The Manohla Dargis review in the NY Times ripped it (and Chanwook's fanbase) a new balloon knot. For those who haven't seen it:
The Violence (and the Seafood) Is More Than RawBY MANOHLA DARGIS
One question, perhaps the question, is this: what does art have to do with a guy eating a live octopus, and then hammering a couple of (human) heads?
The guy in question, the one doing the gobbling and hammering, is Oh Dae-su, the central character in the frenzied Korean thriller "Oldboy." The latest in pulp-fiction cool, "Oldboy" was directed by Park Chanwook, whose films, including the very fine "Joint Security Area" and the repugnant "Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance," have won him admirers in rarefied circles, including the Cannes Film Festival, where last year "Oldboy" took second prize. Given the body count and sadistic violence in "Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance" and "Oldboy," it's no surprise that Mr. Park's largest fan base may be those cult-film aficionados for whom distinctions between high art and low are unknown, unrecognized and certainly unwelcome.
After going on a raucous drunk, an ordinary businessman, Dae-su (the terrific Choi Min-sik, who also starred in Im Kwon-taek's "Chihwaseon"), is mysteriously abducted to a private prison. There, with a television set and a painting of a leering Jesus-like figure for company, Dae-su keeps body and mind together (if barely), mostly by working out and chipping away at his prison walls. Eventually, he's released, whereupon he meets a kindly, predictably beautiful sushi waitress, Mido (Gang Hye-jung), gobbles down that poor octopus and proves that he wields a mean hammer. In time, he comes face to face with his anonymous tormenter, a smoothie with a smile named Lee Woo-jin (Yoo Ji-tae), who gives him five days - or else! - to learn why he was imprisoned.
A master of composition, Mr. Park makes some of the snazziest-looking pulp fiction going. He has an impeccable if unoriginal visual style, indebted both to the usual masters (Hitchcock, Kubrick, with a nod at Buñuel) and especially to David Fincher, whose pop nihilism and dedication to the plasticity of the medium hang heavily over this film. That generally makes "Oldboy" entertaining to watch - notwithstanding the scene in which Dae-su eats a live animal - which is a good thing, because there is not much to think about here, outside of the choreographed mayhem. The screenplay, which the director helped write, is the least of the film's attractions; certainly the puerile, big-bang finish, which flashes the story back to high school and a teenage "slut," suggests that Mr. Park knows the adolescent mindset of his target audience all too well.
"Oldboy" is a good if trivial genre movie, no more, no less. There's no denying that Mr. Park is some kind of virtuoso, but so what? So was the last guy who directed a Gap commercial. Cinematic virtuosity for its own sake, particularly as expressed through cinematography - in loop-the-loop camera work and, increasingly, in computer-assisted ornamentation - is a modern plague that threatens to bury us in shiny, meaningless movies. Historically speaking, the most interesting thing about "Oldboy" is that like so much "product" now coming out of Hollywood, it is a B movie tricked out as an A movie. Once, a film like this, predicated on extreme violence and staying within the prison house of genre rather than transcending it, would have been shot on cardboard sets with two-bit talent. It would have had its premiere in Times Square.
The fact that "Oldboy" is embraced by some cinephiles is symptomatic of a bankrupt, reductive postmodernism: one that promotes a spurious aesthetic relativism (it's all good) and finds its crudest expression in the hermetically sealed world of fan boys. (At this point, it's perhaps worth pointing out that the head of the jury at Cannes last year was none other than Quentin Tarantino.) In this world, aesthetic and moral judgments - much less philosophical and political inquiries - are rejected in favor of a vague taxonomy of cool that principally involves ever more florid spectacles of violence. As in, "Wow, he's hammering those dudes with a knife stuck in his back - cool!" Or, "He's about to drop that guy and his dog from the roof - way cool!" Kiss-kiss, bang-bang, yawn-yawn. We are a long way from Pasolini and Peckinpah.
Ouch...
Not having seen the film, I can't say if this applies,but at the same time, the following phrase certainly sums out a lot of the recent cineaste attitude:
The fact that "Oldboy" is embraced by some cinephiles is symptomatic of a bankrupt, reductive postmodernism: one that promotes a spurious aesthetic relativism (it's all good) and finds its crudest expression in the hermetically sealed world of fan boys.
Discuss?
― jay blanchard (jay blanchard), Monday, 28 March 2005 19:27 (twenty-one years ago)
― fe zaffe (fezaffe), Monday, 28 March 2005 22:18 (twenty-one years ago)
― grandmacop, Monday, 28 March 2005 23:43 (twenty-one years ago)
meh. girls cant see blood
Zing! There goes any chance you had at getting some Manohla action, fezaffe...
― jay blanchard (jay blanchard), Tuesday, 29 March 2005 01:57 (twenty-one years ago)
"hipster goulash" "slick grunge" "the worst sentimentality" "a virtuosic stupid movie" "marketable cynicism"
― andrew s (andrew s), Tuesday, 29 March 2005 02:26 (twenty-one years ago)
Seriously though, is it just me or do both the Dargis and White reviews sound like nothing more than myopic artistic complacency & good old fashioned curmudgeonly youth-bashing? It reads to me as nothing more than "this is the empty sensationalistic, nihilistic crap kids today are going for" when the same was said about Godard, Passolini, Antonioni & all of the other once-cutting-edge filmmakers that Dargis & White look back to, reminiscing about the "golden days" of cinema.
It's easy to praise these cinematic gods now, but back in their early days they were still making works for their "fanboys", and relied on the same cult followings, cynical attitudes & cutting-edge formalistic tricks that today's hip filmmakers do (I mean, what's the difference between Godard & Tarantino when you really come down to it? A little less cocaine & a little more misguided "champagne-Maoism"?)
The kids are all right.
― jay blanchard (jay blanchard), Tuesday, 29 March 2005 03:26 (twenty-one years ago)
although i do doubt that it's quite as dangerous to the established order of the film world as armond seems to imply. i don't think there's a larger trend of "youth-bashing" & the rejection of the new in his criticism, but will happily examine it if it's pointed out to me. sometimes a movie can just suck because it's bad. dargis i'm not really at all familiar with.
― andrew s (andrew s), Tuesday, 29 March 2005 04:29 (twenty-one years ago)
this guy lets his anger cloud his review
― david steans, Tuesday, 29 March 2005 10:05 (twenty-one years ago)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Tuesday, 29 March 2005 13:36 (twenty-one years ago)
― zappi (joni), Wednesday, 30 March 2005 00:57 (twenty-one years ago)
Comparing Oldboy to Hollywood product reveals its qualities - its narratively brave, I thought it was incredibly unsentimental (unlike our old mate Armond) and pitiless in its characterisation. The element that is most obviously attention-grabbing is the violence, the octopus, etc. This is the bit that hollywood can and does do, but Park does it better than most American directors, more stylishly, more audaciously, with far more wit. Dargis says 'so what " of this virtuosity, but it is a pleasure in itself.
It is an empty film, with nothing to say, really, but its beautiful and entertaining and frequently funny. Why should it be anything more than that? Because it won a prize at Cannes?
I preferred Sympathy for Mr Vengeance, which is more formally adventurous for its genre (many long takes and static set-ups distancing us) and more cynical without seeming quite so calculated...
― David N (David N.), Wednesday, 30 March 2005 21:17 (twenty-one years ago)
― Airtube (nordicskilla), Friday, 1 April 2005 22:26 (twenty-one years ago)
― fcussen (Burger), Saturday, 2 April 2005 12:58 (twenty-one years ago)
But then it completely falls apart when the villain arrives on the scene. Badly acted, boring, and so over-the-top evil and powerful that he just ends up as a sadistic Bond villain, complete with a silent-type right hand man.
The ending reminded me of Seven, for some reason. Box being opened, resulting in a sucker-punch to the hero, etc. In Seven it worked for me, in this film it doesn't.
I'd recommend seeing it, I suppose, but don't expect a Cannes prize-worthy or four-star film. LA Weekly had a review last week that was an open letter to Tarantino, wondering why he'd given acclaim to a film that "sucked". I'm not sure it sucks overall, but the last 1/3rd pretty much does.
― Gear! (can Jung shill it, Mu?) (Gear!), Tuesday, 5 April 2005 04:37 (twenty-one years ago)
― TOMB07 (TOMBOT), Thursday, 11 January 2007 15:30 (nineteen years ago)
― TOMB07 (TOMBOT), Thursday, 11 January 2007 15:31 (nineteen years ago)
― Dr Morbius (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 11 January 2007 16:29 (nineteen years ago)
Finally got around to seeing this. Once I figured out who Mido was early on, I rapidly lost interest.
Tombot OTM. What the hell was the big deal about this?
― Elvis Telecom, Thursday, 6 August 2009 04:22 (sixteen years ago)
For the nth time, this movie is better the 2nd time you see it, when you know exactly what's going on. Because that's when you're watching it not as a martial-arts thriller but as a Shakespearian tragedy. And that's what it is. That first review is so wide of the mark it's unreal.
― the hubby space veggiescope (country matters), Thursday, 6 August 2009 04:30 (sixteen years ago)
oh man that first review is such a hilarious blinkered idiot piece of shit
actually wait, given this line:
certainly the puerile, big-bang finish, which flashes the story back to high school and a teenage "slut," suggests that Mr. Park knows the adolescent mindset of his target audience all too well.
never mind, it isnt hilarious, it is an indication of someone who is too caught up in their edgy critical fight the power reaction to actually um pay attention to and follow the BASIC PLOT of the movie.
― Results 1 - 1 of 1 for vedderizer. (0.05 seconds) ;_; (jjjusten), Thursday, 6 August 2009 04:50 (sixteen years ago)
Dargis & White in reductionist non-shocker.
― Elvis Telecom, Thursday, 6 August 2009 05:31 (sixteen years ago)
i just had a moment of "who?" and then realized oh shit i am on ILF run!
― Results 1 - 1 of 1 for vedderizer. (0.05 seconds) ;_; (jjjusten), Thursday, 6 August 2009 05:33 (sixteen years ago)
srsly no offense to you dudes, im just a schlep that watches a lot of movies and is over his head here, carry on
― Results 1 - 1 of 1 for vedderizer. (0.05 seconds) ;_; (jjjusten), Thursday, 6 August 2009 05:34 (sixteen years ago)
watched this thru ondemand last night. pretty silly
― （ ´_ゝ˙） (Dr. Phil), Thursday, 6 August 2009 05:48 (sixteen years ago)
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/spike-lee-direct-mandates-old-209675
― DJP, Monday, 11 July 2011 19:44 (fourteen years ago)
starring Josh Brolin
http://www.deadline.com/2011/08/josh-brolin-to-star-in-spike-lees-oldboy-redo-for-mandate/
WTF
― incredibly middlebrow (Dr Morbius), Monday, 29 August 2011 20:05 (fourteen years ago)
http://24.media.tumblr.com/14089e34df63ef194ef713dac5569852/tumblr_mpmogau03H1qbxn7go1_500.jpg
― 乒乓, Tuesday, 9 July 2013 02:02 (twelve years ago)
a spike lee joint
― johnny crunch, Tuesday, 9 July 2013 02:12 (twelve years ago)
I hope they keep the octopus scene.
― Fetchboy, Tuesday, 9 July 2013 02:15 (twelve years ago)
No no no no no no
― Magna Sharta (jjjusten), Tuesday, 9 July 2013 05:46 (twelve years ago)
creative bankruptcy strikes again
― reet pish (imago), Tuesday, 9 July 2013 08:16 (twelve years ago)
is that real? i was about to say i honestly hope everybody involved dies, soon, but damn i like Spike maybe he will do something oddball to it. but i'd rather he just didn't shit on one of my favouritest films.
― the SI unit of ignorance (Noodle Vague), Tuesday, 9 July 2013 09:26 (twelve years ago)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj38DvZP4YU
― i wanna be a gabbneb baby (Hungry4Ass), Wednesday, 10 July 2013 21:05 (twelve years ago)
Wow. this looks horrible.
― Fetchboy, Wednesday, 10 July 2013 21:43 (twelve years ago)
should still be better than the original, which is terrible. more like Moldboy
― i wanna be a gabbneb baby (Hungry4Ass), Wednesday, 10 July 2013 21:50 (twelve years ago)
josh brolin is hilarious in that trailer. so angry. he must work out really hard to not have mad jowls b/c dudes face is set to jiggle w rage
― adam, Wednesday, 10 July 2013 23:24 (twelve years ago)
only god forgives might suffice as a not-remake-but-there-in-spirit? (note: i have no idea if it's any good)
― dub job deems (darraghmac), Wednesday, 10 July 2013 23:28 (twelve years ago)
I still find it hard to believe that a Hollywood film is going to have the same ending. I at least give it kudos for trying to throw viewers off the trail (according to another thread some of you guys had figured it out right away), but everything else looks horrible. One of the best things about the original was that it wasn't afraid to make Dae-su this sort of grotesque, tragic figure.
― frogbs, Thursday, 11 July 2013 00:30 (twelve years ago)
that said if any American actor could've pulled this off it probably would be Nicolas Cage, for real
― frogbs, Thursday, 11 July 2013 00:32 (twelve years ago)
ok turns out the ending is going to be the same but the "epilogue" may be a little different
― frogbs, Thursday, 11 July 2013 14:40 (twelve years ago)
Oh the whole thing is pure Jacobean revenge tragedy
― reet pish (imago), Thursday, 11 July 2013 14:47 (twelve years ago)
yes except in this case spike lee is woo-jin and we're all dae-su
― truth bomb lawyer mean mean pride (Edward III), Thursday, 11 July 2013 18:05 (twelve years ago)
plus after watching that trailer I wish some cornwall would service my gloucester
― truth bomb lawyer mean mean pride (Edward III), Thursday, 11 July 2013 18:14 (twelve years ago)
just saw a trailer for the American remake in the theatre. going to hope it's just a terrible trailer, because everything I saw looked like Lee is going to mangle the movie and make it a boilerplate revenge flick.
― Neanderthal, Tuesday, 22 October 2013 23:23 (twelve years ago)