Thus a tightly edited, 90-minute action flick becomes a bloated, 105-minute exercise on how not to direct an action film.
You can read the full review where it was originally posted online.
This review of Ong-Bak (2003) was written by G. Allen Johnson and published by San Francisco Chronicle on 06 Aug 2008.
Ong-Bak has generally received positive reviews.
Was this review helpful?
More reviews of this movie:
Review of Ong-Bak (2003)
By Dead_Beat_Dave (1) on 29 Oct 2014
Review of Ong-Bak (2003)
By Kenneth Turan (2,323) for Los Angeles Times (12,977) on 05 Apr 2003
Review of Ong-Bak (2003)
By Joe Morgenstern (2,395) for Wall Street Journal (3,071) on 25 Nov 2007
Review of Ong-Bak (2003)
By Robert K. Elder (222) for Chicago Tribune (6,211) on 12 Mar 2003
Review of Ong-Bak (2003)
By J.r. Jones (1,066) for Chicago Reader (7,190) on 04 Oct 2007
Review of Ong-Bak (2003)
By Chris Kaltenbach (562) for Baltimore Sun (1,823) on 22 Dec 2012
Review of Ong-Bak (2003)
By Sean Axmaker (1,564) for Seattle Post-Intelligencer (2,422) on 09 Apr 2005
Review of Ong-Bak (2003)
Review of Ong-Bak (2003)
By Scott Tobias (1,684) for The A.V. Club (5,644) on 05 Apr 2003
Review of Bruce Lee: A Warrior's Journey (2000)
By George Wu (52) for culturevulture.net (793) on 23 Jun 2002
Review of American Yakuza (1993)
Popular Movies Right Now
