Oldboy : 5.6 ?????

5.6 ?????

WTF ? This movie should be rated way higher than that ! Ok firstly I didn't see the original . But still kick ass flick ! Great who dun it. And the twist was exceptional !!!

Re: 5.6 ?????

Please watch the original so you can prove yourself wrong

Re: 5.6 ?????

That's a terrible way to judge a movie. People are just pissed that they remade a great movie so they are rating this movie very low. I've seen both and yes, the original is better but this movie does not deserve a 5.6. It should be around 7.0 if a bunch of movie purist and fans of the original didn't just rate this low for the heck of it.

Re: 5.6 ?????

That is a fine way to judge a movie. It has the same name and similar plot to another earlier film, which is widely considered a masterpiece. So comparisons are not only inevitable, they are perfectly natural and legitimate. If they didn't want comparisons, they should have made an original film.
Now, if they wanted a good rating, they should have made a good film, that would be able to stand up to the original, but also to have its own identity, something different to say, perhaps emphasize more in some specific part of the original story. Otherwise there is no reason for its making, since people can just watch the original. I gave this film a 1. It was pure crap. I expected it to be pretty bad, but I honestly had higher expectations. Compared to the original, it had nothing. It added nothing to it, just took parts of it and simplified the story. It was neither well-directed, nor well-acted. It had no climax, it had no score. Even the theme of revenge was barely and utterly superficially explored. The characters' motivations were not clear or justifiable enough and were not in full cooperation with the movie's supposed themes.
If someone has not seen the original, they are likely to appreciate this one, because of the story (not the script, the story). But the story is not original, it was actually done much better previously, so this version deserves no credit for the story. I think it deserves a rating below 5 and it is definitely the worst film I've seen this year. Completely worthless.

I Sympathize with Lars Von Trier.

Re: 5.6 ?????

No, it's a terrible way to judge a movie. It's only a good way to judge a movie in COMPARISON to the original.


If they didn't want comparisons, they should have made an original film....Otherwise there is no reason for its making, since people can just watch the original.


This is where a lot of the ignorance comes from the fanboys.....this movie was not a widely seen movie in the US. There are plenty of people who have never even heard of the original before this movie came out. It's trying to reach out to a new audience...not sure why that's hard to get. It's completely different than if they had remade Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, a movie that was a huge success in the US. Then your point is valid.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: 5.6 ?????


Even if the original didn't exist, this would still be a dud of a film.


I'm beginning to sound like a broken record here. Look, just go over the reviews for those that 'Loved it' (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1321511/reviews?filter=love) and those that 'Hated it' (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1321511/reviews?filter=hate). Most of the highest reviews mention they did not see the original, all (or almost all) of the bottom reviews mention they did watch the original.

Then also go to the boards --- and you see several post about the same. The fanboys keep saying "no no, this 2013 remake sucked"....but they ignore the evidence suggesting that for those that didn't watch the original, they seemed to really like it.

Want even more proof! I remember the rating of this movie was in the low 5's when it came out (maybe even upper 4's early on?). It's been having to fight off the fanboy hate since then to crawl up. As more people watch this remake that didn't watch the original (especially since it's now on Netflix Streaming in the US), the score has risen. It was 5.5 (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1321511/board/nest/227159312) on March 15. It was 5.6 when this thread started on June 21. It's now at 5.7.


Re: 5.6 ?????

"I'm beginning to sound like a broken record here."

repeating a statement, doesn't make it an argument.

"laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep and you weep alone." - Dae-su Oh

Re: 5.6 ?????

The thread up so far brings to mind a famous fallacy..
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_nauseam


Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching.

Re: 5.6 ?????

Having just completed watching this film I understand why so many people dislike it. It's just not very good. This is Spike's "Paradine Case" or "1941".

Not much goes right in "Oldboy". The characters are flat, although Brolin gives it a decent shot. The fight scenes are badly choreographed, unless your a fan of the original "Batman" tv series. The pacing is not only erratic, it's mind numbingly wrong almost scene by scene. By the time we get the villain's motive, he's bored us to death.

5.6 ????? 3.0 is generous.

I have not seen the original. Combining these preposterous plot elements into a "classic" as many say the original is, would be masterful indeed.

Concerning the effect of "fanboys" on ratings the connections between data points e.g., most reviews, something from Netflix, a marginal difference in the movie's rating, are muddy. Revealing statistical analysis rests in dryer, inorganic matter.

Re: 5.6 ?????

No, the problem was not Brolin, Brolin did just fine. The production standards were also quite good. The problem lies in director's Spike Lee directing style and choices along with the screenwriter's Mark Protosevich's shameless dumping down and sanitization of the original story. All the interesting elements that made the original special were thrown out, presumably to appeal better to American audiences. The Hollywoodization of the original story amounts to a scripting slaughter and a directorial mayhem.

Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching.

Re: 5.6 ?????

Reach out to a new audience? Why not re-release the original then? They've got the rights, they could give it some proper promotion and distribution. Why make a new one that sucks instead?

I Sympathize with Lars Von Trier.

Re: 5.6 ?????

Please, for the love of god, show me examples where that worked??? I'll await your response.

Re: 5.6 ?????

I just read your side of the arguement up to this point (though I had to skip some because you did repeat yourself tirelessly). Look, as much as I understand where you are coming from and that this film COULD/ SHOULD be praised on its own merits alone... unfortunately it cannot pass JUST on its own because it is a REMAKE and it made it obvious that its a remake. So the film etc. set itself up to be compared to the original source.

Now I HAVEN'T seen neither film as of yet but I do have the Original Old Boy copy at home (but lack the time to watch it as I've heard and read that you really have to be in-the-zone for it, no time for that yet), so you cannot even say I'm fangirl-ing or I'm defending it because it's a movie made in the East. That arguement is old, repetitive and does not really prove a point except prove that the person trying to make an arguement has nothing left to argue with but to retaliate with a silly point like that.

I am making a comment because as I have stated, granted that Spike Lee is a capable director who do good work and granted (speculating here) his remake of Old Boy is technically, script-wise, etc. is sound (or good for all you across the water), basically has its own merits; unfortunately (as someone else eloquently explained before) it will always be held in comparison to the original film as it is a REMAKE.

Let me give other examples of remakes, both East Asian products:
Hana Yori Dango or Boys Over Flowers. Man, this has been remade many times, particularly on TV in Japan, Korea, China (illegally) and two other places I cannot remember right now. Basically these countries bought the right to the script/ premise/ characters of the story. Now I LOATHE the Korean re-make even though it is the most popular WAAAAY before I even saw the Japanese version because it was plain bad. Then I saw the Japanese version (not to mention the anime and read the manga) and I COULD NOT HELP MYSELF but compare EACH version across - the Japanese TV series to the anime series to the manga, to the Japanese version to the Korean version.
It HAPPENS as it is a remake.

In most cases when standards are set, there will always be expectations or criteria that will be raised or form and hence comparisons will never stop. If they did not want to be compared, like the other poster have pointed out, they should have made an original film.

Its cool that you're defending the rights to have this film viewed ENTIRELY on its own credit (strengths) but not to sound like a broken record, it's a remake.

Just got to understand that not "every" fan boy (girl) is what you think they are; some of them have brains and can actually judge whether something is good or bad and not necessarily because they "crapped" over the original (with the added fact that, the original could be from East Asia somewhere).

Re: 5.6 ?????


Look, as much as I understand where you are coming from and that this film COULD/ SHOULD be praised on its own merits alone... unfortunately it cannot pass JUST on its own because it is a REMAKE and it made it obvious that its a remake.


That's a valid point....IF it was a remake for the same audience. It is not. Few Americans have seen the original Oldboy, this was an attempt to broaden the audience. This wasn't a remake of Ghostbusters or some other American movie --- it's a remake of a Korean movie that is little seen in the US.


so you cannot even say I'm fangirl-ing or I'm defending it because it's a movie made in the East. That arguement is old, repetitive and does not really prove a point except prove that the person trying to make an arguement has nothing left to argue with but to retaliate with a silly point like that.


So you don't believe fanboying (or your case fangirling) exist?? I gave you all the evidence that suggest this is a perfect example of where the fanboys/girls have effected the movie ratings and reviews. Why won't you or anyone breakdown that argument....which is CRITICAL to the discussion and PROOF that fanboying is effecting this movie.

Basically, what you are doing, is ignoring the proof that ends and argument and instead trying to divert the discussion. [bold]Fine, if you think it should be judged and compared to the original, okay, that's your opinion. However, it doesn't take away from the fact that fanboys are rating his movie very low while those that didn't see the original seem to have a MUCH better opinion on the remake[/bold] That you can't deny.

Re: 5.6 ?????

There will never be (but I could be wrong) a time when this could be proven because by the time you get what you needed from the other person.... it could be fabricated.

Why? There could be a scenario where Spike Lee's Old Boy has done its circulation and talk amongst peers abounds towards the fact that it is a remake. What happens then? Some interests could be peaked and they will seek the original someway, somehow... and how do they do this? Illegally.

Granted that there are some who do go out and buy it from where it needs to be bought, there are some who will most likely prefer to get it for free online. Plus, you got to consider the point that, not everyone wants to pay for the almost the same thing twice.

I only happened to watch the remake of My Sassy Girl because of a discussion amongst friends about the original and remake. That was what spurred me and not because I initially wanted to. I became curious.

Re: 5.6 ?????

http://www.entertainmentfuse.com/oldboy-review-truly-unnecessary-remake/

I just read a person's thread on imdb where he posted a link to his own review of the film on a website. Here he stated in bried exactly the things in Spike Lee's Old Boy that he liked and didn't like.

Re: 5.6 ?????

Did I ever say that the remake was as good as the original? HECK no. The original is still one of my favorite foreign movies ever. My argument is that this movie is being low balled with 5.6 rating (now 5.7, and as I showed in my previous comments that it was 5.5 just a few months ago and around 5.0 when the movie came out). You act like I think this was a classic movie. You then show me one persons review as an example....while I showed you examples that consider the larger group.

What you are doing is equivalent to saying "my friend's life was saved when he didn't wear a seat belt because he was thrown from the burning car"....an anecdotal evidence, while what I'm doing is equivalent to "look at statistics...you are far more likely to survive a crash if you are wearing a seat belt than if you aren't. While there may be times someones life was saved by not wearing it, the evidence still support that seat belts save lives".

Just explain another point about the direction that the IMDB rating has moved for this movie. Almost all movies have their highest ratings at the beginning, this is especially true of movies with built in audiences. For example, Dawn of the Planet of Apes had an 8.5 just 3 or so weeks ago. It is now 8.2 The Purge Anarchy was at least a 7.2 shortly after it's release and now is at 6.9. Guardians of the Galaxy was 9.0 just 3 days ago and now 8.8. This is because those that have the most interest in the movie tend to watch it first and usually will rate it higher than those that watch it later. Even Lucy had 6.8 a week ago, now 6.6, even though as far I know it is not based on a previous work but those most excited saw it opening weekend.

Oldboy 2013 is going in the opposite direction of 99% of movies by increasing. Just in the past 2 months, after going on netflix, it has gone from 5.5 to 5.7. It was around 5.0 when the movie was released several months ago. This itself is evidence that the fanboys are being really harsh on this movie compared to general audience.

Re: 5.6 ?????

Mr. Nobody

Re: 5.6 ?????

I've never heard of Mr. Nobody. Looked it up though...it's an English language film so it's not event the same. And the movie had some delays....and it didn't do well at the box office....this is NO WHERE NEAR an good example.

Re: 5.6 ?????

I am not posting that often on the boards, I am not even reading the boards that often, except for when I like a movie...
Even now, I am only posting to tell you guys that I haven't seen the original movie, and before I read this thread I was planning to see it.
Now I don't, not anymore, can't really say why, but I can say for sure that the fanboys arguments and attitude drove me away.
So I guess someone was right in this argument, the 2013 movie did make me want to see the original, the parameters of the debate about these 2 movies then made me give up that intention.

And I am quite self-sufficient, don't bother to analyze my train of thought above, just consider the fact that it's a true fact :)

Re: 5.6 ?????

"Now I don't, not anymore,"

good. you would not have liked it.

"So I guess someone was right in this argument, the 2013 movie did make me want to see the original,"

liar.

Re: 5.6 ?????

Well, the problem here is that the movie was so poorly done.
A lot of people that haven't seen the original want to give this remake a lot of bonus points for things like the "twist" (as the OP mentions) or it's, and this is laughable, ORIGINALITY.

Being a remake - it should get NO POINTS for its originality. It's a remake.
Actually, did you ever see the remake of Psycho? I'm assuming you didn't because most people chose not to... and that's fine, but the remake was actually done very well! The movie was totally butchered by everyone because it went ALL-IN on being a remake and made waves before it came out for trying to remake the film shot-for-shot.

Well, let me tell you this: The 1998 version of Psycho was WAY better than this terrible movie. Personally, I think that movie is way underrated (with a 4.6) - but I understand why people wanted to be so hard on it.
Still, for me, at least I can look at that movie and admire the work of Gus Van Sant in his efforts to truly remake a great film.

Or think of 2001: A Space Odyssey.
If almost any other director who's ever lived made that film then it would probably be complete garbage. Make no mistake, I LOVE THE MOVIE. But it's only because the job Kubrick does in making that film is so unbelievably astounding. Lawrence of Arabia is sorta the same way to me - I don't normally get into that kind of film, so far as the story is concerned. And, really, I find the whole film somewhat forgettable... minus how unbelievably beautiful that movie is.

Basically, if you want to be well-received for your story then it better be a good one; it better be an original one.
But you don't really have to even be the greatest story of all-time if you're done really well.

This film is especially easy to see as a terrible movie if you've seen the original because it fails at everything (it even tries to change the story and somehow makes it so much worse).

It really was a terrible film. But, again, to anyone unfamiliar with the source material, I could see liking it... as it would SEEM original.
If we could go back in time and release Gus Van Sant's remake of Psycho back in the 1950s, before Hitchcock made his, then I'm sure it might be recognized as one of the greatest films of all-time... but that's not how things work, is it?

By the same token, if this story had been completely original? Well, I'm sure I'd enjoy the movie a lot more and probably give it at least some praise for what it was doing. And then, maybe, I'd tell you that it probably could have been directed better, but it was a pretty unique story and I found it interesting or whatever... and overall, I might have even liked the movie.

As it stands though? It was basically like watching a 4th-grade class trying to perform Shakespeare - which is to say, it was terrible. And, no, I'm not going to give bonus points to this 4th-grade class for "how well-written their play was."

Re: 5.6 ?????


A lot of people that haven't seen the original want to give this remake a lot of bonus points for things like the "twist" (as the OP mentions) or it's, and this is laughable, ORIGINALITY.


You miss the point…this remake is NOT intended for those that saw the original. It’s intended for a new market that consist of the large group of people that don’t normally see foreign movies. You point would be valid if this was a same language remake or if the original was a huge movie (for example, Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon). Using your logic, The Departed is crap because it wasn’t original.


Well, let me tell you this: The 1998 version of Psycho was WAY better than this terrible movie. Personally, I think that movie is way underrated (with a 4.6) - but I understand why people wanted to be so hard on it.


Interesting how you defend that film even though it not only has lower user ratings but also lower critic ratings. And Psycho was remake of an already super popular English language movie.


Basically, if you want to be well-received for your story then it better be a good one; it better be an original one …It really was a terrible film. But, again, to anyone unfamiliar with the source material, I could see liking it... as it would SEEM original…. By the same token, if this story had been completely original? Well, I'm sure I'd enjoy the movie a lot more and probably give it at least some praise for what it was doing


Again, missing the point about the target audience. I already described in detail in other comments in this thread how those that watch the original are dragging down the score since the evidence suggest that those that didn’t watch the original seem to score this movie MUCH better.

Re: 5.6 ?????

still let letting any facts sink in, eh? good for you.

"laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep and you weep alone." - Dae-su Oh

Re: 5.6 ?????

Agreed. Although at the end of the day, what defines a "good" film? Some people judge a film purely on how enjoyable it was. This of course takes into account everything that they deem important on a subconscious level, but ultimately boils down to how it made them feel- this is the camp I'm in mostly.

Other people, who have studied film (I've also studied film a bit at uni, but wouldn't call myself a "film buff") have a deeper appreciation for the technical side, and pride themselves on analysing a film. This is often done by comparing other "classics".

In the case of this film, I don't blame fanboys/girls rating it low, as it's difficult not to if you're a diehard fan of the original because of the emotional reaction. That said, I can't believe how low they're rating it, and I think its kinda sad how little thought went into the ratings. I mean 5.6... really? I challenge the fanboys and girls to go out and watch another 5.6 movie and then tell me that their rating of this film wasn't irrational and emotionally charged. Seriously.

Imitation is the highest form of flattery, and more people need to appreciate that. This film was good and was on the receiving end of a lot of undeserved hate. Bloody ridiculous. Ratings like that aren't doing the credibility of this site any favours either.

PEACE

Re: 5.6 ?????

lol.

first act like you want to have a discussion:

"Agreed. Although at the end of the day, what defines a "good" film? Some people judge a film purely on how enjoyable it was. This of course takes into account everything that they deem important on a subconscious level, but ultimately boils down to how it made them feel- this is the camp I'm in mostly.

Other people, who have studied film (I've also studied film a bit at uni, but wouldn't call myself a "film buff") have a deeper appreciation for the technical side, and pride themselves on analysing a film. This is often done by comparing other "classics". "

then reveal your true intention:

"In the case of this film, I don't blame fanboys/girls rating it low, as it's difficult not to if you're a diehard fan of the original because of the emotional reaction. That said, I can't believe how low they're rating it, and I think its kinda sad how little thought went into the ratings. I mean 5.6... really? I challenge the fanboys and girls to go out and watch another 5.6 movie and then tell me that their rating of this film wasn't irrational and emotionally charged. Seriously. "

and then try to manifest your opinion as fact:

"Imitation is the highest form of flattery, and more people need to appreciate that. This film was good and was on the receiving end of a lot of undeserved hate. Bloody ridiculous. Ratings like that aren't doing the credibility of this site any favours either. "

hilarious. not as clever as you might think. not even close.

some 6/10ers for you (my ratings):

The Thirteenth Floor (1999)
Jersey Girl (2004)
Compliance (2012)
The Incite Mill (2010)
Autómata (2014)
Carrie (2013)
Transcendence (2014)
In Time (2011)
Horrible Bosses (2011)
Clear History (2013)

they all are not "great", but at least slightly better than this. so yeah, 5.6 is fitting. maybe even a bit generous.


Re: 5.6 ?????

The Thirteenth Floor (1999) - 7.0
Jersey Girl (2004) - 6.2
Compliance (2012) - 6.4
The Incite Mill (2010) - ??
Autómata (2014) - 6.2
Carrie (2013) - 6.0
Transcendence (2014) - 6.3
In Time (2011) - 6.7
Horrible Bosses (2011) - 6.9
Clear History (2013) - 6.5


Look at that, all of those movies are higher rated by IMDB and some significantly higher. The average rating for those movies was 6.5. There is a big difference between 6.5 and 5.6.

So even by your movies said were similar, the rating for Oldboy is almost a full 1.0pts lower than it should be. At 5.6, you have crappy films. At 6.5, you have some decent films. At 7.5, you have good films. At 8.5 you have great films.

Re: 5.6 ?????


This of course takes into account everything that they deem important on a subconscious level, but ultimately boils down to how it made them feel- this is the camp I'm in mostly.


I'm with you here.



Other people, who have studied film (I've also studied film a bit at uni, but wouldn't call myself a "film buff") have a deeper appreciation for the technical side, and pride themselves on analysing a film. This is often done by comparing other "classics".



I agree...except I think it's a little dumb to just compare it to the original. So my argument isn't really about whether this is an enjoyable film or a technically sound film....it's an argument that the fanboys/girls need to get over themselves and stop comparing this to the original and just grade it for what it is. They should grade it as if they have never seen the original. When you try to compare it to the original, your opinion on the film will be influenced. It's like having a hamburger that you really liked but when you try to compare it to the best hamburger you have ever had, well, it's going to effect your judgement. So don't compare that $8 hamburger to the $20 best hamburger you ever had....just judge that $8 hamburger on its own.


I don't blame fanboys/girls rating it low, as it's difficult not to if you're a diehard fan of the original because of the emotional reaction



Since I'm not really a 'fanboy' of anything, I guess I don't understand that fanboy mentality. But a fanboy is going to fanboy so I guess I can't get upset about it....except when they are denying that the 'fanboy' isn't effecting their judgement. That denial is what probably bothers me most.



That said, I can't believe how low they're rating it, and I think its kinda sad how little thought went into the ratings. I mean 5.6... really? I challenge the fanboys and girls to go out and watch another 5.6 movie and then tell me that their rating of this film wasn't irrational and emotionally charged.



Thank you. I don't know why I that didn't come to mind earlier but I had thought from the beginning "do people really think this belongs with all those other 5.6 movies"? Almost every movie under 6.0 that I have watched was just terrible ---- this movie doesn't hold up to the original but it is in no way a terrible movie like most 5.6 movies. Here are some movies at or near 5.6:

Identity Thief 5.7
GI Joe Retaliation 5.8
The Smurfs 1 & 2 5.5, 5.4


Seriously, does this movie belong in that group??






Imitation is the highest form of flattery, and more people need to appreciate that. This film was good and was on the receiving end of a lot of undeserved hate. Bloody ridiculous. Ratings like that aren't doing the credibility of this site any favours either.



When 'fanboy' takes over, they no longer think about why the movie was remade and just get made that others aren't watching the original. The fact is that few English speakers saw the original so this remade was done to reach a whole new audience --- it wasn't made for those like us that saw the original. I do agree that ratings like this don't help the credibility of this site. I'm experienced enough with this site that I know how to 'read' some scores.

For example, fanboy movies are going to be artificially high. So a lot of super hero movies are likely to have a higher rating than they deserve. On the flipside, remakes of movies are likely to get terrible scores. I also know that classic movies tend to draw people that like classic movies so the rating for a 'classic' movie might not be a good indication of what the general movie watcher would like. For example, Seven Samaria is #20 on IMDB but it's not going to have mass appeal. It's very high because only those that are really interested in that type of movie are going to watch it...and for that audience, they LOVED it. But if you forced everyone on IMDB to watch it, I can guarantee you that the film will have a much lower rating.


Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: 5.6 ?????

A coworker of mine just saw this remake and had never seen the original. They thought this movie was good though they had trouble 'liking' the ending'. I don't know anybody who watched this movie without watching the original and disliked it. Everyone likes it.

Granted, it's a pool of maybe only 4 or 5 people I know that watched it but based on the IMDB rating, it would be highly unlikely to have 5 of 5 like it if it's at 5.6.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: 5.6 ?????

"and asian people maybe..."

a new level of sillyness. congrats.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: 5.6 ?????

The issue with the remake is not that we are original film lovers but that the remake was totally sanitized off all the interesting and important elements which made the original a total masterpiece. Particularly the ancient Greek - Euripidic references and plot devices. If Spike Lee did not have creative freedom to make a bolder (in the sense of not very "american audience friendly") film he should not have agreed to direct the remake at all; if he did and this toning downs was his choice, the he is not fit to direct films like this. I like Spike Lee's films and some of them are among my favourites. But directing a modern tragedy with ancient Greek elements needs both creative freedom and skill.


Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching.

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: 5.6 ?????

^^^^^^
2 reasons for the low rating right there.
No one ever rates remakes based on their own merit, but rather just compare them to the source material from the most nonobjective opinions possible.

Re: 5.6 ?????

Most annoying thing ever. Every movie should stand on its own when it comes to rating unless it's a sequel and they screw up continuity or something

Re: 5.6 ?????

evil dead and maniac remake got high votes. go figure.

"laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep and you weep alone." - Dae-su Oh

Re: 5.6 ?????

I think most people would disagree with you there. Remakes will always be compared to their original counterparts. Whats the point in watching the same movie twice or basically the same storyline if its just a lesser version of the original? If people feel it doesnt add anything substantial new or different it will be harshly viewed and justly so because its a waste of their time.

If I saw this before the original, I might have given it a 7, after the original its like what the average is.

The ending was also pretty crap. Go back and see the original and youll see the ending fits the style of movie much better.

Re: 5.6 ?????

I completely agree. It's stupid that people would rate a movie compared to the original ---- it's meant for a new audience so it should be rated on its own merit. I also think you have a lot of stupid fanboys of the original (or movie purist) that just gave this movie a low score just because it was a remake of a classic.

Personally, I have the original around an 8.5 (great movie) and this one as a 7 or a bit higher (solid movie).

Re: 5.6 ?????

yeaaah, those bad bad fanboys. keeping people from going to the movies and renting films. hahahaha.

explain one thing to me then: how come that evil and maniac were scored so high? can't be the quality of the remake, right? xD

"laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep and you weep alone." - Dae-su Oh

Re: 5.6 ?????

Who ever said they kept people from going to the movies??? What's the point of that statement?

Maniac is remake of a French movie....I was talking about Asian movies. Also, Maniac is rated 6.2 IMDB. I don't know what movie is 'that evil'.

Re: 5.6 ?????

it means that if the oldboy remake would have been any good, the ratings and sales would also be good.

"laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep and you weep alone." - Dae-su Oh

Re: 5.6 ?????

The movie needed to be just about equal to the original for the fanboys to rate it decently. Just look at reviews --- almost every single bad review mentions they saw the original. Now look at the reviews of those that rated it the highest --- most mentioned they haven't seen the original. THIS is all evidence one needs that fanboys killed the rating to this movie.

Reviews of those that loved it:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1321511/reviews?filter=love

Re: 5.6 ?????

not all of them. anyway, there are enough reviews that try to measure it at it's own terms and it still failed for those. look at veil dead, maniac, departed, the rings .. etc they all got high ratings and reviews, even though most people have seen the originals. let's face it, oldboy US is simply a bad remake. hell, even 13 sins (remake of 13 beloved) earned some "deserving" reviews. it is widely considered "good, but not great" and in comparison to the original "decent, but falls short in comparison". you oldboy US defenders should just face the truth one day, instead of ignoring every argument that comes your way.

"laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep and you weep alone." - Dae-su Oh

Re: 5.6 ?????


look at veil dead, maniac, departed, the rings .. etc they all got high ratings and reviews, even though most people have seen the originals


Holy crap that is a lie or misleading. Very few people even knew that The Departed was a remake. Very few people saw the original 'The Ring' (Ringu). They have now thanks to netflix but not at the time of release. Oldboy 2013 was released well after the original was on netflix so it has had time to be seen by much larger audiences. Thnk about it....The Departed came out in 2006, well before Netflix streaming (streaming became an option in 2008). The Ring is so old that when it was released, the majority of people in the US hadn't even heard of Netflix.


you oldboy US defenders should just face the truth one day, instead of ignoring every argument that comes your way.


Perhaps you should look at the top reviews that I had linked earlier. Most of the top reviews were by users that mentioned they did not see the original while most (actually ALL) of the worst reviews were by those that where fans of the original. That's about as much proof as one needs.

Re: 5.6 ?????

"Holy crap that is a lie or misleading. Very few people even knew that The Departed was a remake. Very few people saw the original 'The Ring' (Ringu). They have now thanks to netflix but not at the time of release. Oldboy 2013 was released well after the original was on netflix so it has had time to be seen by much larger audiences. Thnk about it....The Departed came out in 2006, well before Netflix streaming (streaming became an option in 2008). The Ring is so old that when it was released, the majority of people in the US hadn't even heard of Netflix."

and now you explain to me how, that is a lie or misleading in regards to:

"look at veil dead, maniac, departed, the rings .. etc they all got high ratings and reviews, even though most people have seen the originals"

"Perhaps you should look at the top reviews that I had linked earlier. Most of the top reviews were by users that mentioned they did not see the original while most (actually ALL) of the worst reviews were by those that where fans of the original. That's about as much proof as one needs."

any proof or so you really think amking stuff up is enough?

"laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep and you weep alone." - Dae-su Oh

Re: 5.6 ?????


and now you explain to me how, that is a lie or misleading in regards to:


I thought it was pretty clear. That few people in the US saw Ringu & Infernal Affairs since the remakes were releases before Netflix streaming. Now, the audience is much bigger.


any proof or so you really think amking stuff up is enough?


Jesus Christ, are you asking for proof on something I gave you proof on? Or did you forget my previous post?

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1321511/board/nest/231304479?d=232027221#2 32027221

Re: 5.6 ?????

"I thought it was pretty clear. That few people in the US saw Ringu & Infernal Affairs since the remakes were releases before Netflix streaming. Now, the audience is much bigger. "

both were pretty successful globally.

"Jesus Christ, are you asking for proof on something I gave you proof on? Or did you forget my previous post? "

you gave nothing. just pulling something out of thin air isn't proof. see your above statement for example.

"laugh and the world laughs with you. Weep and you weep alone." - Dae-su Oh
Top