Oldboy : 5.6 ?????

Re: 5.6 ?????



both (Ringu & Infernal Affairs were pretty successful globally.


Ringu made a total of $13 million at the boxoffice world wide. In fact, The Ring made in the US on opening weekend than Ringu made in it's total run worldwide. In fact, The Ring actually made more than Ringu in Japan. Keep in mind that Ringu was a a relatively low budget movie that cost only $1.2 million to make.

Infernal Affairs grossed only $170,000 in the North America. Again, this was before Netflix so the chances that people saw it on dvd or streaming were slim compared to todays foreign movies.


you gave nothing. just pulling something out of thin air isn't proof.


Pulling something out of the air? I gave you a link showing the top reviews and the worst reviews. The top reviews all mentioned they loved the original and most of the bottom reviews mentioned they never saw the first. You just don't want to admit that this is proof of my point because you don't want to admit defeat.

All you say is "pulled something out of the air" rather than explaining why it isn't proof. Furthermore, you don't provide anything to back your claim (that those that didn't watch the original also hated this movie) so you are one to talk. More to the point...just look at the d@mn boards! It's filled with a bunch of people saying they didn't watch the original and enjoyed this movie.

Re: 5.6 ?????

we are talking globally.

oldboy wasn't a box office success in the US either.

"I gave you a link showing the top reviews and the worst reviews."

c'mon man. those are IMDB user reviews. that's about as credible from a crititics point of view as asking the next homeless guy you meet on the street.

hahahaha, "defeat"??? we are mistaken ourselves for extra important today, aren't we? xD

".just look at the d@mn boards!"

as for this board: aproximately 60% hated it. 10% say it was better than it is rated, but not as good as the original. 20% say it was great or at least good and they don't know the original. 8% are spike lee fans that defend this as if their life would depend on it. 2% have seen both and liked the new one even better. not counting in those that hated both versions.

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

Re: 5.6 ?????


oldboy wasn't a box office success in the US either.


quite being purposely ignorant!!!! I just broke down to you the difference ---- i said all those movies were not succesful but the difference is that oldboy has had time to become a hit on netflix. Why else would I mention Netflix unless it was relevant to the discussion. Are you even paying attention to anything I write? You seem to ask questions that I already answered.


c'mon man. those are IMDB user reviews. that's about as credible from a crititics point of view as asking the next homeless guy you meet on the street.


IMDB ratings are a much better job of 'entertainment' than critics. People use IMDB ratings more than critics reviews.


8% are spike lee fans that defend this as if their life would depend on it.


You WAY estimate how many spike lee fans there. There aren't that many.

Re: 5.6 ?????

"oldboy wasn't a box office success in the US either. "

lol. oooh, now netflix is important out of a sudden. what's next? streamasia.com?

"IMDB ratings are a much better job of 'entertainment' than critics."

yeah, people usually trust some unknown bozo without an own platform more than a professional.

not to speak of the paid shills, those are totally objective. xD


"You WAY estimate how many spike lee fans there. There aren't that many. "

it faded a bit since the release, but if you check the slightly older posts, you will see that there is a whole bunch of hardcore lee fans around here, that would give their right arm for their master.


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

Re: 5.6 ?????


lol. oooh, now netflix is important out of a sudden. what's next? streamasia.com?



What are you talking about? I've mentioned netflix from the beginning. You are really messed up in the head. And if you don't mean that "I all of sudden brought it up" but rather that Netflix is all of sudden important the past few years you are a ret@rd not to understand the importance of netflix, streaming movies, and the internet in general. Do you honestly think that in the 1990's that people had the same access to foreign movies as they do now? Do you honestly think that advancements in technology and the internet haven't brought the world closer?


yeah, people usually trust some unknown bozo without an own platform more than a professional.


You obviously have no idea how it works. First, I'm not comparing one single random person with one movie critic. I'm comparing the collection of thousands even millions of people to a handful of critics. It's basically polling thousands (or millions) of people to get their opinions versus polling a few critics. Do you trust iphone app score if 100,000 reviewed it or do you trust one magazine that has an opinion on that app?

Furthermore, critics are all looking for the same thing and it's not necessarily the same as the audience. Super Bad and Dumb & Dumber (or insert stupid funny comedy) are probably in a lot of people's top 10 movies of all time.....there probably isn't one movie critic that would have in the top 50.

Re: 5.6 ?????

"What are you talking about? I've mentioned netflix from the beginning. You are really messed up in the head. And if you don't mean that "I all of sudden brought it up" but rather that Netflix is all of sudden important the past few years you are a ret@rd not to understand the importance of netflix, streaming movies, and the internet in general. Do you honestly think that in the 1990's that people had the same access to foreign movies as they do now? Do you honestly think that advancements in technology and the internet haven't brought the world closer? "

so?

"You obviously have no idea how it works."

this is gonna be sooo funny.

"First, I'm not comparing one single random person with one movie critic. I'm comparing the collection of thousands even millions of people to a handful of critics."

so, you read all thousands of user-reviews of this film?

"It's basically polling thousands (or millions) of people to get their opinions versus polling a few critics."

so you are not speaking about the reviews at all, but about the ratings. the ratings for this film on IMDB have been very "generous". metacritics judgement is harsher, rotten tomatoes even more so.

"Do you trust iphone app score if 100,000 reviewed it"

a film is not an iphone app. i buy iphone apps to work with them, therefore all i need to know is the developer. if it comes from apple, korg, tascam, filemaker ... etc, then i don't need no rankings. apart from that, most "fart" apps get 100000+ 4 star votes, which renders your statement double redundant.

"Furthermore, critics are all looking for the same thing and it's not necessarily the same as the audience."

lucky for us, there is more than one critic.

" Super Bad and Dumb & Dumber (or insert stupid funny comedy) are probably in a lot of people's top 10 movies of all time.....there probably isn't one movie critic that would have in the top 50. "

super bad. rotten tomatoes. top critics: 7.3/10

do you want fries with that?

apart from that, dumb and dumber is way more polariszing than superbad, but how would YOU know? xD

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

Re: 5.6 ?????


so?


You are not a smart (wo)man if you can't understand it. In fact, it's being purposely ignorant as that is a major point. That already explains to me that I'm dealing with a 13 year old, or someone with the IQ of one.


so, you read all thousands of user-reviews of this film?


More ignorance. I...I....just don't feel like debating this with someone with such a low IQ.


a film is not an iphone app. i buy iphone apps to work with them, therefore all i need to know is the developer. if it comes from apple, korg, tascam, filemaker ... etc, then i don't need no rankings. apart from that, most "fart" apps get 100000+ 4 star votes, which renders your statement double redundant.


More ignorance. I'm not even sure if you are a troll or a 13 year old.




super bad. rotten tomatoes. top critics: 7.3/10

do you want fries with that?

apart from that, dumb and dumber is way more polariszing than superbad, but how would YOU know? xD



Did I say they weren't polarizing? How does that mean that they can't be in a lot of people's list of top movies of all time? Seriously, how old are you??? BTW, 17.2% reviewers gave Dumb & Dumber a 10/10 and it has a 7.3 rating. The Terminator, a top 210 movie with a rating of 8.1, only has 16.0% giving it 10/10. Platoon, a top 170 movie with 8.2 rating, only has 16.8% giving it 10/10. Just because it's polarizing doesn't mean there isn't a large number of people who have the movie as one of their favorites of all time.



I showed you that the 'loved it' and 'hated it' were evidence that fanboys are dragging down this movie's rating. Almost all the 'loved it' reviews were those that didn't watch the original and almost all the 'hated it' mentioned they saw and loved the original. Want more proof of fanboys? Most movies with a built in audience have the fanboys come out early and then the normal movie goer starts watching the film. That's why when a LOTR movie comes out, the rating for the movie on opening weekend are higher than it will ever be ---- it goes downhill from there.

Well, the fanboys rated this movie bad (they didn't want a remake) from early on. The IMDB rating was in the low 5's when I first remember the score early in the release. It may have actually been upper 4.0's on opening weekend. 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.

This is one of the few movies I have seen where the IMDB rating has actually progressively gone up. Gee...I wonder what could be to blame for that?

Along with the IMDB rating increasing and the love it / hate it reviews as evidence of the fanboy effect on this movie, you see more evidence by just going 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.

Re: 5.6 ?????

"That already explains to me that I'm dealing with a 13 year old"

oh the irony.

"I....just don't feel like debating"

don't feel like or being unable to?

"More ignorance. "

arguments aren't your string suit, right?

"How does that mean that they can't be in a lot of people's list of top movies of all time? Seriously, how old are you??? BTW, 17.2% reviewers gave Dumb & Dumber a 10/10 and it has a 7.3 rating. The Terminator, a top 210 movie with a rating of 8.1, only has 16.0% giving it 10/10. Platoon, a top 170 movie with 8.2 rating, only has 16.8% giving it 10/10. Just because it's polarizing doesn't mean there isn't a large number of people who have the movie as one of their favorites of all time. "

temper, temper. ^^

so, your attempt of a point being? try simple sentences, those might work better for you.

"I showed you that the 'loved it' and 'hated it' were evidence that fanboys are dragging down this movie's rating. "

that's not a sentence.

"Almost all the 'loved it' reviews were those that didn't watch the original and almost all the 'hated it' mentioned they saw and loved the original."

bs and you know that.

"Want more proof of fanboys?"

"more"??? hilarious.

"Well, the fanboys rated this movie bad (they didn't want a remake) from early on. The IMDB rating was in the low 5's when I first remember the score early in the release. It may have actually been upper 4.0's on opening weekend."

that's a) speculation and b) a statement, not a fact or an argument. you seem to have a hard time differentiating those.

"This is one of the few movies I have seen where the IMDB rating has actually progressively gone up."

yeah, with thousands of movies getting released every year, i am sure that case is unbelievably uncommon. ;)


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

Re: 5.6 ?????

Just so you know, I'm not longer reading your replies. It's worthless. For example,



"This is one of the few movies I have seen where the IMDB rating has actually progressively gone up."

yeah, with thousands of movies getting released every year, i am sure that case is unbelievably uncommon. ;)


This right here is more proof that nothing makes sense to you. Uncommon or 'unbelievably uncommon' (which I didn't say) is meant as a % of total. There are certain diseases that affect only .1% of the world population. That makes it uncommon or very uncommon. However, the total number would be 7 million people (out of 7 billion). To you, it doesn't make it uncommon....to everyone else, it is very uncommon.

Re: 5.6 ?????

hahaha, yeah. so, an IMDB rating only rarely goes up after a while? hahahaha. you are so funny.

"There are certain diseases that affect only .1% of the world population. That makes it uncommon or very uncommon."

so, only 1% of movies ratings go up after a while? hahahaha. yeah, you would pull anything out of your tailbone to keep up the illusion of having a point here, right?

"However, the total number would be 7 million people (out of 7 billion). To you, it doesn't make it uncommon....to everyone else, it is very uncommon. "

come again? xD

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

Re: 5.6 ?????

Wow....critical thinking skills are not your strong point.

You stay in school. A high school degree is better than no degree.

Re: 5.6 ?????

hahaha. so much about "i am not reading your posts anymore", eh? soooo, self control ain't your thing either, eh? ^^

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

Post deleted

This message has been deleted.

Re: 5.6 ?????

I agree to some extent this does not deserve as low a rating as it got. Most of that is from people who saw the original and are comparing instead of rating.

Even trying to take a more neutral viewpoint I wanted so much to like this film, there IS still something about the style I liked and you can't fault any of the acting (iirc). However, the problem is everything this film seems to do well in the eyes of someone who didn't see the original, it just doesn't do them quite as well as the original. On top of that, the various subtle nods to the original (octopus, angel wings etc.) just don't help separate it from the remake in the minds of those that saw it.

The original's style was just exquisite. Not really a spoiler but it's 10x better to watch first time than to read - For instance, when the main character goes back to the 'prison', that scene where he stands poised with the hammer for what seems like an eternity. The long, shaking attempt at grasping a weapon, and most of all the grin before the crunch. Just incredible.

The plot in the original was not as rushed so the revelation felt more shocking and it destroys you almost as much as it destroys the main character. If you felt "oooh shiz" in the remake... that's nothing. The hammer fight in the remake... Such a shame, I like that they did a single take (although was the climb down a CG cut?), I don't like that the choreography was deplorable. The moves themselves were great, raw and painful. But the guys standing there waiting to attack draw too much attention.

Too many things were just not up to scratch and that is the main reason for the low score. On its own it's not actually that bad a movie. But it is being compared to an incredible piece of film and it will never live up to that.
On its own I would say it deserves a low IMDB 7. Whichever way you look at it though, it's not on its own. Compared to the original the 5.6 is probably fair, misleading maybe, but that's the way it is.

~It's as if she evaporated... straight through the wullz~

Re: 5.6 ?????

I agree with you Krunchy. I'm solely going basing this on me having only watched the American version, not the original. But even if I were to watch the original, I would still give this a high rating. I'm sure the original is great, but man I haven't sat down to watch a movie in a looong time, and I'm glad I sat down to watch this one.

Re: 5.6 ?????

You already admitted you haven't seen the original; furthermore, you admit to knowing its a remake. So... why are you so confident you wouldn't rate it lower if you saw it portrayed in a better manner (yes, hypothetically assuming you'd agree the original is a better portrayal of the story?)

If it was a shot for shot remake and simply higher quality, I could understand that assumption. If someone puts more effort into the same thing, it can be more enjoyable than the original (although that seems to be rare.) Furthermore, you can have a remake which deviates from the original and improves it (imagine the exact opposite of Bram Stroker's Dracula... sorry I just saw that and it took the worse of the book and dulled it down with a bad romance, in my opinion.)

Personally, this seems like a remake with a more shallow story and similar quality. On the bright side, the voice/looks are more attune to what you'd expect if you are a native English speaker?

Re: 5.6 ?????


If it was a shot for shot remake and simply higher quality, I could understand that assumption. If someone puts more effort into the same thing, it can be more enjoyable than the original (although that seems to be rare.)


Gus Van Sant's remake of Psycho has a 4.6 rating, for what it's worth.

Re: 5.6 ?????

It will always be under the shadow of the original (maybe shouldn't have been done, considering the original is well known), if you liked this version, just save it for yourself and save yourself of the trolling from purists.
Definitely not a bad movie, but it's true that lacks the atmosphere of the original.

Re: 5.6 ?????

That sums it up succinctly. I just finished the remake, having really ejoyed the original years ago and a few times since. Lee's version is hardly a crime against cinema, but it's kind of unnecessary. It's basically the exact same movie, with a couple of notable changes.

I think they made a mistake keeping it so faithful to the plot and look of the original. They could've told the same basic story in a way that was less imitation, more of a riff. Another mistake was keeping the title. The term "oldboy" is not widely used, as least in the US, so it didn't give your casual movie fan any idea what it was about. I would bet that the vast majority of fans of the original didn't know what it meant until they looked it up. If you're remaking a non-English movie to appeal to American audiences (who, let's be honest, were the targets), why stick with a title that was destined to produce blank stares?

As others have mentioned, if it wasn't living in the shadow of such a similar, well-liked predecessor, it would've gone over much better. It was a better effort than Robocop, which I thought was termanally bland. At least the performances in the new Oldboy were uniformly solid.

I'm not immune to the "remakes suck by default" sickness that many less-chartiable denizens of these boards suffer from, but mine is more of a "remakes are saddled with a degree of difficulty" sickness. If many of this movie's harshest critics are honest, they'd admit that they were some of the first ones to howl in shrill protest when this was announced. There was literally no way they were going to approve.

-------------------------

I have meddled with the primal forces of nature and I will atone.

Re: 5.6 ?????

A very generous rating, imo.

Re: 5.6 ?????

hey, I'm with ya! I think the original is a good, but not spectacular film. The pacing is just WAYYY to slow early-on. Dare I say it's at times.. BORING. Well acted, yes. The historic fight scene, while great, isn't as great as it's often made out to be.

I like the remake because of the twist, and because Brolin was great. If they had followed the original formula to a tee, then I wouldn't be writing this, but Spike didn't. He successfully made some nice changes to the film. As a matter of fact, the only aspect I didn't like was the remake of the fight scene. Sure, it suffered by comparison, but it also seemed like the only moment where SPike was really using the original as a template.

And for those that "saw the twist coming", I call BS on that. I figure 1-3% of the public may have saw that coming. Somebody mentioned eye color. Nice to see you remember eye color of about 2-3second long baby shots 1 hour after the fact - you're better than most of us I guess.

Awesome twist.

Definitely under-rated. I still think the original is a touch better, but the gap isn't nearly as big as the imdb rating suggests. I think the original should be lower, more like 7.5, and the remake here should be about 6.4. jmo.

Re: 5.6 ?????

The original is also my least favorite of the vengeance trilogy.

Re: 5.6 ?????

I thought as far as remakes go, this was a good remake. It didn't copy the original exactly, it kind of riffs off it. The violence was more cartoony this time round and the ending was more specific than the ambiguous one from the original. No way does it deserve a 5.6, Brolin delivered a good performance. There's enough disparity to appreciate both movies.

Re: 5.6 ?????

As a fan of the original Oldboy, I finally watched this remake. Putting bias aside as much as I could... the plot twists were fun to watch, and there were little touches here and there that were nice additions or changes from the original, but the movie overall is pretty mediocre and forgettable. The pacing and acting were quite poor and didn't build tension or interest for the characters. The major fight scene of course being a complete copy of the original hallway scene, it was far less intense, entertaining, less realistic, with no epic score and definitely not as iconic. That could also be said for the entire movie.

But honestly, I think that remaking Oldboy (2003) is like remaking The Godfather (1971), you just cannot remake a monumental classic, especially without side affects. And on top of that, it's remaking a movie that just does NOT need to be remade!!! And as it turned out Oldboy (2013) is that unnecessary remake, and frankly, it failed.

Without mercy, man is like a beast. http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=33163288

Re: 5.6 ?????

the fighting is ridiculous. What the guy trains himself watching tv over 20 years and can fight like Bruce Lee, LMFAO
The fight scenes made me turn it off. the "bad guys" are just standing there not even hitting him or swinging and missing.... stupid crap

Re: 5.6 ?????

Watch the original, even if you are allergic to subs, and you will understand why.


Fanboy : a person who does not think while watching.

Re: 5.6 ?????

you should judge a film as its own.
ya, its a remake, so what ? this movie is good and you know it. if it was an original it would get at least 7.

just purists thing i guess.

Re: 5.6 ?????

Its a flawed film but its rather decent enough. As I have not seen the original then I have no comparison to make.

Its that man again!!

Re: 5.6 ?????

It is all about comparing. You will always compare a comedy movie to a comedy movie, a horror to a horror, the best movie ever to the movie you are watching now.. in case of this movie is the best to compare it to the original.
Maybe if you look at the complete movie it is not so bad, but it is really not better than 6.0. What made the original so good, was not the corridor fight, not the imprisonment, but the ending/suffering. In the original the final confrontment was 30 minutes long(!!) while in the remake everything was just so speeded up. He just showed him the stage, the movie, there was a few tears, he "begged" him not to tell her the truth and everything finished.
While in the original there is a full orchestra of emotions/suffering! When he realizes what damage he has done, what sacrifice he must make to save the loved one.

Brolin played his part good, but the second most important person in the movie "the bad guy/stranger" was just so horribly flat compared to the original.
His suffering was just so small compared to the the original, it is just not possible to compare.

The remake was also to easy to understand, you watch it once and just forget it, but with the original is like a good book. You have to watch it 2 or more times just to grasp everything it gives you.

but please, to understand it, you must watch the original. Then you can judge.

Re: 5.6 ?????

I completely agree, this movie should be way higher than 5.9.
These people that rate on IMDB are such pretentious dick riders that I kind of expected this type of f^ckery I gave the film a solid 6, and it was better than the original.

Re: 5.6 ?????


Brolin played his part good, but the second most important person in the movie "the bad guy/stranger" was just so horribly flat compared to the original.
His suffering was just so small compared to the the original, it is just not possible to compare.

The remake was also to easy to understand, you watch it once and just forget it, but with the original is like a good book. You have to watch it 2 or more times just to grasp everything it gives you.


this is exactly why the remake gets a low rating. if the remake had the same emotional impact as the original, and had equally vivid and thought provoking characters, then it would have a much higher rating.


Re: 5.6 ?????

Oh those horrible fanboys and fangirls of the gigantic oldboy cinematic universe who won't give the remake a fair chance.

The korean original is just a superior movie in every way, you don't have to be a fanboy to see this, just a fan of good cinema. Also it's completely legitimate to compare a remake with the original, especially when everyone involved obviously had no idea what made it so gripping in the first place.


Does anyone else find it ironic that a black director who constantly complains about racist white people appropriating and misunderstanding black culture is doing the same thing here with asian culture? Not sure if Lee is the main culprit here but you would think in this day and age that people could at least google the fact that korean, japanese and chinese culture are not perfectly interchangeable. I was honestly a bit surprised there weren't any Ninjas in the hammer fight scene.

Re: 5.6 ?????

It's only natural to compare a remake to the original.

"A man chooses. A slave obeys."

Re: 5.6 ?????

I didn't understand the ending a little, he gave diamonds to again sit in the room and watch for her daughter?
Top