For audiences familiar with Chan-wook Park‘s 2003 adaptation of Garon Tsuchiya and Nobuaki Minegishi‘s graphic novel, Spike Lee‘s Oldboy is sure to elicit a different response than those entirely unfamiliar with the material, which could prove an interesting social experiment. I haven’t seen Park’s film for a year or so, maybe longer, but if my memory serves me well enough, in most ways screenwriter Mark Protosevich (The Cell, I Am Legend) hasn’t made many changes in terms of getting from point A to point B, though what largely seems different are the characters’ relationships with one another, but I think even that can be accounted for in interesting ways.
The cultural differences between the Korean original and this American remake result in a fascinating game of compare and contrast for those that have seen both, though it’s not even necessarily the actual culture I’m referring to as much as it’s the difference in cinematic culture. Your willingness to expand your cinematic horizons, whether you’re a seasoned film geek or simply a mainstream moviegoer, will serve as the true test.
It’s oftentimes easier to accept certain plot points from a film set in a culture you’re not entirely familiar with as compared to your own, simply out of familiarity. In this sense Lee’s Oldboy feels like a film transplanted from one body to another, the question is will the new host accept or reject the foreign object?
Oldboy centers on Joe Doucett (Josh Brolin), a deadbeat dad, alcoholic advertising executive. When a deal goes sour due to his philandering tendencies he finally hits rock bottom and ends up stumbling around the rainy city for most of the night, but that botched deal will soon become the least of his concerns.
The year is 1993 and Joe wakes the next morning from his drunken stupor in an unfamiliar room, but things don’t immediately click. He hears the shower in the bathroom and assumes he’s gone home with a woman he met the night before only to suddenly realize there is no woman, the shower is empty, there is no way to open the door and his breakfast is served to him through a small hatch at the bottom of the door, which promptly slams shut as quickly as it opened. Where is he? How did he get here? Who did this to him? He’ll have the next 20 years to consider these questions and the decisions he’s made throughout his life.
After two decades of isolation, dumplings and self-reflection, Joe is released. He busts out of a trunk in the middle of a field and stumbles into the sunlight with a wad of cash in his wallet and determination to find answers to some burning questions. He befriends a young social worker (Elizabeth Olsen), visits a high school friend (Michael Imperioli) and is haunted by the anonymous voice at the other end of the phone he found in his pocket.
Anyone concerned the graphic nature of the film would be toned down from the original adaptation need not worry. Lee maintains a dark thematic tone with plenty of violence to go around as the claw of a hammer proves incredibly useful when looking for a way to puncture the human skull and a box cutter is equally valuable if your needs call for removing small segments of skin from someone’s neck. Oldboy is just as much about blind revenge as it is a mystery and the questions that permeate throughout cause an interesting conundrum as you never know if you should be rooting for Joe to succeed or if he would best be left to suffer.
I enjoyed the performances all around, Brolin as the blunt object of revenge, Olsen as the caring stranger and Sharlto Copley and Samuel L. Jackson as the mysterious puppet masters. Copley’s affected performance may seem silly to some and may even seem silly to those that love the original, but given the film’s twisted narrative I thought it was a perfect performance. Jackson gives a performance we’ve seen from him time and again. He’s reliable in this way and it works for this film, despite its familiarity.
There’s a certain measure of style over substance at times — a naked swim in a private pool and a scantily clad woman with a yellow umbrella standing in the distance. Yet, it’s all in an effort to confuse and frustrate Doucett as well as the audience so it’s understandable. It’s a perfect film for the cinematography of Sean Bobbitt (Shame, 12 Years a Slave) as he really seems to know how to capture a sense of intimate isolation and despair. No such example is more perfect than Bobbitt’s ability to elevate Doucett’s displeasure eating dumplings and projecting that dislike on the audience no matter how much you may love them yourself.
I also enjoyed Roque Baños‘ score, which almost seems to have Hans Zimmer’s noirish cello, mixed with electronic stylings of some of John Powell’s Bourne work, though it never fully envelopes the scene as much as it works in accompaniment with the images.
Lee’s storytelling is very matter-of-fact, though he does deal with a few thematic flourishes that would seem to originate more from the nature of the story he’s telling than anything else. Outside of that, his blunt delivery of violence and brutality gives it an added oomph, almost numbing the audience into submission and sure to appall others. For those wondering, yes, the lengthy hammer battle is included, though Lee does his best to differentiate his from Park’s, but suffice to say, nothing, in this sense, beats the original.
Lee’s remake of Oldboy is bold as he’s sure to attract negativity from moviegoers that consider the idea of remaking Park’s film to be blasphemy, but in his execution of the story he creates an interesting dichotomy between two cinematic cultures. It’s one of those instances where making a near scene-for-scene remake is more interesting than had he made it entirely his own. In a lot of ways I don’t see a ton of differences between the two films, but the approach to the cultural approach to the story can’t help but be different and, for me, it’s a story just as appealing and confounding as it was when Park adapted it ten years ago, though, once again and as with most things, nothing beats the original.
