Hey guys, let's talk about the 2017 film ziPapillon. This movie is a remake, which means it's based on a previous film. The original Papillon, released in 1973, is a classic. It starred Steve McQueen and Dustin Hoffman and is a pretty big deal in cinematic history. The 2017 version, directed by Michael Noer, tries to bring the story to a new audience. Let's see how well it does and explore the key differences and if this remake is actually worth your time.

The story itself is pretty intense. It's based on the true story of Henri Charrière, a man wrongly convicted of murder in France. He gets sent to a penal colony in French Guiana, and the movie follows his daring attempts to escape. The central theme revolves around hope, resilience, and the human will to survive against impossible odds. This is the core of what makes the story so compelling. The original film did a fantastic job portraying this, and the remake aims to do the same.

The film’s focus is on Henri Charrière, also known as Papillon because of a butterfly tattoo on his chest. He forms an unlikely alliance with Louis Dega, a forger, who is also imprisoned. Papillon vows to protect Dega in exchange for help with his escape attempts. The story is a gripping tale of survival, friendship, and the enduring human spirit. It shows the lengths people will go to in order to maintain their freedom. The setting in the harsh and unforgiving penal colony is beautifully captured in both versions, enhancing the feeling of despair and isolation that the prisoners feel. This is one of the key elements that makes the film so impactful.

Differences between the 1973 and the 2017 version

Alright, so the 2017 version of ziPapillon does have some noticeable differences from the original. These aren’t necessarily all good or bad, but they do make for a different viewing experience. One of the biggest changes is in the casting. The original has Steve McQueen, who is legendary, and Dustin Hoffman, also a legend. The 2017 version stars Charlie Hunnam as Papillon and Rami Malek as Dega. While both actors give good performances, they bring a different vibe to the roles. Hunnam gives Papillon a more youthful energy, while Malek brings a degree of vulnerability to Dega that is new to the narrative. It’s definitely a different take.

Another difference lies in the pacing and the emphasis of specific scenes. The 1973 version took its time, letting the tension build gradually. The 2017 version feels a bit faster-paced, which may be more appealing to modern audiences. However, some might argue that this fast pace reduces the weight of the scenes that should be heavy. The director seems to want to focus more on the action and less on the emotional impact of the harsh prison life. Also, the visual style is different. The original film has a gritty, realistic feel, while the remake uses a more modern, polished aesthetic. This shift also changes the way the audience perceives the prison environment and the suffering of the prisoners. The remake feels less impactful, at least in this aspect.

Finally, some of the specific plot points and the sequence of events are slightly altered in the 2017 version. These changes are subtle, but they affect the overall feel of the narrative. For example, the escape attempts might be shown in a different order or with slightly different outcomes. This is not necessarily a huge deal, but for fans of the original, it can be something to note. These tweaks could be good or bad, depending on your perspective and what you like in a movie. The modern version aims to provide a fresh perspective while keeping the core plot intact.

The Cast and Performances in ziPapillon

Let’s dive into the performances, shall we? As mentioned earlier, Charlie Hunnam takes on the role of Papillon. Hunnam is known for his roles in shows like Sons of Anarchy and movies like King Arthur: Legend of the Sword. He brings a certain charm and physicality to the role. He is a good actor, and he brings a youthful energy to the character, showing off his physical presence. In contrast to Steve McQueen, Hunnam's version of Papillon is perhaps more overtly heroic. He’s definitely trying to show off the character's determination. While he does capture Papillon's resourcefulness and determination, some viewers might miss the rugged intensity that McQueen brought to the role.

Rami Malek, who you might know from Mr. Robot and his Oscar-winning performance in Bohemian Rhapsody, plays Louis Dega. Malek’s performance is arguably one of the highlights of the remake. He brings a sense of vulnerability and intelligence to Dega, making the character incredibly empathetic. He creates a bond with Papillon. The evolution of the relationship between Papillon and Dega is really at the heart of the story. The pair have to trust each other, and Malek and Hunnam's performances create a palpable connection. It’s hard not to root for their unlikely friendship. This connection is what makes their relationship so impactful.

Other notable cast members include Roland Møller, who plays Celier, a fellow prisoner. He provides a sense of the gritty prison life. The supporting cast does a good job of portraying the harsh reality of the penal colony and the various characters Papillon encounters. These characters highlight the survival and the bonds that are formed within a tough environment. The cast, as a whole, works to bring the story to life. The ensemble contributes to the authenticity of the prison environment.

The Visuals and Cinematography of the Film

Let’s talk about the look of the film, guys. The cinematography in ziPapillon is noticeably different from the 1973 version. The original has a more raw, gritty look, which adds to the realism of the story. The remake, on the other hand, opts for a more polished aesthetic. It uses modern techniques to create a visually appealing film. This difference impacts the viewer’s experience, as the look and feel of the environment are very important.

One of the main visual strengths of the 2017 version is in its depiction of the prison environment. The filmmakers use striking visuals to showcase the harshness of the conditions and the beauty of the surrounding landscape. The contrast between the two is really powerful. The film captures the claustrophobia of the prison and the vastness of the sea. The stunning visuals serve to highlight the contrast between the prisoners' confinement and their longing for freedom. The visual contrast between imprisonment and the hope of escape adds to the story’s impact.

The cinematography also plays a key role in the depiction of the action sequences and the escape attempts. The action scenes are really well-shot and provide some genuine excitement. The camera work is dynamic and really keeps you on the edge of your seat during the thrilling escape sequences. These escape attempts are incredibly well-executed, and the filmmakers use the visuals to build tension. The cinematography is well done and helps enhance the story.

The Themes Explored in ziPapillon

ziPapillon isn't just an action-packed prison escape movie; it goes deep. One of the central themes is the human will to survive. The film's story highlights Henri Charrière's relentless pursuit of freedom. This is what drives the story forward. He never gives up, no matter how harsh the conditions get. It’s a powerful message about the strength of the human spirit. He faces isolation, brutality, and seemingly insurmountable obstacles. His determination is a testament to the power of hope.

Another important theme is friendship and loyalty. Papillon’s relationship with Dega is the core of the story. They depend on each other for survival. Their bond is tested again and again, but their loyalty to each other is what keeps them going. This unlikely friendship is one of the most heartwarming parts of the film. Their companionship provides them with strength and comfort. The film shows that even in the darkest of times, human connection can endure.

Finally, the film explores the theme of redemption. Papillon is a man who is wrongly convicted. He’s fighting to reclaim his life. The story follows Papillon’s journey as he strives to prove his innocence and regain his freedom. The theme of redemption adds another layer to the story. The prisoners, in their own way, are seeking redemption. They are trying to find their way back to a normal life. This exploration of complex themes makes the film a deeper experience.

Is ziPapillon (2017) Worth Watching?

So, is the 2017 version of ziPapillon worth your time? Well, it depends on what you are looking for. If you're a big fan of the original, you might go in with high expectations. You may find some of the changes, especially in pacing and casting, to be a little distracting. However, if you can approach it as a standalone film, it is a well-made and engaging movie. It offers a fresh take on a classic story.

The performances are good, with Charlie Hunnam and Rami Malek giving it their all. The cinematography is visually stunning, and the action sequences are thrilling. The story, at its core, is compelling and thought-provoking. The film is a solid and exciting watch. It's a testament to the enduring power of the story. The remake serves as a modern retelling of the classic tale. It stands on its own merits.

Whether you love the original or have never seen it, the 2017 version is still worth checking out. It brings a new perspective to the story while keeping the spirit of the original alive. It is a captivating tale of survival and hope that will keep you engaged from start to finish. The themes of friendship, resilience, and the desire for freedom are timeless. It's an interesting watch and a testament to the enduring appeal of this classic story.