Spike Lee to direct Oldboy remake

johnny_ultimate

Looks fairly harmless, really. One to ignore unless consensus agrees Lee goes against the grain and transforms it into the next masterpiece he seemingly forgot to make after 25th Hour.

Aidric

Sad Professor wrote: »

Decent but redundant and totally inferior to the original.

The original is a bona fide masterpiece. Some things should be left stand.

QikBax

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Looks fairly harmless, really. One to ignore unless consensus agrees Lee goes against the grain and transforms it into the next masterpiece he seemingly forgot to make after 25th Hour.

Would love to see Park Chan Wook remake 25th hour instead. It's an underrated American classic

Corholio

Usually there's something in a trailer that's even half interesting, there was nothing in that that would make me go see it.

Just seems loud and brash. What I loved about the original was that a lot of it was just thinking, in between the violent bits it was just a guy figuring out everything in his mind.

Zero-Cool

The daughter

in the tapes has to be a fake.

. Hollywood wouldn't make that big a change to the ending would they.....WOULD THEY???

Da Shins Kelly

Looks like a pile of crap.

Skerries

yeah I was thinking that the tv was fake and the other Olsen sister is in fact his daughter

Zero-Cool

I never watch trailers for films (I really want to see) anymore, the whole plot is shown. They show way too f*cking much in that trailer! Spoon Feeding the dummies who have to have a whole film explained to them before they can commit to 2 hours of their attention.

sheehy83

sheehy83 wrote: »

I never watch trailers for films (I really want to see) anymore, the whole plot is shown. They show way too f*cking much in that trailer! Spoon Feeding the dummies who have to have a whole film explained to them before they can commit to 2 hours of their attention.

That is such crap, the average cinema goer gets far too much abuse from those who think their taste is far more refined.

The reason the entire plot is distilled down into 90 seconds is because the studios are afraid to take risks and simply don't trust in the intelligence of their audience. Do you really think that people want every twist revealed? One of the most common complaints that the studios get from the average cinema goer is that the trailers ruin many a film.

Zero-Cool

I wouldn't say I have refined taste, don't care about cinematography, lighting or angles of shots but I do know a fair few people who won't watch a film unless they see the trailer, even if it gives away story/plot whatever. If I try to say, just watch the film, don't look it up, they'll say, naw, have to see a trailer first.

Watching films without looking them up or watching trailers can be risky but worth it if's a good flick.

sheehy83

sheehy83 wrote: »

I wouldn't say I have refined taste, don't care about cinematography, lighting or angles of shots but I do know a fair few people who won't watch a film unless they see the trailer, even if it gives away story/plot whatever. If I try to say, just watch the film, don't look it up, they'll say, naw, have to see a trailer first.

Watching films without looking them up or watching trailers can be risky but worth it if's a good flick.

Most people want to see a trailer or a teaser before committing 90+ minutes to a film. While I rarely watch trailers for films I'm looking forward and love nothing more than finding a film that I no nothing about but more often than not it can make for a more rewarding experience to know a little about what you are watching. After all, what's to stop someone recommending Movie 43 as something you need to watch? I'd hate to go to the bother of getting a copy and not knowing just how poorly it's been received. One look at the reviews or the trailer would be enough for me not to bother with it.

Zero-Cool

Speaking of, I was interested in seeing Movie 43 with the amount of people in it but IMDB says stay away so i did. Now one of the lads said he recommends it and he really enjoyed it....

Marty McFly

Jesus that looks terrible, if your going to do a remake at least add some your own twists to it, it looks exactly like a poorer carbon copy also they gave away so much of the plot in the trailer imo.

kraggy

Mickeroo wrote: »

I'd be surprised if that were the case but it certainly looks that way on the surface. For now I'm going to assume it's a ploy of some sort by his captors and the girl he bangs is in fact his daughter.

But isn't that what happened in the original. That that's what made the ending so extreme. His realization.

Or am I picking you up wrong?

Mickeroo

kraggy wrote: »

But isn't that what happened in the original. That that's what made the ending so extreme. His realization.

Or am I picking you up wrong?

In the original he never saw what his daughter looked like as an adult I thought? Which is how he ended up sleeping with her. In this trailer it looks like he sees her on TV before he gets out, but it could be a case of the trailer being edited to make it seem that way or also that it's just a ploy by his captors and that's not really his daughter he sees.

pixelburp

If there's one good thing to come out of a remake like this, is that it'll drive more people to watch the original.

People... such as myself. Much to my embaressment, it's one of those movies I keep meaning to watch, but circumstance / forgetfulness gets in the way. If nothing else I want to see what's behind those damnable grey spoiler bars!

Mickeroo

pixelburp wrote: »

If there's one good thing to come out of a remake like this, is that it'll drive more people to watch the original.

People... such as myself. Much to my embaressment, it's one of those movies I keep meaning to watch, but circumstance / forgetfulness gets in the way. If nothing else I want to see what's behind those damnable grey spoiler bars!

Watch it tonight!! It's on netflix, if you don't have a copy.

pixelburp

Mickeroo wrote: »

Watch it tonight!! It's on netflix, if you don't have a copy.

Yup, watching it at the moment

pixelburp

Well that was ... strange. In my mind I thought it was going to be a balls-to-the-wall revenge movie (I guess that infamous hallway scene gave me a false impression of the film as a whole), but it was far more sedate, macabre and utterly surreal in reality, with moments of really dark humour throughout. A very odd film, in a good way.

And that was before I got to the twist. Whoah. A completely effed up climax - even if it hinged on a slightly iffy premise - and I can totally understand why people are sceptical this remake will go anywhere near that sort of territory. In fact, I wonder if the remake will indeed be more of an exploitative revenge flick, with action aplenty and less of the introspective drama...

Fysh

pixelburp wrote: »

Well that was ... strange. In my mind I thought it was going to be a balls-to-the-wall revenge movie (I guess that infamous hallway scene gave me a false impression of the film as a whole), but it was far more sedate, macabre and utterly surreal in reality, with moments of really dark humour throughout. A very odd film, in a good way.

And that was before I got to the twist. Whoah. A completely effed up climax - even if it hinged on a slightly iffy premise - and I can totally understand why people are sceptical this remake will go anywhere near that sort of territory. In fact, I wonder if the remake will indeed be more of an exploitative revenge flick, with action aplenty and less of the introspective drama...

If you enjoy Chan-Wook's direction and want a more straightforward revenge thriller, Sympathy For Mr. Vengeance is well worth a watch. Not as twisted as Oldboy (though still with its moments of dark humour) but still very good as a revenge thriller.

Here's an online comic that fills in some of the back-story.

Oat23

Hehe..

The film, a remake of Chan-wook Park's 2003 classic, bombed making just $850,000 opening weekend. Not a great start at all for a movie that costs an estimated $30 million to make and has the star power of Josh Brolin and Samuel L. Jackson.

e_e

I haven't been so morbidly curious to see something since The Wicker Man remake.

Marty McFly

I don't know I'm kinda pissed off they remade and just can't see how it will compare to the original but still kinda want to see it to more than likely moan about it.

I think it will be one them films I'll wait till it's released on Blu Ray to watch.

spacecoyote

The thing about it to me is...the type of people that this is aimed at are all likely people who have seen the original, so it holds basically no surprises for them and not necessarily any appeal

I absolutely loved the original OldBoy, but theres no way I would bring the missus to see it in the Cinema. Its very much an acquired taste. I gave it to a lad in work who I thought would enjoy it, but it turned out that

if you have kids

it gives you a very different perspective on the movie

Fysh

Having seen (and loved) the original, there's no way I'm arsed watching this. I've read some of the original comics and will get around to finishing them, but this pointless remake will remain forever unwatched, as far as I'm concerned.

The news about the graphic designer who claims to have come up with the design used in the poster being screwed over and not paid doesn't exactly make me keener on seeing the film either, especially given Lee's "I don't give rat's ass, I got mine"-style responses...

e_e

Going to see it tomorrow and if nothing else, it will give me more appreciation of what's so great about the original. I've never bought into the idea that a remake can spoil the original anyway, if anything I think the opposite.

Sometimes you have to watch something terrible to appreciate the good stuff. Who knows, it might be enjoyable in its own way too.

Marty McFly

It got unanimously panned on BBC Film 2013 last night,not one of them could even find one positive thing to say about it. Sounds like a complete disaster of a movie which most people expected.

Zero-Cool

Without spoilering for people, can anyone tell me does it keep the same ending as the original?

Sad Professor

sheehy83 wrote: »

Without spoilering for people, can anyone tell me does it keep the same ending as the original?

Same twist for the most part but totally different, supposedly darker ending that won't offend American audiences.

PanaDrama

Utterly pointless movie remake from a director who hasn't made anything remotely passable in years.

No huge surprise that this turned out to be a crapfest.

TerrorFirmer

I saw the trailer in the cinema recently, and for anyone who's seen the original, it seemed to be a by the numbers remake, which thus alienates the large audience of those who've already seen it, who would arguably have made up a large portion of the cinema going audience.

Giruilla

Looks like it's far from being a 'The Departed' to 'Infernal Affairs'.

Oat23

Oat23 wrote: »

Hehe..

to be fair it opened on less than 600 screens and was up against The Hunger Games which was destined to be huge

krudler

e_e wrote: »

I haven't been so morbidly curious to see something since The Wicker Man remake.

unless Brolin is going around the countryside punching women in the face and screaming about bees then nothing will come close to the majesty of The Wicker Man remake.

e_e

Saw it today, not terribly made but so damn ordinary and lacking in the fierce kineticism of the original. Sharlto Copley is genuinely terrible in it too.

roboshatner

I am so glad it did terrible.....Brolin is a good actor but he should have stayed well clear of it.

Love the Orginal and managed to stay the test of time dispite all the controversy it has had.

Alfred Borden

never saw the original but just back from this today, found it very enjoyable with a genius twist in it, good acting too!

roboshatner

your breaking my heart saying that you have never seen it go out buy it and send me a message...true classic.. remake a joke compared

Raf32 wrote: »

never saw the original but just back from this today, found it very enjoyable with a genius twist in it, good acting too!

Alfred Borden

roboshatner wrote: »

your breaking my heart saying that you have never seen it go out buy it and send me a message...true classic.. remake a joke compared

I just have it now actually going to watch tonight, will let you know what i think :pac:

Busi_Girl08

Right. So I saw this last night, and I must say it was shockingly poor.

Here are some of my key problems with it:

**SPOILERS FOR BOTH MOVIES**

• The acting was atrocious, very wooden and forced. In the original this could be explained with the whole hypnotism and mind bending schtick, but that was left out in this."
  
• Samuel L Jackson served no other purpose in this than to remind us that this was a Spike Lee movie. He stuck out like a sore thumb and was a big distraction
  
• The antagonist in this was turned from a calculating, damaged, heart-broken character to an even more camp Derren Brown/Ming the Merciless hybrid
  
• What was originally a disturbingly romantic story which left the audience almost sympathising with the villain for his doomed love for his sister. We knew it was wrong, but that scene on the bridge was so heartbreaking and tragic that you forgot how wrong it was, giving this story a bit more depth. In the remake they turned it into a freakshow with the super-weird family of incest.
  
• The ending was a terribly uninspired "hero becoming a martyr for the greater good" ending.
  
• It was a 2 hour long Apple advert.

Apparently there are about 35 minutes of deleted scenes. I think this is where some sense can be recovered.

PanaDrama

Spike Lee is a terrible director.


This whole venture was a cynical cash in and shame on all who participated.

e_e

PanaDrama wrote: »

Spike Lee is a terrible director.

In no way are 25th Hour, Inside Man, Clockers, Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X terribly directed films.

I'll defend Lee's previous output at least, can't muster up much of a defense of this though! If anything it's seeming even worse since I watched it.

PanaDrama

Clockers was a dire take on a quite good book.
Malcolm X is utter bilge.
25th hour? *guffaw*

Inside Job? Roflcopter.


He's a hack, he hasnt done anything remotely watchable in well over a decade.
The fact he's now doing pointless remakes just confirms how creatively bankrupt the guy is.

If you want to see just how awful a director he is then watch bamboozled, genuinely one of ther worst atrocities committed to celluloid. he's a much lauded NYC film school graduate who has done absolutely nothing to justify his reputation. Thankfully stinkers like the oldboy remake will see this charlatan consigned to the dustbin of film history.

e_e

Just saying something is blige is not gonna convince me otherwise. Most prolific directors have a few clunkers anyway.

Decuc500

PanaDrama wrote: »

If you want to see just how awful a director he is then watch bamboozled

And if you want to see how great a director he is watch He Got Game, Summer of Sam and 25th Hour.

Sometimes his films are a bit heavy handed and angry but the last word I'd use to describe him is 'hack'.

Mr Freeze

Just like the Carrie remake, instead of watching it, I just read the wikipedia synopsis.

Saved myself 105 minutes.

Fysh

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Just like the Carrie remake, instead of watching it, I just read the wikipedia synopsis.

Saved myself 105 minutes.

Just did the same thing and reached the same conclusion. Certainly glad I didn't waste time or money on it now.

Mickeroo

I probably will watch this out of curiosity at some point but I won't be going to the cinema in order to do so.

roboshatner

shocking that is....

I asked a friend of mine to watch the original Total recall....he said no I said why he said I came out before he was born.

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Just like the Carrie remake, instead of watching it, I just read the wikipedia synopsis.

Saved myself 105 minutes.