Oldboy.

[Mr. Merrill Lehrl]

I don't think there was much substance. Revenge and incest were only excuses to have stylish action sequences, mushy love scenes, and a shock ending.

As in; a larger attempt to add substance to a stylized action flick.  If the substance is debatable it is only because it was forced.  It clearly was attempting to cross some moral boundaries, not in a visual sense but a human sense.  In that vein it went futher than most movies of the same cut.

[modage]

all i know is: if this movie wasnt subtitled and was an american made movie people would think it was the worst thing ever.  except for pete, cause he's actually asian.

[Weak2ndAct]

Mod, come on now, that's just ridiculous.

[modage]

no, i'm serious.  i think people are lighter on movies that are foriegn/subtitled and tend to think they're somehow better/smarter than they actually are because they're in a different language.  i truly believe that if the same movie had an american cast, people would be calling it a total piece of shit.

[pete]

well, that's like saying kungfu hustle or bad education would've sucked if they starred Americans.  of course they would, that's because films are not products with interchangeable properties.  but rather, if you believe that they are art, then they are unique results of specific visions.  a good film transcends boundaries, but that doesn't mean it can be disassembled and re-assembled overseas like a car.  you're saying if Old Boy was "American" as if "American" is some kind of tangeable absolute.

[modage]

i'm saying when people have to read during a movie they think that the smart part of their brain is active and that the movie is good.  when a film is 'foreign' to them, it usually seems cool/exotic/different and is usually cut more slack in departments like story/character/believability for those reasons like maybe they just cant understand the cultural difference or something.

[pete]

maybe, that is something I cannot prove/disprove because I have no idea what other people are thinking when they watch a foreign film.    your argument just got really sloppy in one jump -- from mildly criticizing oldboy for its plausibility to attacking an abstract numbers of faceless dumb American film viewers "out there".  yeah sure, I'll agree with you that there some dumbholes out there who like things that they can't understand; but this thread is a funny place to bring it up all of a sudden.

[Gold Trumpet]

I'm surprised I got to see this, but I did. As for opinion on the ending, I'm in agreeance with just about everyone here. Too plot heavy. Its the first time I ever saw a DePalma-esque ending meshed into a greek tragedy. But, for the bulk of the film, I share little agreeance. I never was too impressed, but opportunistic violence never impressed me much before anyways. The one large fight scene I'd say is technically cool, but after that, I knew the film had lost all hope for any clarity of a thought provoking story.

If anything, I wish the film did invest more into a story that would have justified the heavy handed ending. The intensity of the acting was well worth the viewing experience.

[thadius sterling]

I just now finished seeing Oldboy for the first time. I have been anticipating it for a long time. To be honest I am extreemly surprised at the negative response here at xixax which seems to be a bastion for good taste and a haven for real appreciation of film. But, I digress, my opinion is not lowered at all, I am just surprised. I loved it, but hey, I also loved:

Le Fou Follet
The Royal Tenenbaums
Scarface
Titus
Clockwork Orange
Magnolia

I didn't expect Kill Bill, I didn't expect Ichi the Killer, or an exploitation flick, or anything like that which seems to be what most of the people compare it to on the internet in general. The fight scene was good, but this isn't a movie about bodies fighting. It's a movie about souls fighting. Hypnosis stretching beleivability? Maybe. But everything in Sin City stretched beleivability, was far more concerned with style instead of substance, action instead of interaction, etc etc and yet it is still an amazing movie that connects with moral and emotional nerves. It's an opera of sorts. So as far as comparing it to other movies, I don't know where I stand. I think it's less beleivable that a person would have the willpower to organise such revenge than it is to beleive that hypnosis works. I mean, there's been on record real cases of hypnosis convincing people that they had killed other people, and other instances of hypnosis bringing back forgotten memories. It's a stretch that it would be used in this manner perhaps but I think all these magnifying glasses that are being used to pick apart the movie are out of place. Like I say I'm surprised at the reaction here at xixax. "too plot heavy" sounds like something my photography teacher said.

"I don't like kubrick because he's too cerebrial."

So are you saying "We don't like oldboy because we thought it was going to be Kill Bill 2?"

Kill Bill was inspired by grindhouse/exploitation and samurai movies. So, you reject that expectation and what do you have? I guess you are forced to look at it as a realistic movie if your expectations are extreemly black and white. Isn't there middle ground where a movie is Tragedy, Revenge, and Satirical or Parable-like? The movie is half contained inside the main character's inner monologue dealing with existence at its most basic, with false memories, with moral taboo, and with many extreemly vulnerable aspects of man. I think too many people are judging it superficially or on the surface.

Anyway I'm not sure I'm qualified to continue questioning this movies "goodness" or lack thereof. I do know, however, that I loved it.

I would also love to be shown where I am wrong because I know I am wrong, especially after only one viewing I doubt I have digested enough to see it and the comments on this thread objectionally. So please, someone, tell me I am way off base here, am reading too much into the movie (god forbid) or am just a sucker for "shock value", or I don't know, what would you say about someone who loved OldBoy and wasn't right for loving it?

I appreciate old movies like the 70s New Hollywood and Russian New Wave films and german directors Lars Von Triers and Werner Herzog, etc etc etc... and we look at these movies, foreign or american, an clap our hands because the stories of small people are metaphors or satires for the times, what was going on then, or seek to probe the deeper psyche, or any millions of reasons other than the surface value. Is Oldboy "mediocre" or "not great" because its surface value is as heavy as the underlying context or metaphors or any hundred of possible interpretations?

(/end rant?)

[Pubrick]

i wouldn't say the response here is negative. it's critical, but overall positive.

[pete]

when will the new people on this board stop preaching the obvious sermons based on incorrect assumptions after misinterpreting other people's posts?

[cron]

think of it as a natural process.

there are godawful syndromes though.

[socketlevel]

all i know is: if this movie wasnt subtitled and was an american made movie people would think it was the worst thing ever.  except for pete, cause he's actually asian.

yeah i know what you mean, same goes for el mariachi, people don't know how bad the acting is in that one because it's spanish with subs.  the dubbing sucks too.  iguess international markets is the way to go with that type of thing.

do you speak korean?

-sl-

[thadius sterling]

I apologise if I seemed to be preaching, or if I mis-interpreted any posts. I still don't see how I'm wrong, but I will avoid posting in that much detail in the future. Sorry.


EDIT: I also didn't clarify I was only refering to maybe 1 post on here, the rest of what I was "preaching" about was concerning things I have read on other sites and boards. Once again, sorry.

[hedwig]

nobodys mad at you