Review: The Film, Oldboy (2013)...

Media comparisons. We all make them. We all forge opinions about them. “The original is way better than the sequel.” “The remake sucks.” “This is nothing like the book.” “The French version was funnier.” Yet, if there is a foreign film that Hollywood executives believe is a gem–read: it made lots of money–then Hollywood will take a risk and remake it, despite many reasons warning why this film may tank. In many cases, audiences prefer the original, anyway. Why is that? I have some theories, especially about Oldboy (2013), the Hollywood remake of the Korean film of the same name, made about ten years before it. 

First off, the Hollywood version of this film, starring Josh Brolin (Avengers: Endgame), had several drawbacks. Both films have a plot twist near the end, quite a disturbing one–more on that later. If you’ve already witnessed this plot twist in the original, five will get you ten that the same revelation will have little or no impact on you during the viewing of the remake. You see it coming, after all. Recently, I’ve rewatched Memento (2000). Talk about plot twists that floor you. Watching it recently, I purposely looked for different things in the film, since I knew what would happen. Like narrative clues and hints that gave away the resolution. More often than not, I found myself bored with Memento. 

I inadvertently watched the American adaptation of Oldboy, and I intend to view the original Korean version in the near future. Since I’ll watch them “out of order,” will I think that the American version is better, especially since I’m well aware of the plot twist? Remains to be seen (heh, see what I did there?). 

Some critiques of this film, which I think stem from the audience’s knowledge of the unsettling plot twist, argue that this remake is not needed and that it doesn't provide a new perspective on the original. Well, duh. A film like this is all about the plot twist; it wouldn’t be the disturbing thriller it is if it didn’t have it. Critics claim that Sharlto Copley’s (District 9) performance as the antagonist is subpar, cartoonish, simply stock. My thoughts again lead to a comparison with the original; the antagonist there must have chewed up the scenery, indeed. The critics also bemoan the senseless violence and the uneven pacing. Were these elements purposely included to mirror the original film as well?  

Director Spike Lee (Do the Right Thing), working from a script by Mark Protosevich (Thor), makes choices in the film that give me things to ponder: Is he making this film as a valentine to the original–which would be a big mistake, methinks–or is he trying to make an honest, armrest-grabbing thriller? The auteur originally delivered a whopping 140-minute film, but the studio’s editors cut it down to 105 minutes. This also may very well explain the poor critical response. Needless to say, I’d be interested in seeing that version, but it has yet to be released, if at all. 

The twist itself is as disturbing as you might imagine it if your mind went to those places. It’s hinted at as well, purposely summoning feelings of disgust and revulsion from audience members. So, like it or not, you warm up to it. The plot also hinges on this third-act revelation. Themes like revenge’s destructive nature, the power of truth and memory, social isolation, and guilt all contribute to this twist. The idea that the story mirrors a well-known Greek tragedy drops that hint like an atom bomb. 

My honest prediction? I’ll feel that the American version is better than the Korean one simply because of the order in which I watch them. My recommendation is to watch one of the versions, but not the second (or first) one.