Martyrs

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")

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!

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.

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.

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.