It's just one of those fucked up movies, and obviously you freak out with eek-eyed shock everytime a male member gets lopped off - but then again, all such members get severed as a result of some form of sexual violence, disrespect or just plain old perviness.
Otherwise, I wasn't particularly fussed by the rest of the movie at all, and ended up skimming a magazine at the same time between the shock parts of the movie. Basically that's it, I found it to be generally "meh/alright" with moments of intense "WTF" mixed in.
Finally got around to checking this one out, and yet again another fucked up film. Mind you, there's barely any violence on screen. Apparently the director is harping on at we the viewer because we should be ashamed of ourselves for watching movies like SAW and Rambo.
Ugh - roll eyes time - fair play you could say, but I think all movies have a purpose (whether it's worth while or not is a per-movie assessment though).
For example, Rambo is a great film and the greatest slice of old school, hardcore action blokery since the 1980s. Yes, it's exceptionally violent and gory - but importantly, you're shocked when said violence is descended upon the innocent, and then you're cheering when it's dished back out against the vile, scum-sucking military junta who conduct themselves in an excessively sickening manner. Plus, it does highlight the Burmese plight while at the same time providing action entertainment - what's wrong with that?
As for SAW, it was the set-up that hooked me in first of all, and then the twisting of the story. The gore in the first one is present, but far from excessive (so I'd say anyway), and it was the plight the character's faced that captured my attention - and indeed the twist had me slack-jawed and WTF-ing for a good while after the end credits. SAW II, which was based on a non-SAW script, wasn't cracked up to much. A naff story and often cringe-inducing gore gags didn't leave a good impression, but then SAW III - with it's back-tracking plot and better story - redelivered the goods. Mind you, the gore gags were far more gruesome than the first film ... and it becomes less about entertainment, than shock cinema survival.
Then came SAW IV ... which was a total load of garbage, no doubt SAW V and indeed VI will continue in the same vein as IV.
But anyway - Funny Games, which is what I'm supposed to be on about. Superb performances throughout by all involved, and as a result the simple story often keeps you gripped (even if at times the pacing felt a bit sluggish at certain points). That said, some of the quieter moments - like trying to raise the alarm seemingly after the worst is over - feels real and honest, and indeed the off-screen violence does up the power of the action, but then again so does using a target that is rarely used in film (you'll see what I mean about half way through).
So a generally impressive film, but I do object to the eye-roll-inducing, somewhat holier-than-thou preaching regarding on-screen violence ... I mean, chill out - you're making a fictional movie, sheesh.
Also - I'd much rather have mankind work out their inner turmoil, violence, hatred and all other nasty goings on in a safe medium - such as videogames, or film - rather than do what the vast minority do and take it out on real people, on the real streets and in the real homes of our real, actual world.