Michael Pitt and Brady Corbet in Funny Games Courtesy of Warner Independent Pictures

But are you manipulating them towards something you've designed entirely beforehand, or are you more flexible within a situation to read what's going on and to pull the script there? Or is it both?
It is both, but my tendency is to bring them there where I wanted them all along.

Can you explain why you didn't give [Pitt and Corbet's characters] a backstory?
Because they're not characters. [laughs]

What are they?
They're cartoons!

Who had a harder job as actors in this film, the two young men playing killers or the family playing victims? Which was harder?
Oh, you'll have to ask them. But I think to play good is always difficult. Of course to have tears and cry is hard. But I think it's not easy to play the bad guy. Both are fantastic in my opinion, they are so talented, they have so much charm too, and it brings another whole element to it. Those guys are really a gift — fantastic.

Most of the scenes are similar to the original...
No, it's the same. Exactly the same text as in the original. The film is completely the same film. Seven seconds [longer].

I thought it was four minutes longer?
No it is not. Seven seconds — when I was cutting the film at the half-time I said to the cutter, let's see how long we are and it was a difference of seven seconds. And at the end, it was at least twenty seconds and now the film is three minutes longer because of all the titles at the beginning and the end — you have to have a lot more credits in the United States than in Europe.

Is there any significance to the fact that the two killers are played by Americans, and the parents are played by British actors?
[laughs] No, it's just coincidence. For me, Naomi Watts and Tim Roth are, in the public mind, actors from American cinema. So it was just coincidence that they are both from England.

Arno Frisch in the original version of Funny Games Courtesy of Kino International

Some people really enjoyed this movie, while others have hated the film. Some of the actors in the film have responded to that by saying, well, maybe those people shouldn't see it.
Well, I always say, those who watch it to the end, they apparently needed it. Those who don't watch it or don't watch it to the end, they apparently did not need it. But for critics, that's another story — they have to watch it! [laughs]

But what about those who watch it to the end to see how you resolve this experiment that you're doing?
I mean, ok, then this is an intellectual exercise and they apparently didn't suffer that much. I mean I just think it's a little hypocritical if people watch the film to the end and then they say, "Ugh, what an awful...!" [laughs]

But what if they watch it to see — this is an experimental film — you're experimenting. So what if the audience watches it to the end just to see how the experiment ends?
Any good film should be an experiment.

Do you plan on making any more American films, or is this it for you?
You should never say never, but it all depends on the circumstances. I mean, I'm working on two projects right now in Europe and I'm in between doing some operas. I'm sixty-six years old and… we'll see. [laughs]