this film is better than anything murakami ever wrote, including the source material
The film doesn't understand the source material anyway.
The short story is about mainlining copium pretending you haven't realized that dude totally fricking killed that girl and you were too dumb to realize he all but confessed to you.
The film depersonalizes that and tries to warp the story into a shitty class conflict.
>get bombarded with North Korean propaganda messages on daily basis >North Korea kidnaps your girl >you think the innocent fellow countryman is to blame because he's rich and more successful than you
Burning is about loneliness, and obsession. It's also about how the average person can disappear, and nobody notices or cares. The woman was gone, and everything continued as it was, except for the one guy who cared about her. Because he suspected Ben, he must have felt like he was avenging her. The movie feels like a criticism of modern society, and how soulless things are. It's very similar to Parasite, when you think about it. >poor guy >rich guy >ends in violence
How do we know if the MC didn't kill his oneitis because of unreliable narration?
You don't know for sure. That's one of the main points of the movie. Modern life is confusing, has no real ontology of truth, etc. The movie can be interpreted in a lot of different ways because of this. The more likely outcome is that the ending was a story he wrote.
You can believe that if you want, but I don't agree with the interpretation. The fact that he looks for her after she goes missing, indicates that he didn't know what happened to her. There was nothing to suggest Jong-su did it, and it's a really big stretch. Ben even had the watch Jong-su gave her.
You're a crime of passion. I was trying to make the point that if someone can kill another, they don't actually love them. I don't think the Ben character was capable of love.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Did Jong-su love the girl? Or was he lonely and infatuated with the first one to show interest in him, an object of desire to be desired by
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Did Jong-su love the girl?
Yes. >Or was he lonely and infatuated with the first one to show interest in him
I've had girls show interest in me throughout my life, and I've never had a girlfriend. I'm pretty sure he loved her, if he let her touch him.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Maybe, but the relationship is permeated by desperation for them both, and probably simple boredom, and remember the girl confronts Jong-su that he said she was ugly when they were kids which he doesn't even remember, she was nothing to him until she sleeps with him on her initiative
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Jong-su said she was ugly when they were kids
Maybe she was ugly, or maybe he said it because he didn't want her to know that he liked her. You're probably too much of a normalgay to understand, but to someone like me, who's exactly like Jong-su, I wouldn't even talk to her if I didn't like her.
Burning is about loneliness, and obsession. It's also about how the average person can disappear, and nobody notices or cares. The woman was gone, and everything continued as it was, except for the one guy who cared about her. Because he suspected Ben, he must have felt like he was avenging her. The movie feels like a criticism of modern society, and how soulless things are. It's very similar to Parasite, when you think about it. >poor guy >rich guy >ends in violence
I'm glad you think so, because she's my waifu, and that's why I saved pictures of her. I have a lot of them. I have a folder on my computer and on my phone.
i've been wanting to watch this but I'm afraid it's going to be woke and I can't stomach that woke shit.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I thought it was woke before I watched it too, based on the trailer. Turns out the only wokeness exists in Jo March (Saoirse's character). She's like a feminist, but by the end, she's crying because she's lonely and wants a man. It's not very woke.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Saoirse
her career trajectory has been so disappointing. She went from a sweet little trad lass to a feminist prostitute in a matter of 10 years. hollywood really turns women into trash.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Did that happen? I don't really care about Saoirse anyway, or any actress that isn't who I posted ITT. I did watch a lot of Saoirse movies, and her career is good. She was in Greta's other movie, a nice art movie called Loving Vincent, Peter Weir's last movie, and so on.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Mary Queen of Scots is when her career started to venture into the woke feminist shit. it's been all downhill from there.
3 months ago
Anonymous
It's not woke, if you think it is you don't know what woke means
I found the message relevant regardless of being in the West. Korea is a snapshot of where the West will be in 20 years anyways. They advanced too quickly and fricked up their whole society
He killed her. And spent the rest of the movie taunting the main character about it. The rich guy liked him because the main character was a killer just like he was, the rich guy just hadn't realized the why only that he did. His ego got him killed thinking he was playing with a mouse.
>Have you ever had someone that you loved taken from you?
What's the difference between having someone taken from you, and never having someone? It's kind of the same thing, because both people are alone.
Only someone who never had someone would think it's the same
I have no idea how you can watch this movie and not see how much the rich guy is taunting the protagonist. Before and after her death he's just taking the piss. He likes him though. He can tell their birds of a feather. That's why he associates with him because in a weird way he enjoys the companionship. However he just can't stop looking down on the protagonist and it gets him killed.
I don't see them as birds of a feather. the rich guy is clearly a sociopath. the other guy has kindness in him. the nice guy felt a sense of justice whereas the rich guy just needed entertainment and he used those beneath him for that.
They're both capable of killing. Not everyone is. I don't really have it in me to harm others cause I'm a pussy. Most people are like me. I think 10% of us soldiers actually shot at enemy combatants in ww2. Most shot to miss. A statistic that enraged the brass. Cause most people don't have it in them. The protagonist and antagonist did.
That story Ben tells about burning greenhouses was so strange, that it really did feel like taunting. If you burn an abandoned greenhouse, nobody cares. Well, Jong-su cared. Sometimes you burn the wrong person's greenhouse.
How can you hear the antogonist recount this and not visualize a hammer hitting a nail on the head?
3 months ago
Anonymous
>I don't really have it in me to harm others cause I'm a pussy
I could hurt people if I was angry enough. My default state is very peaceful, but I'm a big guy, and I doubt my ancestors, some of which big guys, were all peaceful. I always surprise myself when I'm angry. I was ready to beat up a black guy recently, but I don't think he wanted to fight me.
3 months ago
Anonymous
some of which were big guys*
3 months ago
Anonymous
every man is capable of killing. men have been killing others since the dawn of time. i think the matter at hand is, how easy is it for you and at what point do you feel justified in killing someone else. i think if there's a sense of justice, it's far easier for your average man to kill.
3 months ago
Anonymous
Someone tried to kill me once and I didn't harm them back cause I cared about them. Just pushed them out the door. I got them in extra trouble in jail though cause I was jealous of how much they liked Mrs. Perfect more than me though. So I guess I can lash out verbally. I dunno what would actually push me to hurting someone else since my own life being in danger didn't.
>I don't really have it in me to harm others cause I'm a pussy
I could hurt people if I was angry enough. My default state is very peaceful, but I'm a big guy, and I doubt my ancestors, some of which big guys, were all peaceful. I always surprise myself when I'm angry. I was ready to beat up a black guy recently, but I don't think he wanted to fight me.
I tend to flee rather than fight.
interesting take. although I don't think that the protagonist had nearly the abusive upbringing that joaquin had.
They're very similar movies. True that the protagonist in burning is less of a cliche unlike joker. But I think that's part of what makes this movie very good.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Someone tried to kill me once and I didn't harm them back cause I cared about them
you didn't harm them back because you didn't deem them an actual threat to your life.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I was bleeding to death. It was just from someone I could never physically hurt.
3 months ago
Anonymous
even so, I have a hard time believing that, if killing this person was the only option to not being killed yourself you wouldn't have killed him. Like I said, you didn't see this person as a threat to your life. the fact that you were bleeding is irrelevant. this is a person that you could manhandle and physically remove from your house, so, not really a threat, even though they apparently got the best of you.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I barely pushed them out. I'm only 2 inches taller and a manlet myself. Not at all strong. I do estrogen treatments and don't work out. We're gay so it wasn't the same kinda strength disparity you see in straight couples.
At the time I thought I was dying. At no point when I had a giant gapping cut through my neck did I think I was not actively dying. But I would never hurt them like that. So the best I could do was resolve the conflict quickly and with limited violence on my end.
They hate me anyways and will never talk to me again. But if they think I concocted some clever scheme or calculated they're wrong. I just hate that they hate me so much.
If others wanna think me the bad guy oh well I know how I feel and what I did.
3 months ago
Anonymous
first off, I don't care if you're a homosexual. i knew you weren't fighting a woman, obviously. let me ask you this; now that you've been cut up and nearly killed, would you do things differently in the future, were someone attempting to kill you? Or do you just not value your life so you don't really care? is there anyone you care about enough to kill for them in order to protect them?
3 months ago
Anonymous
I would probably try to resolve the conflict by putting a barrier between me and them and running away. I like to run away.
I guess if a random mugger was threatening my fiance I would defend her but I would try to do so non lethally first. And only lethally if I absolutely had to.
If they showed up again (which I don't think they would; they're smart and pretty and probably made something of themselves despite the adversity), I don't think I could hurt them.
I do value my life. It's just I would prefer not to take any life to preserve my own. I actually kinda like my life at the moment for all it's speed bumps and aches from the past.
That story Ben tells about burning greenhouses was so strange, that it really did feel like taunting. If you burn an abandoned greenhouse, nobody cares. Well, Jong-su cared. Sometimes you burn the wrong person's greenhouse.
He's rich and can get away with it. He was very much taunting the poor protagonist by telling him that story as a foreshadowing of his prostitute gf disappearing
That's the easy explanation, but people keep trying to give their own interpretation. I've literally never heard someone suggest the MC did it, but it happened. Good luck to all the women that Cinemaphileners meet, if they think someone would murder their girlfriend randomly.
You only think that because the film is presented from the autists perspective and he's mad jealous of Steven Yeun's character.
I normally don't like ambiguity in films because it feels like hacks use it as a shortcut to "art", but this really worked, because I felt like there were several equally plausible explanations, and the ambiguity was the point, rather than just the director not being able to think of a decent ending.
The ambiguity is what makes it a competent thriller. Without it the film falls flat. But it's also a shit movie about a random sperg out if the antagonist wasn't a serial killer. It's ambiguous so as to not lionize the main character. Not because the alternative explanations are worth a shit.
Die hard is actually about a divorced dad who stays home alone on Christmas eve and writes a story about how he saves his exwife and stops the bad guys. And they love each other again. Perfectly plausible alt interpretation of die hard. Also fricking stupid. You could literally do this with any movie
I don't get your point. Die Hard was clearly real, this movie deliberately opens up everything to interpretation. All these different theories about it are very valid and convey the movie's main themes of the modern world stripping away meaning from young people.
Theres a degree of ambiguity to the movie but I remember someone earlier in the thread said the ending mighta not happened and just been a story the character wrote out and that is just fricking dumb. You could say that about every movie
You can't because unlike other movies this one deliberately opens up the idea of that being a possibility. The main character is seen writing immediately before the ending which he never did until then despite claiming to be a writer and making all kinds of literary references (Gatsby, Faulkner, etc). This is part of a whole thematic thread in this movie about how artists get inspiration and whether they imitate life or create it depending on how you interpret the movie. The film operates on a million different layers like this and that's what makes it so good. It's not lazy writing, it's brilliant. Ambiguity is not a feature of the movie it's the whole point
3 months ago
Anonymous
>Ambiguity is not a feature of the movie it's the whole point
i didn't see the movie as ambiguous at all, really. i think there were a lot of metaphors, but not ambiguity.
>the movie's main themes of the modern world stripping away meaning from young people.
It's a very relatable movie for Millennials and everyone after. Everyone is like Jong-su, and wondering what the point is. Most of the movie is just him doing nothing.
Someone tried to kill me once and I didn't harm them back cause I cared about them. Just pushed them out the door. I got them in extra trouble in jail though cause I was jealous of how much they liked Mrs. Perfect more than me though. So I guess I can lash out verbally. I dunno what would actually push me to hurting someone else since my own life being in danger didn't.
[...]
I tend to flee rather than fight.
[...]
They're very similar movies. True that the protagonist in burning is less of a cliche unlike joker. But I think that's part of what makes this movie very good.
>I tend to flee rather than fight.
That's good. If you run, you live. Never be ashamed of running. You can run, and I'll stay, so you can get away. I don't really care if I live or die.
You can't do that with every movie because most aren't about writers trying to come up with a story, while this one is.
The end sequence of sideways was just a story the main character wrote to make himself feel better
Here's a better example and it still sucks. Kinda ruins the whole character arc
3 months ago
Anonymous
It's a possibility because of the shot of him typing and imagining Hae Mi in the apartment.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>I'm really good at running away and hiding.
Nice, that's a useful skill. It's like when you play Dota and there are different roles, you would need your exact skillset to be a good Support, whereas I like playing Off Lane.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I played league of legends in college and often played support with my friends. I miss swain support that shit was fun.
3 months ago
Anonymous
>I played league of legends in college
Lol, you baby. Literally Dota for babies. Try some Dota, and see that LoL is the same game but watered down. Dota is literally they killed you because you were in the wrong place and you can't do anything about it. I love the game.
3 months ago
Anonymous
I only played lol cause my friends played it. If they played Dota I woulda played that instead but they didn't.
Myself, I prefer single player games. I don't like multi player
steven yeun fricked with the wrong dilapidated greenhouse. he thought himself untouchable because he had everything but felt nothing, he ran into a dude that had one thing but it was taken away from him.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomie
didn't like the movie that much but it was an interesting watch. don't like movies that spend so much time baiting you into thinking something and then acting coy and ambiguous about it later
Literally me when I die, lol. What is he even losing? His rich guy life where he goes to the gym, restaurants, meets with random girls. People ITT have explained that current society is soulless for everyone, that means both leads, and not just the poor guy.
If Ben killed her why did he agree to meet Lee Jong-su at the end when he said he was with the girl? Ben seemed totally relaxed and not at all suspicious. Furthermore Jong-su straight up told Ben he loved her so he knows she's not an unwanted greenhouse nobody will miss
He's rich and can get away with it. He was very much taunting the poor protagonist by telling him that story as a foreshadowing of his prostitute gf disappearing
Maybe deep down, he wanted to be found out. It would explain why he was so casual about everything. Maybe he thought >what are you going to do about it
I also interpreted it this way. We know that he knows the other was stalking him too so it wasn't like he didn't think he would become violent. He probably expected getting killed and welcomed it
Ben was empty, he was doing anything he could to feel something, anything. that's why he started a relationship with the protagonist. it was something new and different.
The MC was trans, the girl represents his true self, the antagonist represents society and its oppression of trans expression. Hope this clears things up for you
The pantomime scene the girl does at the beginning is the key to the whole movie. Nothing's there, but you see what you want to see. That's what the protagonist does when she disappears. He can never really know what happened, but it's too painful to imagine she disappeared of her own free will and left him behind.
The least ego-dystonic narrative the protagonist can arrive at is that Ben, who the protagonist is jealous of, had something to do with her disappearance. The protagonist only has circumstantial evidence to conclude that Ben is up to some shady shit, but he needs Ben to be a serial killer, so from his perspective Ben IS a serial killer. He kills Ben to avenge himself even though it solves nothing and the girl will still be missing. Directly before this, we see Ben in a scene from outside the protagonist's perspective for the first time and Ben doesn't seem nearly as sinister as he did in any scene with the protagonist, casting doubt as to how much the protagonist ever truly knew about him.
>Directly before this, we see Ben in a scene from outside the protagonist's perspective for the first time and Ben doesn't seem nearly as sinister as he did in any scene with the protagonist
Wrong, he was seen grooming another girl aka potential new victim
The ending is really interesting. If I remember correctly, he takes all his clothes off, and then burns the car. It really feels like a proper ending, like you're seeing the last important moment in this person's life. After the ending, he's back to being a nobody. It's why I said the movie is about how soulless everything is.
Imagine this movie without Ben - would it not be extremely boring? It would be a regular love story. The ending is like a return to the dullness of reality, for both the protag and the audience.
its so fricking profound and in my opinion, ben is a better gavin elster than the actual gavin elster
at the end of both movies there is tragedy but jong su actually manages to understand what scottie didnt, thus killing ben
Read Murakami
this film is better than anything murakami ever wrote, including the source material
The film doesn't understand the source material anyway.
The short story is about mainlining copium pretending you haven't realized that dude totally fricking killed that girl and you were too dumb to realize he all but confessed to you.
The film depersonalizes that and tries to warp the story into a shitty class conflict.
who did it better?
Burning Local
He was gay, anon, that's what
>get bombarded with North Korean propaganda messages on daily basis
>North Korea kidnaps your girl
>you think the innocent fellow countryman is to blame because he's rich and more successful than you
How do we know if the MC didn't kill his oneitis because of unreliable narration?
You don't know for sure. That's one of the main points of the movie. Modern life is confusing, has no real ontology of truth, etc. The movie can be interpreted in a lot of different ways because of this. The more likely outcome is that the ending was a story he wrote.
You can believe that if you want, but I don't agree with the interpretation. The fact that he looks for her after she goes missing, indicates that he didn't know what happened to her. There was nothing to suggest Jong-su did it, and it's a really big stretch. Ben even had the watch Jong-su gave her.
Why would a person kill someone they love? I'd like to hear you explain the logic behind that.
>what are crimes of passion
You're a crime of passion. I was trying to make the point that if someone can kill another, they don't actually love them. I don't think the Ben character was capable of love.
Did Jong-su love the girl? Or was he lonely and infatuated with the first one to show interest in him, an object of desire to be desired by
>Did Jong-su love the girl?
Yes.
>Or was he lonely and infatuated with the first one to show interest in him
I've had girls show interest in me throughout my life, and I've never had a girlfriend. I'm pretty sure he loved her, if he let her touch him.
Maybe, but the relationship is permeated by desperation for them both, and probably simple boredom, and remember the girl confronts Jong-su that he said she was ugly when they were kids which he doesn't even remember, she was nothing to him until she sleeps with him on her initiative
>Jong-su said she was ugly when they were kids
Maybe she was ugly, or maybe he said it because he didn't want her to know that he liked her. You're probably too much of a normalgay to understand, but to someone like me, who's exactly like Jong-su, I wouldn't even talk to her if I didn't like her.
Burning is about loneliness, and obsession. It's also about how the average person can disappear, and nobody notices or cares. The woman was gone, and everything continued as it was, except for the one guy who cared about her. Because he suspected Ben, he must have felt like he was avenging her. The movie feels like a criticism of modern society, and how soulless things are. It's very similar to Parasite, when you think about it.
>poor guy
>rich guy
>ends in violence
pugh looking good here, like a nice wife
I'm glad you think so, because she's my waifu, and that's why I saved pictures of her. I have a lot of them. I have a folder on my computer and on my phone.
you have good taste, anon. what's your favorite pugh movie?
Oh, I'm glad you asked. My favourite Florence movie is also my favourite movie; It's Little Women.
i've been wanting to watch this but I'm afraid it's going to be woke and I can't stomach that woke shit.
I thought it was woke before I watched it too, based on the trailer. Turns out the only wokeness exists in Jo March (Saoirse's character). She's like a feminist, but by the end, she's crying because she's lonely and wants a man. It's not very woke.
>Saoirse
her career trajectory has been so disappointing. She went from a sweet little trad lass to a feminist prostitute in a matter of 10 years. hollywood really turns women into trash.
Did that happen? I don't really care about Saoirse anyway, or any actress that isn't who I posted ITT. I did watch a lot of Saoirse movies, and her career is good. She was in Greta's other movie, a nice art movie called Loving Vincent, Peter Weir's last movie, and so on.
Mary Queen of Scots is when her career started to venture into the woke feminist shit. it's been all downhill from there.
It's not woke, if you think it is you don't know what woke means
Like 99% of Korean drama, it's about the social hierarchy of the country. So pretty much what you said, but not aimed at the west.
I found the message relevant regardless of being in the West. Korea is a snapshot of where the West will be in 20 years anyways. They advanced too quickly and fricked up their whole society
Have you ever had someone that you loved taken from you? If you haven't you probably would only get so much from this movie
She inexplicably disappears, most likely killed herself. The protagonist is is mouth-breathing autist incapable of understanding that.
He killed her. And spent the rest of the movie taunting the main character about it. The rich guy liked him because the main character was a killer just like he was, the rich guy just hadn't realized the why only that he did. His ego got him killed thinking he was playing with a mouse.
Only someone who never had someone would think it's the same
>most likely killed herself.
uh, no. she was murdered by the antagonist.
I have no idea how you can watch this movie and not see how much the rich guy is taunting the protagonist. Before and after her death he's just taking the piss. He likes him though. He can tell their birds of a feather. That's why he associates with him because in a weird way he enjoys the companionship. However he just can't stop looking down on the protagonist and it gets him killed.
I don't see them as birds of a feather. the rich guy is clearly a sociopath. the other guy has kindness in him. the nice guy felt a sense of justice whereas the rich guy just needed entertainment and he used those beneath him for that.
They're both capable of killing. Not everyone is. I don't really have it in me to harm others cause I'm a pussy. Most people are like me. I think 10% of us soldiers actually shot at enemy combatants in ww2. Most shot to miss. A statistic that enraged the brass. Cause most people don't have it in them. The protagonist and antagonist did.
How can you hear the antogonist recount this and not visualize a hammer hitting a nail on the head?
>I don't really have it in me to harm others cause I'm a pussy
I could hurt people if I was angry enough. My default state is very peaceful, but I'm a big guy, and I doubt my ancestors, some of which big guys, were all peaceful. I always surprise myself when I'm angry. I was ready to beat up a black guy recently, but I don't think he wanted to fight me.
some of which were big guys*
every man is capable of killing. men have been killing others since the dawn of time. i think the matter at hand is, how easy is it for you and at what point do you feel justified in killing someone else. i think if there's a sense of justice, it's far easier for your average man to kill.
Someone tried to kill me once and I didn't harm them back cause I cared about them. Just pushed them out the door. I got them in extra trouble in jail though cause I was jealous of how much they liked Mrs. Perfect more than me though. So I guess I can lash out verbally. I dunno what would actually push me to hurting someone else since my own life being in danger didn't.
I tend to flee rather than fight.
They're very similar movies. True that the protagonist in burning is less of a cliche unlike joker. But I think that's part of what makes this movie very good.
>Someone tried to kill me once and I didn't harm them back cause I cared about them
you didn't harm them back because you didn't deem them an actual threat to your life.
I was bleeding to death. It was just from someone I could never physically hurt.
even so, I have a hard time believing that, if killing this person was the only option to not being killed yourself you wouldn't have killed him. Like I said, you didn't see this person as a threat to your life. the fact that you were bleeding is irrelevant. this is a person that you could manhandle and physically remove from your house, so, not really a threat, even though they apparently got the best of you.
I barely pushed them out. I'm only 2 inches taller and a manlet myself. Not at all strong. I do estrogen treatments and don't work out. We're gay so it wasn't the same kinda strength disparity you see in straight couples.
At the time I thought I was dying. At no point when I had a giant gapping cut through my neck did I think I was not actively dying. But I would never hurt them like that. So the best I could do was resolve the conflict quickly and with limited violence on my end.
They hate me anyways and will never talk to me again. But if they think I concocted some clever scheme or calculated they're wrong. I just hate that they hate me so much.
If others wanna think me the bad guy oh well I know how I feel and what I did.
first off, I don't care if you're a homosexual. i knew you weren't fighting a woman, obviously. let me ask you this; now that you've been cut up and nearly killed, would you do things differently in the future, were someone attempting to kill you? Or do you just not value your life so you don't really care? is there anyone you care about enough to kill for them in order to protect them?
I would probably try to resolve the conflict by putting a barrier between me and them and running away. I like to run away.
I guess if a random mugger was threatening my fiance I would defend her but I would try to do so non lethally first. And only lethally if I absolutely had to.
If they showed up again (which I don't think they would; they're smart and pretty and probably made something of themselves despite the adversity), I don't think I could hurt them.
I do value my life. It's just I would prefer not to take any life to preserve my own. I actually kinda like my life at the moment for all it's speed bumps and aches from the past.
That story Ben tells about burning greenhouses was so strange, that it really did feel like taunting. If you burn an abandoned greenhouse, nobody cares. Well, Jong-su cared. Sometimes you burn the wrong person's greenhouse.
He's rich and can get away with it. He was very much taunting the poor protagonist by telling him that story as a foreshadowing of his prostitute gf disappearing
>Have you ever had someone that you loved taken from you?
What's the difference between having someone taken from you, and never having someone? It's kind of the same thing, because both people are alone.
she literally left because she had bigger plans than stay in same boring town. The MC is hallucinating half the shit he sees.
He didn't hallucinate the phone call where she runs and then the phone hangs up
Steven Yeun was a serial killer and he stopped him at the end. not that complicated
That's the easy explanation, but people keep trying to give their own interpretation. I've literally never heard someone suggest the MC did it, but it happened. Good luck to all the women that Cinemaphileners meet, if they think someone would murder their girlfriend randomly.
Protagonist is an autistic anti hero. Burning is basically like joker for adults.
interesting take. although I don't think that the protagonist had nearly the abusive upbringing that joaquin had.
You only think that because the film is presented from the autists perspective and he's mad jealous of Steven Yeun's character.
I normally don't like ambiguity in films because it feels like hacks use it as a shortcut to "art", but this really worked, because I felt like there were several equally plausible explanations, and the ambiguity was the point, rather than just the director not being able to think of a decent ending.
Nice breasts on the girl too
The ambiguity is what makes it a competent thriller. Without it the film falls flat. But it's also a shit movie about a random sperg out if the antagonist wasn't a serial killer. It's ambiguous so as to not lionize the main character. Not because the alternative explanations are worth a shit.
Die hard is actually about a divorced dad who stays home alone on Christmas eve and writes a story about how he saves his exwife and stops the bad guys. And they love each other again. Perfectly plausible alt interpretation of die hard. Also fricking stupid. You could literally do this with any movie
I don't get your point. Die Hard was clearly real, this movie deliberately opens up everything to interpretation. All these different theories about it are very valid and convey the movie's main themes of the modern world stripping away meaning from young people.
Theres a degree of ambiguity to the movie but I remember someone earlier in the thread said the ending mighta not happened and just been a story the character wrote out and that is just fricking dumb. You could say that about every movie
You can't do that with every movie because most aren't about writers trying to come up with a story, while this one is.
You can't because unlike other movies this one deliberately opens up the idea of that being a possibility. The main character is seen writing immediately before the ending which he never did until then despite claiming to be a writer and making all kinds of literary references (Gatsby, Faulkner, etc). This is part of a whole thematic thread in this movie about how artists get inspiration and whether they imitate life or create it depending on how you interpret the movie. The film operates on a million different layers like this and that's what makes it so good. It's not lazy writing, it's brilliant. Ambiguity is not a feature of the movie it's the whole point
>Ambiguity is not a feature of the movie it's the whole point
i didn't see the movie as ambiguous at all, really. i think there were a lot of metaphors, but not ambiguity.
>the movie's main themes of the modern world stripping away meaning from young people.
It's a very relatable movie for Millennials and everyone after. Everyone is like Jong-su, and wondering what the point is. Most of the movie is just him doing nothing.
>I tend to flee rather than fight.
That's good. If you run, you live. Never be ashamed of running. You can run, and I'll stay, so you can get away. I don't really care if I live or die.
I'm really good at running away and hiding.
The end sequence of sideways was just a story the main character wrote to make himself feel better
Here's a better example and it still sucks. Kinda ruins the whole character arc
It's a possibility because of the shot of him typing and imagining Hae Mi in the apartment.
>I'm really good at running away and hiding.
Nice, that's a useful skill. It's like when you play Dota and there are different roles, you would need your exact skillset to be a good Support, whereas I like playing Off Lane.
I played league of legends in college and often played support with my friends. I miss swain support that shit was fun.
>I played league of legends in college
Lol, you baby. Literally Dota for babies. Try some Dota, and see that LoL is the same game but watered down. Dota is literally they killed you because you were in the wrong place and you can't do anything about it. I love the game.
I only played lol cause my friends played it. If they played Dota I woulda played that instead but they didn't.
Myself, I prefer single player games. I don't like multi player
>opens up everything to interpretation
meh, the only thing suggesting he's a killer it's the girl's watch in his home, a bit too weak
The cliche is that Serial killers usually collect mementos
yep. pretty kino ending ngl
Forget about it Lee, it's Korea-town
steven yeun fricked with the wrong dilapidated greenhouse. he thought himself untouchable because he had everything but felt nothing, he ran into a dude that had one thing but it was taken away from him.
he's just like me
He's just like me too (I fantasize about this happening but it never does)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomie
didn't like the movie that much but it was an interesting watch. don't like movies that spend so much time baiting you into thinking something and then acting coy and ambiguous about it later
MC is schizo and finally snaps kills an innocent man. Terrible movie btw.
Korean L'Avventura
>rich guy has a face of relief when he dies, not sadness or surprise
what was up with that
Literally me when I die, lol. What is he even losing? His rich guy life where he goes to the gym, restaurants, meets with random girls. People ITT have explained that current society is soulless for everyone, that means both leads, and not just the poor guy.
he was empty inside, as is typical for sociopaths. he knew his life was meaningless and in some ways, he was being put out of his misery.
If Ben killed her why did he agree to meet Lee Jong-su at the end when he said he was with the girl? Ben seemed totally relaxed and not at all suspicious. Furthermore Jong-su straight up told Ben he loved her so he knows she's not an unwanted greenhouse nobody will miss
Someone explained it here:
Maybe deep down, he wanted to be found out. It would explain why he was so casual about everything. Maybe he thought
>what are you going to do about it
I also interpreted it this way. We know that he knows the other was stalking him too so it wasn't like he didn't think he would become violent. He probably expected getting killed and welcomed it
Ben was empty, he was doing anything he could to feel something, anything. that's why he started a relationship with the protagonist. it was something new and different.
Trans allegory
I think the antagonist was an agp buffalo bill type actually.
The MC was trans, the girl represents his true self, the antagonist represents society and its oppression of trans expression. Hope this clears things up for you
What did she say?
>if you don't stop him, he'll do it again
>be my instrument of justice, Jong-su
Moo
Ignore all other posts.
The pantomime scene the girl does at the beginning is the key to the whole movie. Nothing's there, but you see what you want to see. That's what the protagonist does when she disappears. He can never really know what happened, but it's too painful to imagine she disappeared of her own free will and left him behind.
The least ego-dystonic narrative the protagonist can arrive at is that Ben, who the protagonist is jealous of, had something to do with her disappearance. The protagonist only has circumstantial evidence to conclude that Ben is up to some shady shit, but he needs Ben to be a serial killer, so from his perspective Ben IS a serial killer. He kills Ben to avenge himself even though it solves nothing and the girl will still be missing. Directly before this, we see Ben in a scene from outside the protagonist's perspective for the first time and Ben doesn't seem nearly as sinister as he did in any scene with the protagonist, casting doubt as to how much the protagonist ever truly knew about him.
Pic unrelated
send da video
>Directly before this, we see Ben in a scene from outside the protagonist's perspective for the first time and Ben doesn't seem nearly as sinister as he did in any scene with the protagonist
Wrong, he was seen grooming another girl aka potential new victim
is this really what virgins think when they see chad on a date?
Do you put makeup on your girlfriend when you date? Is that a normal male thing to do
I once got a girl to sleep with me by asking her to come over and bring tweezers to pluck my brows, women love grooming and what not
At what cost? You probably looked like a gay when she was done with you.
If anything it shows that Ben was soft as frick. Maybe he actually made his money as a makeup artist? Maybe he was a gay? We have no way of knowing.
Best movie of the 2000s
For me it’s another asian movie, Yi Yi
one of the most cathartic movie endings ever
The ending is really interesting. If I remember correctly, he takes all his clothes off, and then burns the car. It really feels like a proper ending, like you're seeing the last important moment in this person's life. After the ending, he's back to being a nobody. It's why I said the movie is about how soulless everything is.
Imagine this movie without Ben - would it not be extremely boring? It would be a regular love story. The ending is like a return to the dullness of reality, for both the protag and the audience.
That is an interesting point of view
its a non declared remake
its so fricking profound and in my opinion, ben is a better gavin elster than the actual gavin elster
at the end of both movies there is tragedy but jong su actually manages to understand what scottie didnt, thus killing ben
You have to watch it twice. It is a masterpiece. Search on YouTube for explanations, there are some great videos on it.