getting way too much hate


I admit I have yet to see the original. But I loved this movie. The film was gripping from beginning to end. I could have been more happy with the way it ended. Weird part is it, it was satisfying, but very grim at the same time. Julia Roberts was easily the stand out, while everyone else was decent. Sad part is Julie is going to get screwed over by not even getting an Oscar or Golden Globe recognition. This is easily one her most top-notch performances, her best after Erin Brockovich.

And in this moment, I swear we are infinite.

reply

[deleted]

Just wanted to comment on the uber comfortable recliner seats. The AMC by me made all their seats recliners and it is heaven for me with my bad back. They are fantastic, only place I go now to watch a movie. The recliners have brought in so much more business for this AMC. Only problem is they are so comfy that if your a bit tired it can be hard to stay awake. Almost every movie I see you can hear at least 1 person snoring, lol. I applaud AMC for not raising their prices also. We got it made these days. We can order a beer or a mix drink, relax in a recliner, and watch a movie in crystal clear resolution.

reply

Yeah i loved this movie so much, this negativity surrounding it just because it's a remake

reply

Haven't seen the original but this movie was terrible. Poorly paced absolutely boring mess that's rests the entire film on a twist ending.

reply

I was considering a reply to jado_888 who stated that people hated it simply because it was a remake.
I did not see the original but my feeling pretty much parallel yours.
There may have been a decent movie here but it was ruined for me by being presented in a jumbled incoherent manner.
Billy ray is now on my "watchlist" of directors who's work I will avoid or at very least will wait to see what others are saying.
If I would not have gone with a friend who drove, i would have walked out. I dont think I would have missed much. By the time it got to the end, I really didnt care how it ended. I just wanted to leave.

reply

I'd like to see the original. This is one of the worst movies I've seen that had so much potential as far as the actors involved...just a mess of a movie and an incredibly insipid script. Good Lord. The original just has to be better than this Americanized version.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-09OhQPiIg#t=85

reply

I really enjoyed this as well. In fact my cousin (who is the entertainment business and a script writer) really liked it as well. This movie was exactly would I would hope it would be. A great drama with a very dramatic ending. I think JR should definitely get an Oscar nod for his impressive performance in this sleeper hit of the year.

---

...so that's where I've been the last 13 years.

reply

Yeah, you really need to see the original to see how great this story can be told. The American version is ok, but the hate is absolutely warranted if you had seen the original first. The American version simply pales in comparison in every way. Also, the performances in the American version were not that good, nor was the chemistry between the actors. In the original, the performances were amazing and the chemistry, I mean Jesus, you could almost taste it.

"This life's hard, man, but it's harder if you're stupid!"

reply

(This post will have spoilers, though I'll try to keep them only to the remake.)

After watching the original last night, I'm afraid I have to agree with the stinky foreigners on this one, present company excluded, of course. The few brilliant scenes in the remake -- and all that comes to mind right now is the dog, the stadium, and the interrogation -- are really only brilliant because they directly replicated those moments from the original.

Bits that I thought were weak in the remake, for example, the bad guy becoming a person of interest solely based on him glancing at the victim in a photograph, are in the original significantly shored up, in this case by multiple creepy photographs of the same guy lurking in the background.

The actress in the Nicole Kidman role also has the distinct advantage of not being Nicole Kidman, though, conversely, the actor in the Chiwetel Ejiofor role has the distinct disadvantage of not being Chiwetel Ejiofor. (I'll admit that he grew on me as the movie went on.) What tips this ultimately in the original's favor is the Pablo Sandoval role, which, in addition to being one of the most amazing performances ever, is the heart and soul of the movie. His passion speech was unforgivably mangled in the remake and his absence is not in any way made up for by the Dean Norris character.

One thing that made more sense in the remake, though it was certainly convoluted, was the reason why the bad guy got released. In the remake, he's already working for the counter-terrorism bureau when he commits the crime. In the original, he's recruited by some bizarre Argentine version of the Dirty Dozen program. I am vaguely aware of South America's difficulties with rebels and guerrillas, and this is set in the turbulent seventies, so it's probably not at all out of place, but I did feel like a little more information was warranted. That said, holy christ did I LOVE the elevator scene; what was rendered maudlin in the remake is in the original both hilarious and horrifying.

Overall, beyond Nicole Kidman's inability to act like a normal human being, what really kills the remake is its bland direction. As I said, the only moments that showed any flare of brilliance are straight up, frame-by-frame replications of the original. That amazing Dodgers stadium shot, where for a moment you think you're watching a Fincher film, is done even better as a soccer/football stadium in the original.

In short, I strongly recommend you watch the stinky foreigner version. This is not a Fincher/Dragon Tattoo improvement, it's a fruitless and, at times, painfully misguided attempt to tell a brilliant story in the most disjointed way possible. (The back-and-forth with the past and present is not nearly as prevalent or whiplash inducing.)

reply

[deleted]