Oldboy

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.

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 .............!

Woody acting and product placement ruined this movie for me. i'm not sure how he did it, but spike lee even manged to make 20 years in captivity feel rushed and uneventful. to elaborate further, there was ZERO character development, everything felt pushed along, including the 20 years in the room. he was just a pitiful alcoholic for YEARS, then "EPIPHANY", a five minute montage of getting clean and getting in shape annnnd he's out. there was no passion to it, there was no empathy that you get from the original, you don't feel sorry for him. he's just a sociopath on a revenge spree. although, i think the big ending twist was done well, the overall movie was a snooze fest. they even managed to make a pivotal scene, the hallway fight, BORING and pushed along.

everything the main character is, is because of that room, his life, his persona, his transformation, and his realizations. it had no heart. the subtlety and nuances of the original are just lacking. like i said, you you don't care about the characters, you're just waiting to see what happens next...and what made it even worse, is that i KNOW what's going to happen next, but dammit, i wanted my money's worth.

Hollywood remakes of Asian films are always an iffy proposition. How will the nuances and culturally-specific references translate across oceans and continents? Generally, however good the remakes, they rarely – if ever – eclipse the original films. In recent memory, perhaps only Martin Scorsese's The Departed, based on Infernal Affairs, has managed to find a life of its own. Other remakes, like The Lake House and Shall We Dance?, have sunk into ignominy. Spike Lee's Oldboy isn't completely terrible, but it does lose quite a bit of the dark, bruising, ambivalent flavour of Park Chan-Wook's 2003 Korean classic.

Josh Brolin takes centre stage in Lee's version. He sinks credibly into the abrasive, drunken skin of Joe Doucett, a slimy guy whose wife and daughter Mia have left him. Nevertheless, Joe continues to merrily offend everyone around him, until he is abruptly kidnapped and trapped in a hotel room for twenty years. During his arduous time spent in solitary confinement, Joe ponders the mystery of his captor. When he finally gets free, he resolves to seek revenge and re-connect with Mia – a mission that becomes increasingly fraught with complications as horrifying secrets from his past are unearthed.

On its own merits, Oldboy – the title as obtuse as ever – is passably gripping. It entertains and horrifies in equal measure, packing in a great deal of bone-crunching violence and torture that runs the gamut from physical to psychological and everything in between. The relationship that develops between Joe and charity worker Marie (Elizabeth Olsen) is well-acted, if a little forced. Lee even cooks up a pretty disturbing face-off between Joe and Chaney (Samuel L. Jackson), the guy in charge of locking up people for his clients – no questions asked.

What works rather less well is the deliberate dilution of the twist in Oldboy's tale, presumably because American audiences can only handle so much moral and emotional ambiguity. Where Park's version sees the revenge mission warped with a horrifyingly emotional dilemma, Lee's film shies away from the conundrum. As a result, the film becomes far less subtle and considerably more melodramatic. There's a flashback sequence towards the end of the film that's ridiculous enough to make audiences laugh rather than gasp, even as blood splatters across walls and families are torn apart.

The cast assembled is impressive, even though they're not really given a lot to work with in the frequently stilted, over-blown script. Brolin anchors the film with admirably stony determination, but his Joe never seems to really feel the weight of his twenty years without human contact. Olsen, too, stumbles around a bit, as if never quite sure how to play her part, and Sharlto Copley comes close to overplaying his hand when he emerges from the shadows to drop a few hints about the reasons behind Joe's ordeal.

There's enough on display in Oldboy for the film to jog by at a fairly quick clip. Lee pays tribute along the way to a few iconic elements of the Korean film – an octopus in a tank, a prolonged battle in a corridor – and the cast tries its hardest to make it all work. But it's hard to shake the feeling that something a little deeper, richer, sadder and weirder was lost in translating the film into a vernacular more pleasing to Hollywood audiences.

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.