a grand finale, a struggle, maybe an escape. When she is tipped back into the water without so much as a second look we feel, discarded.
It moves on to the next house as if it hasn't just spent x hours torturing us in our house.
Just like violence in real life.
Do you know that version only exists because the director did not have enough money too shoot it in America at the time originally ? It is shot for shot scene for scene the same movie . I prefer this version personally .
I feel like the whole film is forcing people to look at what the typical horror movie has become, there was no real reason given for what happened, the bad guys didn't get their comeuppance, all three of the main characters died as predicted by the villains, nothing too unusual happened they just murdered them as they said they would, none of the murders were glorified or even shown for the most part and then when it gets to the 'final kill' there wasn't even a slight suggestion of any revenge or fight back, they just tipped her in the water and carried on like it was nothing, like it wasn't a big 'horror film finale' but actually just something to do before moving on to their next victims, it's a realistic look at a horrible scenario where the good guys don't always win, in a way it was filmed as if it wasn't a movie, and yet kind of ironically on several occasions they spoke to the audience and acknowledged that it was, very strange but true horror
I enjoy difficult and challenging films and picked this one up as a recommendation. I was ready to be impressed, or at least to be engaged in novelty.
But this film was like watching the snot of a better film drip down off the screen. The meritorious craft of the film is ultimately lost in just how cruel, empty, and arbitrary it amounts to being. It is degrading, almost pretentiously nihilistic, and offers no narrative semblance for what it is doing, why it is doing it, or why we should care.
And if the rejoinder is that audiences don't have to understand or don't have to care, I would merely suggest this: Don't even bother to watch "Funny Games" in the conventional way as the director intended. Re-edit the film yourself with the ending you know is already there. Or better yet, just put it on, walk out, and do something better with your life for 111 minutes. That's the best way to watch this movie.
This is a reaction I've come across before when encountering people who've seen the film, and honestly, it's this exact reaction that is what makes this film such a masterwork(IMO). It genuinely bothers people, it gets under their skin in a way most movies can't. I've seen so many reviews saying it's stupid and pointless and just cruel, and it's like, yeah, that's what he was going for.
It doesn't mean it has to be your cup of tea, but I imagine your reaction would put a smile on Haneke's face.
So violent films like Kill Bill, Godfather, Once Upon a Time in America, Scarface, Django, Django Unchained, and a whole host of horror, action, western and gangster films are too violent? Don't be so pretentious. Fictional violence has its place.
I'm a fan of movies that make violence cool, when it's done right it can be a ton of fun, but we definitely need films like Funny Games to balance it out, we need to be reminded that violence in the real world is an ugly thing, and this film does not pull its punches when it comes to showing that.
I have definitely gotten better at balancing my audio since this video, I still have room for improvement, but I never went to school, never really made videos like this until starting the channel, and MAN is there a steep learning curve for some of this stuff, but I'm always learning from my past mistakes with these things.
I agree it was very boring and slow and unrealistic kind of stupid. A waste of perfectly good actors that I really would have liked to see in a violent home invasion thriller movie that I was promised in the trailer. I'm glad I didn't pay to see this I would have wanted my money back
+Film Radar why would anyone go to the movies to Not be entertained?. He kind of lied in the trailer and made this movie seem like it was going to be a violet crazy home invasion Thriller and it was so not. He should put a disclaimer saying that this is not supposed to be entertaining if that's really what he wanted which is weird. Ijs
I mean, it's all subjective, some people are more freaked out by gore, some lose sleep from jump scares, it all depends on the person. Though I do think the goal of any horror movie should be to scare everyone equally, and from that point I can see why one would hesitate to call Funny Games a horror film.
What about a film like The Shining? Considered to be one of the greatest horror films of all time, has very little in the way of horrifying or twisted imagery. Psychological horror has a lot of potential within the broader horror genre to scare I think. There are some shots in Funny Games that would completely qualify for the genre as well.
Idk, I was never afraid during this film. I was anxious and I did feel suspense but I would like the horror genre to not be soo cluttered with movies that don't pertain to horrifying imagery, twisted imagery for the audience. I would consider this in the broader sense as a thriller and I hope you would to. I was not spooked after seeing this movie but I was after The Ring, for example.
One thing I'd like to mention about the remote scene is Peter's monologue on the boat afterwards. All the talk about "another universe in fiction, where the hero wins" I think says a lot about people's perspective on scenarios like this. I'm surprised people say it's open to interpretation, when I think Peter pretty much outright says it was another timeline or story in which Ann wins the fight. Also, maybe I'm just looking way too into it, but did anyone see parallels between the Racecar channel commentary and what was going on in the movie? I seriously thought it was lining up really well to the thoughts of the characters.
I've thought about that as well, it's definitely an interesting idea whether it's what Haneke intended or not.
That for sure HAD to be intentional, I don't know why else he'd close in on the TV for so long if there wasn't something else going on.
Good video on a very intriguing (and infuriating) film. I've seen the original which had grimier, more naturalistic cinematography but maybe I will check this one out someday. Though I'm not sure Michael Pitt can match how terrifying the Austrian actor who played Peter in the original was.
I can't pin point it (I still really enjoyed Pitt) but I prefered the Austrian actor, something about him was terrifying but I can't place it (for me of course).
It was the way he smiled, something was so off.
Yes I'm aware they're practically the same film. With the actors being perhaps the only true variable in both films given Haneke favours a very rigid pre-determined style of film-making. But well done on the video - it made me value the film more than I did before.
From what I've seen, they're practically identical, which was the point. He wanted to bring the film to American audiences, and made a shot for shot remake. I haven't seen the original, but trust me, Michael Pitt is brilliant in the film.
I'm not gonna lie, I was HOPING that at least Ann would make it, but once that formula was broken, when the 4th wall is broken the first time) I thought they were ALL going to die. I can understand why the remote scene is where people FINALLY understand 'Oh, this isn't like any horror or thriller blockbuster, so all bets are off'. I just HATE when people say this movie sucked and they don't get the message at ALL. I can understand if someone gets the film, but still doesn't like it though.
I have not come across anyone who has gotten the message in the film and still doesn't like it. Maybe I just don't know a lot of people, but the majority of the people that don't like it always say because it's basically a snuff film, which is totally not the case. They don't even show anyone's actual deaths on camera... I can understand if someone gets the movie, but just doesn't like it, because it is pretty hard to sit through 2 times. I personally can watch this and find other little messages throughout the film, which to me is what makes a great film. I love it when films strike up a conversation and discussion. It's usually either people love this film or hate it. I just wish people would actually look into the movie and actually try to understand it. I think conventional movies have their place, but I also believe great and different films should also be recognized. I did come off like a dick, but I am just tired of people putting down different or non-conventional movies, just because they don't understand it. Imagine how many movies have been turned down because the idea is just too different. Writers are so scared to break conventions, because they need money, and without that then the writer cannot really do anything.
I've only seen the Austrian version but I can tell I will prefer that one anyway. The bit with the golf ball in the us version isn't as good as the one from the austrian version, there is a look of realisation and terror in the original actors face that Tim Roth didn't match.
Thanks man! I haven't, though there are several that sound really interesting to me. Being poor and being busy makes it really hard for me to keep up with seeing the movies I want to see, especially if they're foreign. But for me, Amour, Benny's Video, Cache, and The White Ribbon all seem like fantastic films.
I'm still going to watch the US version and I have no doubt it will be great as well, I have only recently started watching movies by Michael Haneke but he seems like a director that has a catalogue of brilliant films.
I really liked your video by the way, and was wondering if you'd seen any of Haneke's other films and plan on doing videos on them?
They might as well be identical, and they were designed that way. Haneke wanted to a shot-for-shot remake of his original, just for American audiences, so really the only difference is the performances, and that just comes down to preference. Having seen many scenes from the original, I personally prefer this version, but the original seems excellent as well.
I think Funny Games can be seen as sort of an experimental essay on violence in media and our perception of it, disguised as a classic horror flick. Scenes like Peter winking at the camera, Paul alluding to the cliches of classic movies ("Why don’t you just kill us?" - "You mustn’t forget entertainment value!") and especially Peter rewinding the film are means of pointing this out to the audience. We are not supposed to watch this film for any kind of entertainment, not even the entertainment in suffering. We are supposed to see this as an study on our perception of medial violence.
What I really liked was, when the son and dad were doing up the boat there was a shot directly showing the knife falling down into it. So you immediately think "oh that will end up saving someone or being important". The entire movie I was just waiting for them to get into the boat so the knife could come into play. Then at the end, they get in the boat, she's seen with the knife, and it is thrown overboard with her soon following. Now that, that was a bigger slap in the face than the kid almost escape, the parents almost getting off the hook, and the shotgun rewind. Because even though the carpet had been pulled from under me so many times, I still believed the knife would somehow work out. Hard film to sit through, but worth it
Oh yeah, that was just the final slap to the face, one last chance for redemption annnnnnnndddd....nope. That's basically the film in a nutshell, "maybe they can...nope...or how about? nope...." It's incredibly rough to sit through, but an experience unlike any other I've had with a film.
One major difference is the aftermath of the boy's death - in the original the mother is shown for almost a minute and a half not moving vs. 25 seconds in the remake.
The longer shot is devastating to watch as a viewer (I saw the original first) because all the guilt of spectation of "people's" worst moments, like we're feeding off a real misery, to a brutal and true empathy.
So the shot-to-shot isn't exact.
I still think the re-wind scene was pretty stupid. There's nothing wrong with breaking the cliches of storytelling, but the re-wind scene just seemed silly. Like a director blatantly telling you that his movie is different. Show don't tell mother fuckers.
I thought so my first viewing, and the more I watch the film the more I really love the choice to include that scene, but hey man, everyone's entitled to their opinion. I can definitely see where you're coming from, it's a weird thing to have happen in an otherwise viscerally realistic film.
this movie made me feel like shit but the acting was fucking incredible. there is one scene where they are just sitting in the living room after the intruders left and the camera doesnt pull away for like what seemed to be 10 minutes. It's just them sitting there in shock about what just happened. great acting and directing, however, i would never this shit again it was dreadful.
I'd probably never want to watch this movie (in fact, I walked out of the Austrian version, I suspected something was up after the cell phone got dunked). That being said, I think I see your point. I watched the first season of True Detective and thought: :"That was brilliant. Now I never want to see this again."
Tim Roth and Naomi Watts performances is what made this movie so unsettling. The way they're faces were dripping with sweat and tears as they're shaking uncontrollably after their son dies is what got me. It felt so real and authentic as they were trying to move on to find help.
Totally agree. Funnily enough, Tim Roth(the actor that plays the father) refuses to watch this film, saying that shooting the movie "traumatized" him, it appears that Haneke went to Kubrick level craziness to get those performances, but man are they good.
I think one of the most interesting things to happen in the film is the killing of Tubby (Peter). Of the three people who get shot in this movie, his shooting is the only one that occurs on-screen. It is also the violent thing to happen on-screen throughout the entire movie. This is Hanake giving the audience exactly what they want. By this point in the movie, the audience is no better than Peter and Paul. They want to see violence so Hanake gives it to them and then says "Fuck you" with the rewind scene. He is punishing the audience for their bloodlust. It's really clever and something that doesn't get mentioned enough in my opinion
Pffft, 'punishing the audience for their bloodlust', the cringe is palpable. And God forbid an audience should expect equal and consistent treatment and payoffs where character deaths, either good or bad, are concerned. No doubt the same excuse self confessed sadomasochist/pedophile/hypocrite Lloyd Kaufman fed himself when he decided that the hit and run killers from 'The Toxic Avenger' (a vicarious influence on Hanneke) didn't deserve the same kind of pornographically violent death he was otherwise happy to portray in every self indulgently sick detail. Wouldn't want to shatter the private fantasy, would we? You're dismissed
While this is true, and from what I gather, it was Haneke's intent. I always thought that was strange to judge the audience for bloodlust, of course we wanted to see Peter or Paul get killed, after all of the suffering they put the family through, we wanted vengeance, I think that's normal for most people. But either way, still a great scene, totally shocked me the first time I saw it.
Very well done essay as always. I for one hate movies like this. When I was younger I was fine with them, but I just get disgusted by them now. I no longer feel like punishing myself by choice. Cruelty in this world no longer needs to have a spotlight on it... it shines so very brightly on it's own.
Great video, I'm really into your stuff. I was thinking about the violence in this movie in terms of how Nicloas Winding Refn describes it. He essentially says that violence in film is a lot like sex, it's really about how invested you are to the build up, as opposed to the actual climax. Violent scenes that really stay with you are the ones that have a carefully crafted build up to the ultimate moment. Funny Games is a film that is only build up. The audience keeps getting built up and up, only to be robbed of their climax because it's always shown off camera. Even when it is on camera, like Peter getting shot for instance, the audience is still robbed of the climax when it's all undone. It's all build up to the moments of gore/torture/climax, without the satisfaction. When Ann and George keep asking "why are you doing this?" Paul responds, "it's not for me, it's for them" and motions to the camera. To me, this film is largely an answer to people who love torture movies. It makes you feel guilty for enjoying it when you are directly told by the antagonist that the only reason this is happening to these people is because you want to watch it, that's why you're here. Paul is simply delivering on what needs to happen to keep the audience happy.
That's a really interesting point, that it's almost like Paul and Peter know it's a movie, but the family does not. I think it's why many find the film so disturbing as well, we normally love violence, but Haneke really pushes those boundaries and makes us feel guilty when watching. Powerful stuff, one of my favorite films.
I think the biggest achievment of this film is actually his social critics. It treats the viewer as a spoiled children hungry for violence, and that's what Haneke gives us, violence and suffering, no matter if something doesn't make sense. There's a LOT of plot and continuity errors in there, and that's really unusual on a filme by such a perfeccionist director. On a first view, these errors might seem like a problem, but if you look deep, they actually play a part on this very same message the film wants to tell.
Totally! And I think these reactions actually confirms and intensifies what the movie is talking about, as they usually come from people who are looking for nothing but violence (and they get it, just not the way they are used to).
I think the frustration happens because people watch thrillers and violence to feel scared, but Haneke gives us pure violence by itself, even if the movie loses connection to reality, in Funny Games the violence must go on (e.g. the remote control scene).
great video. hope you're watching more. white ribbon is the most terrifying move I've ever seen. also I think this move is more than how violence is portrayed in media. I think there's a continuation of that as how we, the audience consume the violence. great scene Naomi shoots guy we cheer... the rewind... now the audience is upset.
Thanks man, that's quite the compliment! Sadly this is the only film of his I've seen(I know, I'm awful) but it's one of my favorites. I really look forward to delving into his career in the future, particularly looking forward to watching his films: Cache, Amour, and Benny's Video.
The remote rewind scene was what made me really dislike the film. As you noted, the whole film is filled with set-ups and pay-offs, but there is suddenly a random event that was never set up and never recurs. The rest of the film feels like a skilled writer toying with the audience, but this scene just feels like an author who wrote himself into a corner and had to resort to bad writing to get himself out.
I'm a little bit late to the discussion, but I perceived this scene as it was just the first time the audience saw the remote being used. One of the most convenient thing in horror movies is how everything always turns out in favor of the killer even if the scenario is complete stupidity. With a remote like that they can redo a scene hundreds of time until they get it right, and that's the only logical way movies like Halloween and Friday the 13th auctually can be played out. It's just a way to show that the killer has complete control of everything at all times.
Adam N. Webber i actually think it added to the mystery and the whole "what the fuck is going on" factor of it, and just really making the viewer believe that regardless, the victims are trapped.
it ties in with he conversation the boys had at the end of the movie, about the "real world" and "alternate universe" but we never got to hear the entire thing, they knew something that the audience didn't, and it goes against all rules and cliches in every other pyschological thriller.
i think it was brilliant.
Adam N. Webber well understandable Paul never hit rewind plus its supposed to be related to real life u can't rewind life n unfortunately this has happened to many people it's to show that not everyone gets to have a happy end
to me not only felt like it was meant to make people participants or witnesses but to also remove any sort of power or control we might still have. we are left completely helpless and powerless to the killers.
Heh heh, good choice! I'd do a GOT vid too, but I already did! XD Can't wait to see it tho! Oh also Nerdwriter1 channel did a GOT vid, don't know if you know "The Nerdwriter", but his channel is the best thing on YouTube! .. er well, tied with yours maybe :D (But really you gotta keeps it up, your vids are top-notch).
If you are here, it means you are either looking for a good movie or TV shows streaming App for your smartphone. There is no doubt that you have chosen the Cartoon HD App for this purpose. Once you decide to use Cartoon HD the next thing which required is APK file of this app because it’s not available on Google Play Store. So here in this post, I will provide you step by step assistance to download Cartoon HD APK file , and the proper way to install it on Android phones.
Cartoon HD is one of the most popular Movies and TV shows streaming app for Android and iOS. The app gains popularity in very short span of time. The App is loaded with excellent features with a vast library of Movies and TV shows. As the name itself refers cartoon HD , here, you will get all videos in high definition quality. Apart from this it has also provision for watching the same video iल different quality such as low, medium and high as per your wish and your internet speed.
In this post, I’ll guide on how to download Cartoon HD APK & install it on the smartphone . You can download Cartoon HD for your iOS and Android. If you want to enjoy the all features of Cartoon HD on your PC then it can also be done. Here is a separate article on that topic too, please refer.
Before discussing how to download Cartoon HD APK, first of all, have a look on some of the best features of Cartoon HD app. These features are more enough to prove that your choice for Cartoon HD App is absolutely right. The features of Cartoon HD app are as follows.
Features of Cartoon HD App for Android.
The App is completely free, so you do not need to pay a single coin for downloading it. The user interface of the app is very simple, you will fall in love with it. The app is available for Android and iOS platforms. So either you are an Android phone user or a iOS, i.e., iPhone or iPad user you can enjoy the streaming of your favorite movie and TV shows in High Definition video quality.