Thursday, November 14, 2013

'Memories' of Murder...Whose memories?

Wow. That film was very different from what we have been watching for the past month two months. I enjoyed this different genre of criminal, mysterious, yet subtle parts of comical aspects of the movie, 'Memories of Murder'.

It was more mind-boggling when I was doing some research on the film. I already knew that the film was based on a true story, a well-known case of Hwa Sung serial murder. The actual killer, rape murdered 10 women in total and the killer is still out there somewhere in the world. This crazy murder case investigation ceased after 15 years because of the statute of limitations. As stupid as this sound, what creeps me out the most is that he is still out there, living like a normal person when he destroyed and demoralized the victim and the victims' families. Anyways, like I said, this is not what surprised me. It was because of two different interpretations of the endings that were proposed.

The movie ended with Song Gang Ho, actor for Detective Park Doo Man, looking directly at the audience as if he is trying to send off a message to the viewers. This particular scene stood out because normally in movies, the presence of the audience is supposed to be invisible. Some believe the reason is because the director wants to target the actual killer. Because the director believes that somewhere in the audience, the actual criminal will be present watching this movie. This is what the majority of the audience would believe.
But here comes the twist, Park Doo Man did not look at the audience because he was giving the message to the killer. But he turns away from the girl to look at us, as if the audience caught him. Which brings me to my next point, perhaps Park Doo Man is the criminal and there are evidences throughout the film to prove it. Some firmly believe the director did this on purpose, to trick the audience. One of the most obvious examples is when Park Doo Man is talking to the girl in the year 2003 at the crime scene. Remember when Park Doo Man was telling his co-worker, Cho Yong Gu, that criminals always come back the scene of the crime? Park Doo Man did not come back to that place as a detective but as a serial killer. The director, Bong Joon Ho, does this by first putting both the girl and Park in the frame. The audience can see both of them in one frame but as the moment progresses, the girl’s background is white and camera’s looking upwards toward her, giving off the idea that the space of time is non-existence. This could mean the girl is, perhaps, not talking to Doo Man. Also, the director decides to separate each character into two different frames. The scenes edits back and forth from the girl and Doo Man. Paying close attention to their dialogue as well, when the girl says the killer has ‘plain’ and ‘ordinary’ look, the camera immediately shows the plain and ordinary look of Song Gang Ho. Then he slowly turns around and we can see the surprised (a bit teary eyed as well) look on him, staring directly at us. Now take a moment to rethink about the film.

I am also curious about the significance of the grasshoppers at the beginning of the movie and the boy who catches the grasshoppers. Furthermore, the significance of the boy who is wearing very similar clothing to Park Doo Man and copies every movement and things he says.



 

For any Korean speakers (I apologize to non-Korean speakers, I could only find Korean version of this), take a look at this website. It has very detailed explanations of the interpretations of the film. http://k.daum.net/qna/view.html?qid=3Udw1


To know that the director spent so much time studying about the Hwa Sung serial murder case and he used many techniques to give certain subtle evidences or messages to the viewers, makes me send shivers down my back. I know we should always pay attention to the techniques used in the film, like how the camera is held, from what angle it’s showing, or even what is going on in the background, but I feel it is crucial, especially for this movie, that we are observative of how the director made the film.

1 comment:

  1. I don't think the director (and the website you provided) suggest that Kim Man Doo was literally the rapist/murderer. i.e. he's not the suspect in that sense.
    I think what he is saying is that they are guilty because they were unable to stop it. They are the ones to blame for being incompetent, non-scientific "fighters of justice". The whole movie is critical of the incompetent police but especially critical in putting the blame of the serial murder/rape case on the police and the government at large.
    The director (apparently) wanted to extend the criticism on the Jeon Doo Hwan regime by using Kim Doo Man to symbolize Jeon.
    Well, that's what the website says at least. So technically, the killer isn't Kim Doo Man, but the director is saying "Well, you dumb detectives (and Jeon Doo Hwan) are BASICALLY the killers (the serial murder and Kwnagjoo and social turmoil, and all that)."

    ReplyDelete