Martyrs (2015) User Reviews

Everything that made the original great is missing

[jtindahouse · 4/10 · 22 March 2017]

I recently saw the original 'Martyrs' and absolutely loved it. That French film from 2008 was very close to a horror masterpiece. It was original, disturbing and clever. An absolutely marvelous film. So of course the Americans were going to have a go at remaking it - I'm just surprised it took them so long. Now, there are a number of reasons you might remake a film. You could think there were areas that could have been improved on in an otherwise good film, or you might simply want more people to see such a wonderful story. Whatever your reason is for doing it though, one thing is absolutely crucial - you must maintain the quality. Otherwise you are doing a massive disservice to the original and tarnishing its name. Sadly, that's exactly what the 2015 version of 'Martyrs' has done.

The first 3/4 of the film remain extremely similar to the original, almost feeling like a shot-for-shot remake at times. During this phase the movie isn't actually half bad. The same intensity isn't quite there and the acting is step down, but it could be considered a passable film up to that point. Then the final 1/4 begins and it all starts to unravel. This was always going to be the segment that determined how good this film was going to be, because it was the segment that made the original what it was. Everything that made the original ending great was basically removed and replaced with inferior ideas. I would've preferred to see zero creativity used and simply a shot-for-shot, word-for-word remake created, simply because people who see this instead of the original are going to get a bad taste in their mouth, when they should have exactly the opposite.

This remake of 'Martyrs' never dares to be great, and that it why it isn't. Whether they were afraid American audiences wouldn't be able to handle the gruesome violence and ambiguity of the original I'm not sure, but if that was the case it makes zero sense because the only people who are going to see a film like this are the ones that can handle it. It's a terrible shame this movie was ever made. If it's not too late and you haven't seen either version yet, I implore you to choose the French original. It'll be the wisest decision you ever make.

Dead on arrival

[drownsoda90 · 4/10 · 29 January 2016]

I'm not even going to lay out a plot blurb for this, because if you are planning on seeing it, chances are you have already seen Pascal Laugier's 2008 original and know what's up. In fact, it's probably not inaccurate to say that the only people who may be seeing this film are those already acquainted with the source material, as this remake had virtually zero publicity, a sad excuse of a theatrical release, and a buzz that was DOA.

By most accounts, this remake of "Martyrs" was doomed by the mere fact of it being a remake; it's difficult to outdo something with as much palpable intensity and thematic abhorrence as the original film. and that's precisely where this film most falls flat. There is an inexplicable feeling of shallowness to the picture that pervades it from nearly beginning to end. Part of it is the lackluster cinematography, and part of it is the lack of dynamism in the performances, but most of all, it feels like the filmmakers in general were dispassionate about the material itself, and it shows.

The truth is, a remake could have worked, but it would have needed at least a little life breathed into it, and this film feels like it was taken off life support from day one. The script here is near identical to the original film's, and it begins as a near shot-for-shot remake, but falls off that train within the first ten minutes. In fact, the film only really begins to diverge in the final act, which is honestly where I found the it to be most convincing. I may be the minority here, but I actually thought the way they rewrote the conclusion was clever and intriguing without being too much of a touchy-feely tradeoff—it still maintained the dark nerve of the original's ending, which I respected, and the last five minutes may be the only portion of the film that I truly thought was worthwhile.

The acting here is decent, but the lead female actresses at times seem to be going through the motions. Some obtuse dialogue doesn't exactly help matters either. Kate Burton is an interesting and solid choice for the cultist matriarch, and I actually enjoyed her performance in this quite a bit.

Overall though, "Martyrs" only barely begins to scratch the surface of what the original film did, and it's unfortunate. It fails to capture any of the remote coldness, psychological disconnect, or stark brutality that made the original film so unforgettable, and ends up feeling like little more than a direct-to-video horror flick with about a fifth of the vitality. When watching the remake, one feels like the film is self-consciously going through the motions, and when taking into consideration its stodgy demeanor, failed distribution, and complete lack of any and all promotion, "Martyrs" 2016 ultimately feels like a production that was given up on before it had even begun. Where the original was gutsy, stylish, and unsparing, the remake manages to be the film equivalent of a death rattle. 4/10.

No comparison to the original

[lmt_is_me · 3/10 · 31 December 2018]

I would have to say that this is not really as good as the original.

There was little character development at the beginning so you don't really get to know these two. I was not a fan of either actresses although I have seen them in other shows/movies and they were decent.

I think most American remakes do not live up to the original. While, this may be a reimagining, it is loosely based on the original. This is another remake that should not have been done.

A polished, well-executed turd is still a turd

[manuelasaez · 2/10 · 6 October 2016]

I have to start off by saying that I believe that the French version of the film is the most depression, soul-wretchingly horrific movie I have ever seen in my life. It is a masterpiece in the use of atmosphere, nuance, and tact in horror film-making, and will most likely not be topped as a horror film for quite some time. This Blumhouse version is NONE OF THAT. Imagine if someone told you that France has the best burger you have ever tasted. You want to eat it so bad, but you don't want to travel to France or learn to read the menu at the restaurant because you are lazy. You wait for an American chef to create the same burger, but the meat is dry, it has no lettuce, tomatoes or pickles, and the condiments lack taste. That is exactly what you are getting with this remake. It is tasteless, like New York BBQ is tasteless compared to Texas BBQ. Like Taco Bell is compared to REAL Mexican Tacos. It lacks any redeemable elements that would make it palatable for anyone over the age of 14, and who has a more refined palette. It is simply a hollow imitation of the French film. It tries so hard to shock and disturb, but in the end, it just makes you feel sorry for everyone involved. People woke up and went to work for this. They have their names attached to the credits. It will be a film they will be forced to use on their resume. It just makes me sad that production companies like Blumhouse can outright spit on real artistry in the name of profit margins. Blumhouse, you are the worst thing to happen to horror movies since the advent of Found-footage. You have ruined one of the most definitive horror experiences since The Exorcist, and your whole company should be ashamed of yourselves.

This film was absolute garbage and an insult to horror films. We will never speak of it again, and never within the same sentence as the original. A complete and utter failure, it should not be seen by anyone. It is, without a doubt, one of the worst films ever made, regardless of genre.

Yet another pointless remake that is completely inferior to the original.

[PeterLormeReviews · 2/10 · 10 December 2016]

Martyrs (2016) is yet another pointless remake that is completely inferior to the original. Have you ever heard one of those trashy Kidz Bop covers of a pretty good song? This remake is like a Kidz Bop version of a heavy-metal song. The entire movie just put a foul stench in my mouth. It is neutered down to its core. There isn't anything disturbing, horrifying, or shocking like there was in the original. Hell, there isn't even a lot of blood in this one. It's hard to just simply describe how horrible it is, so I'll just use another analogy. Let's say the class genius is taking a test, right? So the big class goofball decides to sit down next to him and cheat off his test. He copies most of the test, but then there's the essay section. The smart kid is moving along with it, writing in his own unique way. The catch is that he writes really fast. So the dumbo has to quickly copy down everything he's writing. After they finish, the smart kid has a pretty good essay but it's not his best work. The noodlehead kid has an incomprehensible copy of the smart kid's essay, so much so that sentences are out of order, and the essay prompt isn't even answered. Even if you take the original out of the equation and call this remake an original movie, it's still garbage. One of the saddest attempts at a remake I have ever seen.

Less violence, less emotion, less quality

[christinapichler · 2/10 · 31 May 2016]

Being a huge fan of the French 2008 movie "Martyrs", I had strong doubts about the quality and necessity of a remake. Still I tried to push all those negative feelings aside and give the movie a fair shot.

Like the original, it starts out when the young girl Lucy escapes from a terrible situation unknown to the viewer. She lands in an orphanage where she meets her best friend Anna while being haunted from the past. Ten years later, Lucy kills a family claiming they are her former capturers.

One aspect I love about the French version is, it basically consists of two stories with the turnaround in the middle of the movie. The remake adapts the first half of the film more or less faithfully though clearly worse than the original and the second half deviates completely from it. With those drastic changes it feels more like one consisting story rather than two. They tried to create a new story instead of copying the French movie shot for shot and the attempt of doing so I appreciate about it. Still the second part fells illogical and is a mess. For me it does not work and felt even cheesy sometimes.

The acting is not exceptional but also not terrible. It has some beautifully shot scenes but there is some shaky cam in it which is bothering. Furthermore the movie is a lot less violent and gory which basically is okay but leads to some illogical moments in the second half. Also there are some genuinely boring moments considering the short running time and overall it is a lot less emotional than Pascal Laugier's Martyrs. Especially an aspect from Lucy's struggle with the past is left unresolved and you care a lot less about her.

Over all, I think someone who has not seen the French version or does not like extremely brutal movies can watch this toned down version and might actually enjoy it for its story. Fans of the New French Extremity masterpiece should stay away from the remake and everybody else I clearly advise to check out the former one!

Hacked to s&*t (and not in a good way)

[LivinDownUnder · 2/10 · 24 January 2016]

First off, I'm a big fan of the original French version of Martyrs (2008). This is one of those movies that stays with you long after you have watched it. When I heard of a remake for the American audience, I thought it would be great and would love to see what could be done with it. I went into seeing this movie very excited. It starts off similar to the French version, but seemed to lack a bit of the eerie atmosphere the original had. The characters seemed a bit more likable in this version, so I started to get a bit more excited about it the further it went.

The story then take a left turn and seems very rushed once all of the action starts. The original version is a lot bloodier and contains a lot more violence. This version hints to the violence taking place but never shows whats going on. The ending, which in the original, is the part of the movie that sticks with you, is hinted to, but again, never shown. I recommend that if you do decide to watch this movie, what the original version first. Hey America, if you're going to do a remake, do it properly and don't hack a film to shite!

Yet another unnecessary remake....

[KD-Lasso · 2/10 · 21 January 2016]

First off: I love the original french Martyrs(2008), but I still had some issues with it which would make this a prime target for remaking. So I started watching this movie with an open mind, hoping for the best preparing for the worst... And sadly, it turned out to be the latter.

It starts off the same, but without the eeriness of the original, granted that could be because I already had seen the original so I'll give that a pass. The acting is fine for what it is, but it's shot way worse than the original. (And yes, I'm gonna keep comparing it to the original) but it's just "blah"... They totally waste Toby Huss, I'm a big fan of his and was looking forward to see him in this, but yeah that don't pan out.

The ending, my favorite part from the original, is... "americanized". Let's say that. The one part from the original that really sticks with you and they throw it away like an unwanted fetus on prom-night.

Do not watch this movie! Watch the french original, it's the same thing but better. So sum Martyrs(2015) up in one word: Unnecessary!

Ignore the pretentious fools, it's decent

[shawnhossen · 6/10 · 2 January 2020]

People have actually lost their minds, just because the original is much better doesn't make this a 1/10.. They think you have to hate on the remake for the sake of being a remake. If this is 1/10 what is Paranormal Activity -9/10 Fast and Furious 12 is -34/10? Come on think a little bit, you don't have to hate this one with all your soul to be able to say you liked the original. People just go way overboard. If it wasn't a remake it's a pretty decent movie by itself, that's all you need to know.

Disappointing Remake...

[stjeanclaudel · 1/10 · 12 August 2018]

The original Martyr is quite a masterpiece this is almost an insult to it...

Rare Fan Of The Original That Actually Liked It.

[AlukardsCastle · 8/10 · 2 February 2016]

Unlike most others, I welcome horror movie remakes. I know that most end up being trash. But there are the few that end up being decent horror movies in their own merit. Yes, I'm a fan of the original 2008 French film Martyrs. I mean I really loved the intense raw terror of the original. But like most have said, it wasn't just about the terror. It had deep meaning. Which is why it has become one of the biggest horror cult classics of the past 20 years. So when I heard that they were making an American remake, I was honestly excited. The producers promised to keep the intensity of the original. This announcement was way back in 2010. So you can imagine I've been waiting nearly 6 years for this. Now the film is finally here. I will admit that the trailer for the film released online made it look very mediocre. And I knew that most other fans of the original would trash the film relentlessly regardless of its true value. It is hard to not compare this to the original. The critics reviews seem implausible too. I guess I'm the rare fan of the original that actually liked it.

*Basic Plot* A girl escapes from captivity from being tortured on a daily basis. The police return to find the torture site abandoned. The girl is sent to an orphanage where she befriends another orphan girl and sees visions of a monster. Years later as an adult she tracks down her captors and takes revenge, which sets off a chain of even more terrifying events for her and her best friend.

That really is just a typical summary of the plot to lure you in. It's for the most part a carbon copy of the originals story. Some scenes are shot for shot. There are a few tweaks that are "Americanized", but are still a bit intense compared to other horror remakes that seem dumbed down. I will admit that upon my first viewing I was disappointed in the handling of the ending. But the film still stuck with me long after. I read all these negative reviews prior and expected the holy grail of terrible remakes. I'm glad to find out most of those reviews are completely misguided. Yes, it pales in comparison to the original. But it is not nearly as bad as other fans have said it is. They seem to blindly hate it. I read one negative review that pointed out that the movie had country music, as if that played a big part in the soundtrack, when in reality it was literally just 10 seconds of the music near the beginning. Others say the acting is typical terrible American remake bad acting. Again, wrong. Sure it wasn't Oscar worthy acting. But it was all believable. Yes, the ending and captivity scenes are changed a lot. They are still intense, but less effective. BUT, still pretty good. I think the movie was still a pretty good horror film. There were scenes of brooding terror in the beginning. The musical score is very epic and emotional for a horror movie. The acting is pretty good. The production value is really good for a low budget remake. There are some visual shots during the daytime scenes that are eye candy. The message the original sent out is still present, just not delivered nearly as well. But it's still there! The ending will disappoint fans of the very memorable finale of the original, but in its own context it works decently. So all these insanely negative reviews should not be taken that seriously until you've seen the movie for yourself and will form your own positive or negative opinion. Believe it or not, even the original hasn't been seen by everyone. So most early reviews for this remake are from disgruntled fans of the original who went out to do nothing but trash this film. Of course if you saw the original and liked it, you will have a hard time not comparing the two. At first I was comparing them, but once I looked at this movie as a standalone horror film pretending the original didn't exist, I found it to be a pretty good horror experience. For the moment, I'd trust the opinion on this film of someone who hasn't seen the original more than the angry fans. Because their minds are fresh. They won't be overly nitpicky. Some will, but most might appreciate this for it's true value. Sure its not nearly the best horror movie ever made, but it's one of the best remakes. I'd bet anything that if this was released nationwide in theaters first, that it would get a warmer response from reviewers. I say if you haven't seen the original, you'll have a better time seeing this on your horror movie night. If you did see the original I strongly recommend you try your hardest not to compare the two and view this as if its truly a standalone film. I predict as time passes by this will find a small cult following. The reviews will slightly get better. Either way, turn up the volume, turn off the lights, and enjoy.

**Fun Fact** The writer of this remake is the same man who wrote the adapted screenplay for the award winning film The Revenant. Believe it or not.

Not Horrid but Not Very Good Either

[Michael_Elliott · 4 February 2016]

Martyrs (2015)

** (out of 4)

A young girl named Lucie escapes from being held hostage and struggles to fit in at the orphanage she's sent. She eventually becomes best friends with a girl named Sam. Flash forward ten years and Lucie (Troian Bellisario) kills the people she feels was responsible for her capture and asks Sam (Caitlin Carmichael) for some help but things take a deadly turn.

The 2008 French film of the same name was known for its brutality and it certainly lived up to its reputation as one of the most graphic movies to be made up to that point. This American remake isn't nearly as awful as some people are making it out to be but there's no doubt that it isn't nearly as entertaining as the original. With that said, there are some major issues here but it's really neither awful or good.

I think the biggest problem with the film is that it's just not all that entertaining. If you've seen the original then you're obviously going to know what's going on but the changes in the story really don't make too much sense but even worse is that it's just downright boring at times. I'm really not sure what it is but I never once really cared for either of the lead characters. Even worse is that if you don't care for them there's really nothing to root for.

The violence here is pretty strong but not nearly as graphic as the original movie. For the most part it's a technically well-made film and features two good performances from the leads. I really thought Carmichael was good in her part. Another good thing is the music score but in all reality that's about it. MARTYRS, the American version, isn't awful by any stretch of the imagination but the filmmakers just didn't do enough to make this stand up on its own.

Don't Compare to Original/Satisfied because of ending

[barathkrishnana · 6/10 · 12 May 2021]

In the Ending Little disappointed But good ending than Martyrs 2008 Not Brutal like Martyrs 2008.

A shell of the original

[deucemcnutt · 4/10 · 22 January 2016]

The original Martyrs is one of my favorite horror movies of all time. I'd even rank it up there with The Exorcist, another film that pushed the envelope and was ahead of its time. Unfortunately, because of the original's cult status, a remake was inevitable. Does it do the original any justice? I can't say that it does. And I honestly feel bad for the directors. They were simply set up for failure. If you are curious about the remake, watch it. I'd read the bad reviews, but I still had to see how it held up to the original. Just too bad it doesn't at all. I will say the acting and score were decent. Again, not as good as the original, but good nonetheless. If you've never seen the original or remake, please watch the original first. Yes, you will have to read subtitles, but I'm gonna assume most of you have a third grade education and can read.

Dare I say one of the worst remake of all time

[Jblum5 · 1/10 · 1 March 2022]

I was a big fan of the French original and decided to see this remake even though the reviews are pretty awful. With respect to Nick Cage's "The Wicker Man" Martyrs American counterpart disrespects the original. The basic story is the same, a girl is seen fleeing captivity and returns to seek revenge on the people who did this to her.

Every single "change" they made to the story made it worse/dumbed down the film. Characters are added and changed and it was all so unnecessary. The acting here is atrocious but I believe in this case it comes down to awful directing. No passion to be found. Also the editing is terrible at many times. Very rarely do we ever get to focus on a shot it's cut very quickly.

Watch the original only and let's hope this is forgotten and many of these people don't get any more work.

Unnecessary Remake

[claudio_carvalho · 4/10 · 28 March 2019]

The French-Canadian "Martyrs" (2008) is one of the most unpleasant and brutal movies ever made, with a disturbing story of insanity and a deceptive open end.

The American "Martyrs" (2015) is an absolute unnecessary remake of this movie. The performances are top-notch but the sick story is uncomfortable for any viewer, especially for those that saw the original film. My vote is four.

Title (Brazil): "Martírio" ("Martyrdom")

Made for people who can't be bothered to read subtitles.....

[FlashCallahan · 3/10 · 13 April 2016]

And that's the only reason I can think of as to why anybody would even begin to think of remaking, re-imagining, cashing in on an out of the blue, fresh, sadistic horror that really had a lasting effect.

And it's made for those people who balk at the idea of watching a movie with subtitles (we all know someone who won't watch a subtitled film, and to be honest, I feel so sorry for them, as they are missing some of the best pieces of cinema ever made).

And lets not forget, it's also a good way to cash in on an already successful film, because there are sadists out there who want to see how much they have ruined a film they genuinely love (and believe me, I paid to see the recent Point Break remake.....Point fake if you would).

So if you haven't seen the wonderful original, stop reading this and do yourself a favour. Or if you are one of those ignorant people, shame on you and the plot goes along these lines....

Ten-year-old Lucie flees from an isolated warehouse where she has been held prisoner. Deeply traumatised, she is plagued by night terrors at the orphanage that takes her in.

Her only comfort comes from Anna, a girl her own age. Nearly a decade later and still traumatised, she finally tracks down the people that tortured her.

As she and Anna move closer to the truth, they find themselves trapped in a nightmare that resembles her past trauma, and if they cannot escape, the titular fate awaits them....

It's a very pointless remake, and it's directed lazily, with poor performances from most of the cast. Bellisario and Noble are quite good as the titular characters, but the material that they are given just resorts them to screaming and looking in shock for the majority of the second and third act.

The originals final act was shocking, the narrative really came into it's own, and it was explained to great lengths, which enhanced the quite sinister subject matter.

Here, it's explained quite briefly by a fourth rate Meryl Streep wannabe, and when the 'money shot' is finally upon us, your already getting your copy of the original Blu Ray out of it's case and ready to put in your machine.

It's not a very good film, it's lazily made, and despite the two leads putting in okay performances, the rest of the cast bring them down.

See the original.

Martyrs - the Family Friendly Version

[olovsimonsson · 3/10 · 5 October 2017]

I wish I could review this movie without comparing with the original, but I don't see how I could do that. As often is the case when Americans attempt to remake movies from other countries, they fail. Such is certainly the case here. Although the directors tried to make the excuse that they was re- imagining rather than remaking, they obviously failed to understand what made the french original so extraordinary. There is no depth to the characters in this version. The directors fail to make me feel for the protagonists. In fact they fail to make me feel anything at all. The long and cruel journey of the protagonist is completely lost.

I don't see the point in the use of excessive violence or gore for the sake of chock in movies. The original version of Martyrs was gory and violent but it was not included for the chock value. The explicit cruelty had meaning, to make the audience understand the suffering of the main character and the amazing ending. This version is more of a family friendly action movie in comparison, and in reducing the most of the violence and cruelty, the movie completely loses the impact of the original. Even more annoying is the assumption that Americans are stupid and need everything explained in detail. Whereas the original made me think and feel and not forget, this version did not affect me at all, and in the moment of writing I'm already forgetting it. Had I not seen the original I probably would not say it's not a terrible movie, just bland. But having seen the French masterpiece, this version certainly is terrible in comparison.

So to summarize: If you want to see a good movie, watch the French 2008 original! And if you have already seen that, then watch it again instead of this mess.

Pointless remake but still watchable

[Stevieboy666 · 5/10 · 5 September 2019]

I think that Martyrs (2015) should be looked as both a remake and as a film in its own right. As a remake it completely lacks the originality, brutality and sheer brilliance of the French original. This is more of a watered down version for non-French speakers who are too lazy to read subtitles. As a film in its own right it is still pretty nasty, well acted and has decent production values. A reasonable time filler. I have to disagree who reviewers who say this is the worst horror remake ever, go check out the Elm St abomination!

Shocking

[curtisjlewis · 6/10 · 7 August 2021]

I'm glad that I watched this before I read the reviews. I haven't seen the original French version that other critics refer to. I thought that this was okay, very gory and at times hard to watch. I love gory films and this one actually, literally made my toes curl. Okay, so truthfully I think think great reveal was a load of nonsense, but it was an okay way to spend a wet English evening. Give it a go.

Maybe you'll like it if you haven't watched the original???

[sarahjanehuber · 4/10 · 16 February 2016]

The original film is one of my favorite horror movies, so I went in with very low expectations. I was very nervous to watch a remake, especially of a film that was so brutal, heart wrenching, and yet beautiful at the same time. Even though I had low expectations, I was still disappointed. They changed too much, and it wasn't as beautifully done, or as brutal as I expected. If I had never seen the original I may have actually enjoyed this one more. This is one of those movies is recommended to people that enjoy American horror movies, and don't want to read subtitles. But if you love horror movies, and don't mind reading a little, then this one would be a let down to all of the amazing foreign films out there.

One Of The Rare Fans Of The Original That Liked It.

[stivan-amed · 10/10 · 9 April 2016]

Unlike most others, I welcome horror movie remakes. I know that most end up being trash. But there are the few that end up being decent horror movies in their own merit. Yes, I'm a fan of the original 2008 French film Martyrs. I mean I really loved the intense raw terror of the original mixed. But like most have said, it wasn't just about the terror. It had deep meaning. Which is why it has become one of the biggest horror cult classics of the past 20 years. So when I heard that they were making an American remake, I was honestly excited. The producers promised to keep the intensity of the original. This announcement was way back in 2010. So you can imagine I've been waiting nearly 6 years for this. Now the film is finally here. I will admit that the trailer for the film released online made it look very mediocre. And I knew that most other fans of the original would trash the film relentlessly regardless of its true value. It is hard to not compare this to the original. The critics reviews seem implausible too. I guess I'm the rare fan of the original that actually liked it.

Not a masterpiece, but not horrible either. Unless you expect too much.

[fairdraconica · 6/10 · 12 February 2016]

I can't really see why there are so many negative reviews. Did people really expect so much that they are so disappointed now?

While this film isn't as good as the original one, it was better than I, personally, expected from a remake. I hate most Hollywood remakes.

The original, French, version was more shocking and somewhat darker, true, but this one has its own little details that I found worth seeing.

I liked the actresses who played the lead roles; they look convincing and they made me sympathise with the characters, which doesn't happen often with the characters in a film of this genre. The general atmosphere isn't bad either. It did make me feel the hopelessness of the situation the girls found themselves trapped in.

Not brilliant, but I don't regret watching this film. 6/10

Don't even try

[ed-76454 · 1/10 · 13 September 2016]

Watch original version instead.

I love original Martyrs and this one is just cheap, crap version of it. Another prove that muricans should not touch European movies.

Why?

Everything is wrong, from poor acting to changing main plot of the movie. So called movie miss brutality of original version and can only be viewed as typical 'saturday tit grab movie' for poor muricans.

Simple waste of time nothing else. Maybe now murican movie makewrs can learn how NOT to fukk up things? One may hope...

Want a good movie? Watch original Pascal Laugier's one from 2008.

The worst remake I've ever seen

[mondaymorgan · 1/10 · 25 January 2016]

I'm a fan of extreme horror, but I was in no way a die hard Martyrs fan. I saw the original, was impressed, but that was about it. When I heard about this remake I was immediately disgusted with the idea of why the people who make movies at the level of 'Annabelle' would try to remake such an iconic classic in the horror world. I gave it the benefit of the doubt and watched it. I have never been more angry with a movie. Imagine Titanic being remade, but the ship doesn't sink and everyone lives happily ever after. That is what they did to this movie. I was blown away by how literally EVERY scene and plot point this movie is known for was removed entirely. I know remakes tend to change some details for the audience of that country etc, but they basically wrote a whole new movie 30 minutes in. This would have been far better off if they took their plot of 'BFF's live happily ever after' and just made an original movie. Worst excuse for a remake, I knew they wouldn't do Martyrs justice, but this was just pathetic.