प्रतिशोध से ग्रस्त, एक आदमी यह पता लगाने के लिए बाहर निकलता है कि उसे अपहरण क्यों किया गया और बिना किसी कारण बीस साल तक एकांत कारावास में क्यों बंद रखा गया थाप्रतिशोध से ग्रस्त, एक आदमी यह पता लगाने के लिए बाहर निकलता है कि उसे अपहरण क्यों किया गया और बिना किसी कारण बीस साल तक एकांत कारावास में क्यों बंद रखा गया थाप्रतिशोध से ग्रस्त, एक आदमी यह पता लगाने के लिए बाहर निकलता है कि उसे अपहरण क्यों किया गया और बिना किसी कारण बीस साल तक एकांत कारावास में क्यों बंद रखा गया था
- पुरस्कार
- 4 कुल नामांकन
Cinqué Lee
- Bellhop
- (as Cinque Lee)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
Remakes are generally a bad idea. The percentage of remakes that are equal to or better than the original is probably less than 1%. However, English-language remakes of foreign films (or vice-versa I suppose) are a slightly different story. The percentage is still low, but maybe not quite as low. Anyway, all of this is to say that while I was skeptical of an Oldboy remake, I was not 100% against it. The benefit that a remake of a foreign film has over a regular remake is that you are pretty much forced to make things different, at least a little, simply by virtue of different tastes and filmmaking styles between cultures. That's a good thing, in theory, because all of the good remakes I can think of changed things from the original. The cookie cutter shot-for-shot remakes are the worst. Oldboy (2013) is, unfortunately, not a good remake.
In some ways the movie smartly avoids trying to copy some things from the original that would not fit with an American version. There's no hypnosis, no guy cutting his own tongue off, and no octopus scene. It's when the movie tries to copy its Korean roots that it fails most. I'm speaking particularly of the comedy and action portions, which feature Josh Brolin trying to mimic Choi Min-sik with embarrassing results. Obviously the biggest problem is that the twist that the first movie relied so heavily on is going to be spoiled for a large portion of the audience that will even want to see this one. Worse, this remake seems to telegraph the twist in ways the original didn't. I watched the movie with friends who hadn't seen the original and they all figured out the twist and none were particularly shocked by it. Finally, it ends with the type of bizarre "happy" ending that plays to the worst stereotypes of Hollywood filmmaking.
Josh Brolin was probably a weak choice to play the lead. He's not awful but just very unimpressive. Sharlto Copley, however, is terrible. Absolutely horrid. Yoo Ji-Tae was so good in the original film. He gave a sympathetic performance that actually made you feel for his character, even when you're being repulsed by his actions. In contrast, Copley is a completely unsympathetic foppish cartoon villain. To make matters worse, Samuel L. Jackson also appears in the movie in a villainous role and, of course, his huge personality makes Copley appear all the more underwhelming. The only real bright spot in the cast is Elizabeth Olsen, who continues to impress and is definitely headed for bigger things than this. Spike Lee's direction is workmanlike and uninspired. The less said about it the better. Yes it's a poor remake but, more importantly, it's a poor film altogether.
In some ways the movie smartly avoids trying to copy some things from the original that would not fit with an American version. There's no hypnosis, no guy cutting his own tongue off, and no octopus scene. It's when the movie tries to copy its Korean roots that it fails most. I'm speaking particularly of the comedy and action portions, which feature Josh Brolin trying to mimic Choi Min-sik with embarrassing results. Obviously the biggest problem is that the twist that the first movie relied so heavily on is going to be spoiled for a large portion of the audience that will even want to see this one. Worse, this remake seems to telegraph the twist in ways the original didn't. I watched the movie with friends who hadn't seen the original and they all figured out the twist and none were particularly shocked by it. Finally, it ends with the type of bizarre "happy" ending that plays to the worst stereotypes of Hollywood filmmaking.
Josh Brolin was probably a weak choice to play the lead. He's not awful but just very unimpressive. Sharlto Copley, however, is terrible. Absolutely horrid. Yoo Ji-Tae was so good in the original film. He gave a sympathetic performance that actually made you feel for his character, even when you're being repulsed by his actions. In contrast, Copley is a completely unsympathetic foppish cartoon villain. To make matters worse, Samuel L. Jackson also appears in the movie in a villainous role and, of course, his huge personality makes Copley appear all the more underwhelming. The only real bright spot in the cast is Elizabeth Olsen, who continues to impress and is definitely headed for bigger things than this. Spike Lee's direction is workmanlike and uninspired. The less said about it the better. Yes it's a poor remake but, more importantly, it's a poor film altogether.
If the original version of "Oldboy" has a perfect 10 out 10, this one has a mixed 6 out 10.
At first, I just came back from the theater and I found this movie a very poor remake if I compare it with the excellence, the complexity and power of the Asian film. That film was purely brilliance. So this new version was really promising but had the bar raising too high.
From Spike Lee we could expect a truly mesmerizing movie or a very weak one. And in this case I say that this one is not so bad as it looks like here. It's obvious that some people is apparently going too far. It's a disappointing movie, but not a bad movie. It focuses too much in blood and gory instead of the script and the complexity of the characters and situations. The ending can be a bit upsetting for some viewers.
Josh Brolin is one of the better things of this version. His performance is as good as he always do his roles. The rest of the cast is between average or good. Nothing remarkable under my watch.
So, this "Oldboy" is not a brilliant movie or a powerful remake but it's an entertaining one. It's weird and bloody. Be prepared for that.
At first, I just came back from the theater and I found this movie a very poor remake if I compare it with the excellence, the complexity and power of the Asian film. That film was purely brilliance. So this new version was really promising but had the bar raising too high.
From Spike Lee we could expect a truly mesmerizing movie or a very weak one. And in this case I say that this one is not so bad as it looks like here. It's obvious that some people is apparently going too far. It's a disappointing movie, but not a bad movie. It focuses too much in blood and gory instead of the script and the complexity of the characters and situations. The ending can be a bit upsetting for some viewers.
Josh Brolin is one of the better things of this version. His performance is as good as he always do his roles. The rest of the cast is between average or good. Nothing remarkable under my watch.
So, this "Oldboy" is not a brilliant movie or a powerful remake but it's an entertaining one. It's weird and bloody. Be prepared for that.
This was the first version of the film I watched as I didn't know about the Korean Original (I was just scrolling through Netflix) and on the first viewing, I just enjoyed it as a decent B movie.
However today I saw the original "Oldboy" in the cinema and I have to say, as a stand alone film this version is alright. But compared to the Korean original, it's just absolute garbage.
I'm glad I saw this version first as when I watched the original, I wasn't as shook up as I may have been with how the plot unfolds. The Korean version is in every way superior and much more dark, but this film is a much more simplified version of he story and a decent B movie if you haven't seen the original.
It's worth watching, but watch the original too.
However today I saw the original "Oldboy" in the cinema and I have to say, as a stand alone film this version is alright. But compared to the Korean original, it's just absolute garbage.
I'm glad I saw this version first as when I watched the original, I wasn't as shook up as I may have been with how the plot unfolds. The Korean version is in every way superior and much more dark, but this film is a much more simplified version of he story and a decent B movie if you haven't seen the original.
It's worth watching, but watch the original too.
Why would they remake a film by the master? The whole idea behind remaking films is to remake something that was maybe a good idea but had bad execution. The original Oldboy is a 10 top to bottom, story, script, action, actors, direction, why did they try to remake perfection.
Josh Brolin is good but when you start comparing him to the pain and anguish Min-Sik Choi convaed in the Korean version there is no way to compare the two. Also I like Spike Lee and some of his work but he was the wrong choice for this.
Still not sure who thought this was a good idea, it's like eating a McRib when you can have Korean BBQ, which one sounds better to you. Watch the Korean version.
Josh Brolin is good but when you start comparing him to the pain and anguish Min-Sik Choi convaed in the Korean version there is no way to compare the two. Also I like Spike Lee and some of his work but he was the wrong choice for this.
Still not sure who thought this was a good idea, it's like eating a McRib when you can have Korean BBQ, which one sounds better to you. Watch the Korean version.
I admit, I watched this film with half a mind on the original and hence it should have been doomed before the opening credits had rolled by. Reading various other reviews, the film was never going to be a hit with the so called "connoisieur" However, once I got over my own pomposity, I was pleasantly surprised and, admittedly with a nod to the original, don't think a much better job of a remake could have been managed.
The remake is not as good a film as the original. That out of the way - as a stand alone and to the viewer who does not know about the 2003 film, this is very good viewing.
The fight scenes were entertaining. Acting good. Good pace. Story good. Basically,nothing bad. I actually thought the photography better than the original. (I also liked the nod to the original's octopus).
In summary, if you have seen the original you are always going to be judging one against the other and Korea will win. Also dismiss me as a Philistine but I don't enjoy subtitled movies as much as English speaking ones. I don't have the intellect to understand every (or indeed any) foreign film without having to miss half the cinematography reading.
If you haven't seen the original, watch this. It is good. It's just that some critics have got there heads so far up their .............!
The remake is not as good a film as the original. That out of the way - as a stand alone and to the viewer who does not know about the 2003 film, this is very good viewing.
The fight scenes were entertaining. Acting good. Good pace. Story good. Basically,nothing bad. I actually thought the photography better than the original. (I also liked the nod to the original's octopus).
In summary, if you have seen the original you are always going to be judging one against the other and Korea will win. Also dismiss me as a Philistine but I don't enjoy subtitled movies as much as English speaking ones. I don't have the intellect to understand every (or indeed any) foreign film without having to miss half the cinematography reading.
If you haven't seen the original, watch this. It is good. It's just that some critics have got there heads so far up their .............!
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाElizabeth Olsen did not know the ending of the film until she watched it for the first time at the New York City premiere. "I've never been more shocked and surprised by an ending since maybe like द सिक्थ सेन्स (1999)," Olsen said. "No one spoiled it for me. No one hinted at it for me. And I got to experience it with just a blank canvas."
- गूफ़(at around 1h 12 mins) When Joe sneaks into Edwina Burke's (Evergreen Headmistress) home while she's talking to Marie, he pulls out a yearbook. He looks into the yearbook and the name says "Adrian Pryce". Then when the shot zooms in, it says "Adrian Doyle Pryce". When Joe and Marie return back to the motel, Marie takes a picture of the yearbook photo where it now returns back to just "Adrian Pryce".
- कनेक्शनFeatured in WatchMojo: Another Top 10 Worst Hollywood Remakes (2012)
- साउंडट्रैकMysteries of Crimea
Written and performed by Bruce Hornsby
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Oldboy?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Oldboy: Días de venganza
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $3,00,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $21,93,658
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $8,85,382
- 1 दिस॰ 2013
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $51,86,767
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 44 मि(104 min)
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.35 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें