How does this one compare with the new US Remake?
I haven't seen either..... which should I check out?
www.dunnypop.com
The original, hands down. The US remake is nothing but pretty TV personalities running around screaming. The original is a brooding tale of loneliness and isolation. It is at once unnerving, haunting, depressing, uplifting, spiritual, and the scariest goddamn movie I've ever seen.
share[deleted]
The remake doesn't compare to the original. I saw the remake first, then decided to see if the original was better-i felt like the storyline had some potential, i just felt it wasn't put together very well! Well, the original is longer than the remake, but appropriately so because by the time you finish watching the remake, you're not gonna get what happened...well i didn't. You may get tired of reading subtitles, i kinda did. But ultimately, "Kairo" is the better movie. Makes more sense, and is DEFINITELY scarier.
shareLike the person above me, I did watch the remake before the original. I kind of thought the remake was better. And in my opinion I think that Pulse was scarier than Kairo, I didn't jump once during Kairo and I did a lot during Pulse. Although, it does take a lot to scare me in a movie. So I would tell you to check out the remake, but it seems that I'm the only one who likes the remake over the original. You'll probably like the original too if you're like these people. Just watch both of them and decide for yourself.
shareI, too, saw the remake first. While watching the original, I was for some time thinking I liked the remake better, too. The dialog in Kairo is sparse and stilted, and the acting is pretty bad (in both movies, actually). UNTIL about half to two-thirds into the original, where I realized the remake's bigger budget and special effects just could not stand long against the much better existential creepiness of the original. The creeps build slowly. Keep watching and pay attention; by the end of Kairo you'll be quite disturbed.
The remake comes nowhere near that -- ultimately just another empty (if entertaining) hollywood flick where everything is spelled out in shallow detail, the ending is disappointingly neat and tidy, and there's almost no mystery or truly disturbing creepiness. Unfortunately, a fundamental premise of Hollywood in recent decades is that the audience is by and large stupid and lazy, and the remake does not assume otherwise. Nevertheless, the remake I thought for the most part had a pretty good thing going, but that they didn't know what to do with it and so wound up copping out and blowing the ending.
The remake is worth seeing -- it does have its satisfyingly dark, brooding elements (the cinematography is quite good), and it is in fact pretty okay up until the last 5-10 minutes or so. But the original is truly disturbing (if a bit confusing at times) and sticks with you long after you've seen it, the mark of a good horror story.
At some point I will have forgotten the remake, but the original, Kairo, is one of those uncommon movies that will reside permanently in dark, disturbing recesses.
They both suck. Just like both versions of the Grudge.
share"by teachersfirstpupil (Mon Sep 25 2006 14:28:25)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They both suck. Just like both versions of the Grudge."
Oh yeah, an idiot chimed in! Thanks for your detailed and valued opinion.
Why does he have to be an idiot because he said they suck. I have Kairo on DVD and it does suck! The only good part of the whole movie was when that girl did a face-plant off that silo. That looked real. Other than that, this movie was way too slow, boring and wasn't scary in the least. If I could get my money back for buying this DVD, I would.
-------
You better stay low fo` you get a halo
plus wings and a gown when I come around
The fact that you are defending someone for their one word review "suck" makes you an idiot as well. Try explaining why you might have felt the film doesn't work. God forbid you try and put words down to form sentences and express your feelings on the film. There are many people who like horror films that take their time, move slowly and build a sense of dread - thus they may "suck" to you but to millions of others. There are plenty of lowest common denominator films for you - since you enjoyed seeing the girl do "a face-plant off that silo" that's why there is Saw and other films where it basically scres you by showing how many different sharp objects can do damage to the human body. Big deal. Give me the original The Haunting or the original Kairo anytime (I know, I am sure they are "boring" to you). Go take a nap, Sleepy.
shareThe fact that you are defending someone for their one word review "suck" makes you an idiot as well. Try explaining why you might have felt the film doesn't work. God forbid you try and put words down to form sentences and express your feelings on the film. There are many people who like horror films that take their time, move slowly and build a sense of dread - thus they may "suck" to you but not to millions of others. There are plenty of lowest common denominator films for you - since you enjoyed seeing the girl do "a face-plant off that silo" that's why there is Saw and other films where it basically scres you by showing how many different sharp objects can do damage to the human body. Big deal. Give me the original The Haunting or the original Kairo anytime (I know, I am sure they are "boring" to you). Go take a nap, Sleepy.
shareBefore you got off on a soliloquy, try learning basic English grammar first, alright? I couldn't understand a damn thing you were trying to say.
BTW, thanks for singling me out and posting twice about a post I made 2 years ago! At least I bought the damn DVD...give me a damn break!
_
Every person that served can be called a veteran, but not every veteran can be called a Marine.
You suck!!!
sharei couldn't tell you which one to see. the american version is more linear, and you get more answers. but i like that in the original you get a half hearted theory or two, but none that seem like they are "it." the american as a reletively happy ending compared to the american version, but that's not saying much. the original is much more about alienation, depression, the aftermath of the bomb. where as the american seems to be all about alienation by technology.
i will give the american version a little credit, tho. most american remakes are 'upscaled'-- the cinematography and settings are prettied up. both versions take place in apartments that really look depressing, and close to uninhabitable. i just wish they would go with less glossy film work. i've always thought that what makes a lot of horror movies good is the grime....
this coming from some pansy named after a pokemon.
sharei saw a youtube clip of the original, it looks *beep* horror movies are not about "jumps"... unless you are a American of course :P
shareThe American version is much better. If you end up watching this you will feel like you've definitely wasted a small portion of your life. The American version isn't spectacular, but at least it'll keep you entertained.
share[deleted]
In my oppinion Kairo is one of the scariest movies I've ever seen. Watch it alone in the dark. It's a horror movie all about tone with some really horrifying scenes. The remake was alright but it was more of a standard horror flick. The Japanese version is a scary movie but also has some artistic value in my oppinion. I love it. Some people say it's boring but I love it.
shareKairo is so much better but i still liked the remake too. I saw kairo first but Pulse wasn't that bad it would have been better if i had never seen the original
What's the good in goodbye?
It honestly depends what you prefer. If you like jumping a lot and being able to just watch and be freaked out without reading subtitles or waiting for the scares to come, watch the remake, you'll enjoy it much more. If you like a mystery building up over time, slowly becoming creepier and creepier until it becomes incredibly unsettling, disturbing, and sad, and don't need to be scared every second but like atmosphere, watch the original, you'll love it. I like both types but I honestly prefer the original. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, unless they reduce themselves to insult-spewing jerks "defending" it.
shareGreat response!!
shareIt is all about what you like... If you would rather have a lot of jump scares with the occasional creep out, see the remake. If you would rather be creeped out a lot and jump just a little, see the original. I really liked both, but the original is better.
In other news, this post is really old, but I just wanted to state my opinion on this.
In every remake (Japanese to USA) you face this...Japanese has a better story, but the american version is full of "jump-seat" scenes. Japanese version is horrible in acting, shows no emotion. I wonder why people still thinking that Japaneses are the masters in horror movies. I prefere watching Korean ou even Thai horror movies (See Silk or Slither). Talking specifically about Pulse, there´s a big problem in the american version. The movie ends without a real (and good) explanation about everthing that happened, and that makes the movie to fall apart. It looks like you spent 80 minutes for nothing. I didn´t watch the japanese version yet, but the remake version is awful.
Watch both, and then, see whose is better.
although I very much enjoyed the additional information provided by the remake which answered alot of the questions I had after watching Kairo, Pulse simply reinforces the fact that Kairo is a superior film. I actually cared about the characters in Kairo and the tension ratchets up very nicely too. In Pulse it only really gets good towards the end. The effects were nice and the cinematography was great but Jim Sonzero is no Kiyoshi Kurosawa.
Kairo also had a deep message about urban alienation something which Pulse did not seem to bother with. Half of the shots were identical to Kairo too. Although I appreciate the spasm like jump cuts in Pulse it did nothing by way of building up tension and instead relied on the ol' 'cat in the fridge' type of scare tactic and annoying loud sounds exploding out everytime something 'scary' happened on screen.
Still, the remake was a valliant effort I certainly wouldnt be ashamed if I had made this film. Wouldnt suprise me if a sequel pops up soon...
I didn't experience kairo as a 'scary' movie.. instead, it's an allegory of our times, the solitude and fear spreading like a disease and making the world fall apart.. I haven't seen the remake, but i can't see how it would give me more answers about the themes Kairo conveys so darkly and on point.
It's a saddening experience: the friends turning into flickers in time, grainy and colourless, and people falling along in their fears and not having the strength to do anything about it... The empty chairs that move by themselves, void of personality.. how everything is seen only as mechanics, people unconnected.. places void of warmth.. the dark shadows of fear, helplessness and depression turning you into a ghost of your former self. The others locking and marking you with bright tape outside of theirs and others world, not to be seen and thought about.
Everytime there was a ghost I imagined it as the representation of the person's inner self, which the movie showed, not the real person, that the characters actually saw and tried to connect with. In the end death connects us all.
Definately not a cheap scare, but an excellently and vividly portrayed story. I don't think i bother to check out Pulse at all, as I imagine it to be just one of the movies that numb the mind in the end, but i understand the need for those movies too..
p_d- this is the best interpretation of Kairo I have come across- in my opinion, you are right on- exactly what my take is on it too.
shareSo you haven't seen the original but the Japanese acting is horrible. Or are you saying that Japanese acting always sucks? Because that is an even more ridiculous statement.
shareI watched Kairo last night and watched Pulse about two months back.
Am I the only one that looks at both films as companion pieces? I mean it is stated in both that the "ghosts" are a global phenomenon so why can't these stories take place at the same time? In Kairo we get the eastern way of handling the problem and in Pulse we get the western way of the same. I know the story is the same and the scenes are practically identical in some cases, but if you look at them as different views of the same predicament then neither movie is horrible.
"How dare you speak his name! YOU FILTHY HALF BLOOD!"
[deleted]
Simple answer: If you're a psychological horror fan, go for Kairo.
If you're looking for a riped-off, cheap, dirty, idiotic, ridiculous, absolutely atrocious, trash of a movie that makes you want to puke each time you watch it, go for Pulse.
PS. Yes, I hate Pulse that much.
Visit my blog:
http://everythingjapanese.wordpress.com/
The pacing in each Kiyoshi Kuraswawa film goes far beyond the idea of a "slow burn." Cure, Seance and Kairo were all so deadly dull that I was quite happy to throw them back to Netflix.
I am a huge J-Horror fan, but the time he takes to sufficiently achieve the desired mood is time which could enhance the story, throw in something action-related, a good scare, but no.
If you want a good director, throw some Miike in the DVD player... or for a proper film, how about Suicide Club/Circle?
I suppose Kurosawa's movies require...peace of mind, shall we say. I, too, am not able to stand KK's flicks these days because I have so much on my mind that I can't focus on the films properly. But when I'm mentally relaxed and have nothing on my mind, I can divulge into his stuff so much better.
Just throwing that out there, you don't have to agree with me. :)
Visit my blog:
http://everythingjapanese.wordpress.com/