13 (2010) Reviews

• Poor and unnecessary remake

  adi_20022013-08-24

  13 is the story of a naive young man assumes a dead man's identity and finds himself trapped in a underground world driven by greedy for power and violence. There, gangsters betting on other people's lives. It is the American version of the French film "13 Tzameti" that I liked it very much but this rather gave me some smiles along. Beginning of the film where Vince is an electrician is too fast, we see him in glimpses when he connects two wires to a switch, Emmanuelle Chriqui appears for a few seconds but the good part is that True Blood fans have the chance to see Eric in another role than the vampire. Sequences follow each other too smoothly and leaves the viewer thinking about the scenes and have to put them together to understand what is happening. Another remake which I think is pointless.

  More

• I paid the right price... nothing

  marcsparc2010-12-03

  I really don't understand how movies like this get made. Step one, half ass a cast together of "big names" and provide a silly premise. Step two, give someone top billing even though their role is the lesser part of 5 minutes. Step three, find a rapper that has no talent so that your culturally bereft urban youth have a reason to see the movie. Step four,rely upon arty cinematography as the culturalification of the movie, legitimizing that its no better than a bottom shelf rental. Alright, get the idea? movies these days suck, no wonder I won't pay to see one.

  More

• Preposterous in a bad way

  ljw10042011-02-12

  This film is about an underground "game". It a game of pure random chance. You have a 78% chance of being killed, 17% chance of surviving, and 5% chance of walking out with a little under two million dollars. Rich people dress up in tuxedos, act all high-class, and bet on which participant will win. The bookies offer odds. How can they offer odds on a game of pure random chance? It doesn't make sense. It's a dumb excuse for voyeuristic sadism. Jason Stretham enters his brother into the game three times in a row, giving him a 99% chance of dying. Why would the brother do this? Why would Stretham? Why would he act all surprised when his brother dies? Okay, so the plot is particularly stupid. The characters in it are preposterous. Also the pacing is ponderous. This film has no redeeming qualities.

  More

• Gambling Can Be The Death Of You!

  gradyharp2011-11-24

  Georgian writer Géla Babluani found such success in his film 13 Tzameti n 2005 that he decided to recreated the story, this time placing it in the United States. Co-writing this version with Gregory Pruss is the only aspect of this adaptation he shared. The story is a tough one to watch, not unlike 'Fight Club', but with higher stakes. It share how far gambling men will go to get their thrills, making cock fights seem very tame. The game at hand is based on gathering quasi-desperate men (prisoners, men deeply in debt, criminals who have little to lose, etc), placing them in a room with tee shirts bearing numbers, giving them guns, placing them in a circle, and on the command of the master of ceremonies they are to fire their gun into the head of the person in front of them. A smarmy form of Russian roulette, at first each man's gun has one bullet in the chamber, but as the game goes on more bullets are placed and the game continues until there is one man left alive. The gamblers place bets on the various numbered men and the stakes are high. This process is performed in a isolated meeting space and is closely scrutinized by detectives who seek to uncover the scheme and stop it. Vince (Sam M. Riley of 'Control' and 'Brighton Rock') is a young electrician whose father has been in an accident resulting in sever injuries that require multiple surgeries. Vince's family must put their house up for sale to pay the expenses unless Vince can find a quicker way to make big money to pay the hospital and surgeons. Quite by accident while doing an electrical job he over hears the house owner discuss a 'job' that promises to pay a lot of money. The man plans on doing the job, receives an envelope with instructions, but then shoots up heroin and dies of an overdose. Vince helps the police who investigate, but before leaving the house Vince takes the envelope that contains instructions and a cell phone and a piece of bark with the number 13 printed on it. Vince follows the instructions and ends up in a complex scheme - the ultimate result of which is the fact that he becomes #13 in the gambling game. Others sequestered for the killer game include Mickey Rourke, Ray Winstone, and among those involved in the offensive debacle are Alexander Skarsgard, Ben Gazzara, and emcee Michael Shannon. The ending of the film is a complete surprise and revealing even part of it would ruin the impact of the film. This is definitely not a film for the fainthearted. That such a gruesome gambling scheme could exist is terrifying. But the production and the acting and the grisly atmosphere is well worth the moviegoer's attention. Grady Harp

  More

• Abominable

  philman2000012011-01-02

  I don't know what Géla Babluani was thinking. 13 Tzameti was a cool movie made on a shoestring budget and was ingratiating in its presentation. This newer version is completely watered down, soft around the edges, and bereft of all the charm of the original. Everything from the wide angle tracking shots to the roofing opposed to electricity (the whole in the roof was a nice device), the death in the bath as opposed to the chair, the globe hiding spot, the little sister of the protagonist in the original had a more authentic cuteness about her than the WASPY mainstream girl in this one. The protagonist steals the papers instead of finding them outside. All the minor differences favor the original. Surprisingly, even the acting was much better in the original, despite being paid a fraction of this all-star cast. The main reason I wanted to see the remake was because of the cast, but it was a total let-down. The original was good, but it was good to the point where it was a cool idea and they were able to make it with the budget they had and it worked. It wasn't so brilliant that it deserved a big money remake which in fact hurt the credibility of the film, and in my opinion, the reputation of the director. He had his breakthrough movie, and then he could have followed up with a similarly creative idea. He may have ruined his career with this terrible remake. All in all this movie just seemed incredibly lazy and it didn't seem like anyone working on the movie cared about the final product. Rourke is entertaining as always, but you can tell it's just another shtick role for him, nobody was making much of an effort here. As a viewer I felt like I was investing more energy into watching it than anybody put into making it, so i started to doze about halfway through. Skip this movie, it's just not worth your time. Life is too short. If you haven't seen this, then watch the original. But if you have seen this, I think the original is spoilt for you.

  More