13 (2010)

I enjoyed the premise. I just enjoyed it better in the original. Sadly this is just another bad film in a sea of bad films. The movie is mildly entertaining up until the near end. Then you get a nice feel good movie buzz from how the movie turns. Then they end it in the most nihilistic manner possible. It aggravated me to the point where I shut the film off and came here to rant.

There are plenty of good films out there within the genre to satisfy any fan of these types of movies. So please pass this one up. Its really not worth your time.

Thanks for reading and I hope I helped sway you from this atrocity.

Fmovies: Very dark, very tense. I don't know about the original or anything, just came across this movie randomly and it is better than most thrillers nowadays. Not a lot of movies can make me feel tense or keep me at the edge of my seat. What I like about the plot is how plausible it is. I mean, could there be such an underground gambling ring? I mean if you have nothing to lose and you're desperate enough or don't have much to live for, then why not make money for your family while you're at it. I guess it's not that much of a stretch given how much insanity exists in the world. The acting was good and depicted the proper human emotions in these types of situations. Enjoyed it thoroughly, no complaints here.

This film had so much potential, how did the director mess this up so badly?

You have a decent number of very good, famous actors and a starting point of an amazing story of underground gambling and the chance to make something artistic and maybe even original, but no, you go ahead and produce this film.

Hardly any character or proper story development, some bad acting and awful camera direction with weird and unnecessary camera angles. There was no proper feeling to this film and it seemed quite rushed. I was somewhat bored throughout the film. The actual gun scenes were decent, but with a little effort, they could have been amazing.

13 fmovies. The first review on this film by Dr Yvon is incorrect. Fans of the original 13 will enjoy this remake. As the OP would like to suggest this is yet again another film in the Hollywood machine, I would argue that the original 13 director/writer Géla Babluani is behind the helm yet again.

Géla Babluani was given a chance to do what many filmmakers dream of doing.... remaking their films with a Hollywood budget and the chance to put top tier actors into their work. The eclectic mix of actors is amazing..... Jason Stratham, Ray Winstone, Mickey Rourke, and David Zayas who American audiences know from his many roles as detectives.

If you could handle Tzameti 13 you'll love 13.

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.

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.