MovieChat Forums > Funny Games (1998) Discussion > Regarding Peter and him crying.

Regarding Peter and him crying.

posted 6 years ago by TheMan18 (12480)
4 replies | jump to latest

When Peter was crying before Paul interrupted him to (apparently tell made up) stories about him, what do you think he was meant to say, what was it in him that later turned him into a sadistic psychopath and what kind of traumatic childhood or life did he have?

Did his parents really abuse him and did he have a drug problem, was he in some or other ways confronted with his sexual orientation or was he perhaps just putting on an act to ensure that during the whole torturous ordeal, the family ends up being sorry for him and doesn't get a strength and a desire to hurt him even in self defense, regardless of whether or not its all true and that there really IS a motive or a reason these two people turned evil psychopaths?

[–] illnagas (457) 6 years ago

Not completely sure what you’re asking but I think the entire movie is an exercise in teasing audience expectations. The long story about abuse is something a traditional movie might do to provide some character development and then watch as the protagonists later use that personal tidbit against their captors. But no, it was all a joke. Those things never happened. Back to the torture.

[–] TheMan18 (12480) 3 years ago

Basically, in a scene about halfway through the film, they start telling stories, possibly made up ones, about what made them that way and then the Fatty, Peter, starts crying because he doesn't want some painfully true story to be told about him, but what was it and what exactly made him cry?

Also, at one point Paul says "that's why he's gay and a thug" but with that speech, what was the director trying to say? And also, the way he said it almost sounded like "being gay" is something that one becomes rather than perhaps being born with and he also connects "being a thug" to it but was that simply the director darkly satirizing the many stereotypes that also have existed in, Austrian, 90s or otherwise, societies?

[–] MiguelGordon (446) 3 years ago

I respect your commitment in still trying to clarify your point 4 years after the original post.

I think you may be overthinking it though (or maybe I'm underthinking it?) because to me this scene just seemed like more of their lies, I don't think there was much meaning behind the charade.

However this scene and others did leave me with the impression that Paul was the more dominant member of the sadistic duo.

[–] TheMan18 (12480) 9 months ago

Maybe he was putting an act in that scene to imply somehow that something traumatic happened in the past and he wanted to make Paul's explanation about it to the family more believable that way.