Martyrs Remake

[detective392]

Anchor Bay Will Release the ‘Martyrs’ Remake

the news that the long-gestured Martyrs remake was already filmed, Anchor Bay has nabbed all North American rights to the film, including plans for a limited theatrical run.

The Goetz Brothers (Scenic Route) have directed the U.S. version of Pascal Laugier’s 2009 French horror film that challenged religion, and played a cathartic role in his real life loss.

Bailey Noble, who played Adilyn Bellefleur on “True Blood”, toplines with “Pretty Little Liars” star Troian Bellisario. Kate Burton (Stay, Big Trouble in Little China) and Blake Robbins (Rubber) round out the cast.

Mark L. Smith (Vacancy, The Hole, The Revenant) penned the screenplay: “In ‘Martyrs’ 10-year-old Lucie flees from the isolated warehouse where she has been held prisoner. Deeply traumatized, she is plagued by awful 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 haunted by demons, Lucie finally tracks down the family that tortured her. As she and Anna move closer to the agonizing truth, they find themselves trapped in a nightmare – if they cannot escape, a martyr’s fate awaits them…”

The Last Exorcism‘s Daniel Stamm was once attached to direct and called the screenplay “spellbinding.”

[MrBlonde]

No

[TommySyk]

I'll still see it out of curiosity, but I think they shouldn't have remade it at all.

[Michael1989]

"Spellbinding" Huh? We'll see about that

Martyrs still haunts me. I want to watch it again, but then I kind of don't

[levcore]

Martyrs is a superb film but a very uncomfortable watch and one has to be in the right mood. I hope the American remake further explores the nature of what goal the main antagonists are hoping to achieve with their experiment, or that it takes its own path. One of the great things about the original was all the twists and turns it took.

[Foggy]

Are they for real? What studio executive is like "American audiences are really craving for

[Show spoiler]skinning alive and helpless child torture

"

[LegacyCosts]

Originally Posted by MrBlonde

No

I hate movies

[thewerepuppygrr]

Urgh. Still not remotely interested in watching the original, so I imagine a remake will be even worse.

[Bullseye]

This is one of the few new horror movies I love. Its a depressing movie for sure. I would have no interest in seeing a remake.

[Ultra_Violence]

Martyrs isn't a perfect film but it doesn't need a remake. There's plenty of stuff from the early days of horror that should be revived. Rather than something not even 10 years old.

[lolwut]

Originally Posted by Ultra_Violence

Martyrs isn't a perfect film but it doesn't need a remake. There's plenty of stuff from the early days of horror that should be revived. Rather than something not even 10 years old.

Exactly my thoughts.

[feeling22]

MARTYRS Trailer (Horror - 2016) - YouTube

[Michael1989]

Wow, I just thought this was all talk at this point, didn't think they'd even made it yet. Looks terrible though from the trailer.

[EvaDK]

And they are pretty much revealing the entire story and its twist turn in that trailer as well...

Stupid.

[Pondosinatra]

Dear Hollywood,

[feeling22]

I've never seen the original, but this remake was so bland. The Martyrs idea is interesting and I thought the ending was great but it took forever to get there (despite being only 80 minutes) and seemed like pointless torture porn to me.

[cheez avenger]

It's bland and awful.

[jacobsever]

From my Letterboxd.

One thing is certain: you will hear lots of bad things about this movie. However, my review won't be one of them.

First and foremost, do NOT go into this film with the only intent to compare it to the original. (I'd actually recommend doing that with any remake/reimagining, but hey) The original is considered a classic, and this remake is considered blasphemy by most. Me personally, didn't think much of the original. It was good, but it didn't stick out to me. It wasn't as gruesome, or horrifying, or bleak and depressing as everyone else made it out to be.

Anyway, as a standalone film, this movie was really solid. It's a hell of a lot better than a majority of new, Hollywood produced horror films that reach the theater. You'll hear people calling this movie "tame", and it's anything but. This film has more graphic violence, blood, and gore, than probably 80% of horror films being made today. "But...but...the original..." SHUT THE **** UP.

The acting was solid, as the star Bailey Noble (whom you might recognize from HBO's True Blood) gave a great performance. This movie looks really good. It's not some cheap hack, the film looks polished and professional. There are a very few instances of sub-par CGI being used, but it's in no way a deal breaker.

I wouldn't really call this film scary, but what it does, it does well. I was tense and nervous the whole time, even though I had an idea where it was going. The ending is maybe a little rushed, but a fun new idea.

Had this been an original horror movie, released in 2016, this would be loved. But just because it's a remake/re-imagining of what a lot of people consider to be one of the best, they'll never give it a fair shot. It was doomed from the start, from a bunch of ****ing turbo-nerds on the internet, lashing out negative reviews from the comfort of their parent's basements.

3.5/5

[cheez avenger]

Originally Posted by jacobsever

From my Letterboxd.

One thing is certain: you will hear lots of bad things about this movie. However, my review won't be one of them.

First and foremost, do NOT go into this film with the only intent to compare it to the original. (I'd actually recommend doing that with any remake/reimagining, but hey) The original is considered a classic, and this remake is considered blasphemy by most. Me personally, didn't think much of the original. It was good, but it didn't stick out to me. It wasn't as gruesome, or horrifying, or bleak and depressing as everyone else made it out to be.

Anyway, as a standalone film, this movie was really solid. It's a hell of a lot better than a majority of new, Hollywood produced horror films that reach the theater. You'll hear people calling this movie "tame", and it's anything but. This film has more graphic violence, blood, and gore, than probably 80% of horror films being made today. "But...but...the original..." SHUT THE **** UP.

The acting was solid, as the star Bailey Noble (whom you might recognize from HBO's True Blood) gave a great performance. This movie looks really good. It's not some cheap hack, the film looks polished and professional. There are a very few instances of sub-par CGI being used, but it's in no way a deal breaker.

I wouldn't really call this film scary, but what it does, it does well. I was tense and nervous the whole time, even though I had an idea where it was going. The ending is maybe a little rushed, but a fun new idea.

Had this been an original horror movie, released in 2016, this would be loved. But just because it's a remake/re-imagining of what a lot of people consider to be one of the best, they'll never give it a fair shot. It was doomed from the start, from a bunch of ****ing turbo-nerds on the internet, lashing out negative reviews from the comfort of their parent's basements.

3.5/5

[A Tortured Duckling]

I will avoid this like I avoided Spike Lee's Oldboy remake and will also avoid Raimi's "A Prophet" remake and Wingard & Barrett's "I Saw The Devil" remake.

The originals are fantastic. They are fantastic because they aren't tainted by Hollywood nonsense and the wimpy American approach to tackling the "taboo" subject matter of these films. Leave them the **** alone so people who don't know about the originals aren't subjected to this weak shit before they have a chance to be introduced to the real thing.

Originally Posted by jacobsever

[Show spoiler]From my Letterboxd.

One thing is certain: you will hear lots of bad things about this movie. However, my review won't be one of them.

First and foremost, do NOT go into this film with the only intent to compare it to the original. (I'd actually recommend doing that with any remake/reimagining, but hey) The original is considered a classic, and this remake is considered blasphemy by most. Me personally, didn't think much of the original. It was good, but it didn't stick out to me. It wasn't as gruesome, or horrifying, or bleak and depressing as everyone else made it out to be.

Anyway, as a standalone film, this movie was really solid. It's a hell of a lot better than a majority of new, Hollywood produced horror films that reach the theater. You'll hear people calling this movie "tame", and it's anything but. This film has more graphic violence, blood, and gore, than probably 80% of horror films being made today. "But...but...the original..." SHUT THE **** UP.

The acting was solid, as the star Bailey Noble (whom you might recognize from HBO's True Blood) gave a great performance. This movie looks really good. It's not some cheap hack, the film looks polished and professional. There are a very few instances of sub-par CGI being used, but it's in no way a deal breaker.

I wouldn't really call this film scary, but what it does, it does well. I was tense and nervous the whole time, even though I had an idea where it was going. The ending is maybe a little rushed, but a fun new idea.

Had this been an original horror movie, released in 2016, this would be loved. But just because it's a remake/re-imagining of what a lot of people consider to be one of the best, they'll never give it a fair shot. It was doomed from the start, from a bunch of ****ing turbo-nerds on the internet, lashing out negative reviews from the comfort of their parent's basements.

3.5/5

I only read the last paragraph, and it gave me a good laugh. Thank you.