Showing posts with label Parasite. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Parasite. Show all posts

Monday, 10 February 2020

92. Parasite (2019)






Plot Intro
Kim Ki-woo (Choi Woo-shik) is an intelligent but indolent young man living in dingy basement flat in an impoverished district of Seoul with his father Kim Ki-taek (Song Kang-ho), mother Kim Chung-sook (Jang Hye-jin) and sister Kim Ki-jeong (Park So-dam). An old friend of his gets him the role of a tutor to the teenage daughter of the wealthy Park family. But Ki-woo doesn’t have any qualifications, so he forges his documents and cons his way into the Parks’ good books. Gradually the rest of the Kim family gain positions in the Parks’ service through fraudulent ways until eventually the family are gaining a more comfortable income. But when the Park family go away for a camping weekend, the Kims discover a dark secret hidden within the Parks’ house…

Paul says...
As I write this article, Twitter (and not just the millennial movie critics of Twitter) are still going mad. Parasite’s win is an undeniable landmark, being the first non-English language movie to win the big title, and it very cheekily took Best International Feature Film too. 

It bloody deserves it too. The favourite to win, 1917, was great, with immersive visuals and intense camera work. But where Parasite trumps it is in its multi-layered storytelling, and I will try to explain what I mean without giving away too much of the plot.

In a nutshell, Parasite is about class, most pertinently in South Korea but it seems to have struck a nerve across the world. The Kim family are the lower class “parasites”, living in a tiny, smelly basement flat. One of their first scenes sees them keeping their windows open to let fumigation fumes in- even though it stinks. People outside their window piss and vomit in the street. They even liken themselves to cockroaches, and often their movements around the Parks’ house evokes insect-like behaviour through their hunched, scuttling, jerky movements, their deception, and their tendency to hide in dark, concealed corners. The only way they can infiltrate such a world of peace and cleanliness is through deception and by destroying the lives of others. And like real body parasites, they dwell within the host body (the Parks) and pretty much suck the life out of them to survive. 

Furthermore, when they travel from their basement to the Park household, they are always travelling upwards via steps and hilly roads. When returning, they travel downwards, and when it pours with rain, the torrents of dirty water hurtle down from the wealthier part of town, and destroys the poorer. There’s a real sense of hierarchy here, with the gullible, anxious Parks at the top and the conniving parasitic Kims at the bottom. Indeed, these basements flats really exist in parts of Seoul. Originally built in the '60s as bunkers in case the North Koreans invaded, over-population has let to them being adapted into cheap housing, and they are far from ideal. This film may do a lot for Korean filmmakers but perhaps not for the Seoul tourist board, or for capitalism.

Another major reason to see this film is Bong Joon-ho’s direction, which is so carefully and intricately constructed that I can imagine him planning out every single shot with meticulous detail. The ominous stairs to the basement are jet-black but surrounded by vast golden shelves containing glass sculptures, trophies, expensive wines and other symbols of status; the camera is often angled to look up or down, depending on the characters’ social position; symbols such as the perfect geometry of the Parks’ interior design and the Park’s son’s obsession with Native American role play; all of these create a film that has many things to say about how capitalism constructs an arbitrary and destructive social hierarchy, but tells it in a way that is coherent and accessible for all. 


If I say anymore, I run the risk of revealing the various plot developments, all of which left me surprised but convinced that this sort of thing could really happen. I’ll finish by saying that Parasite is one of the most incisive, exciting movies ever made and I am over the moon that it won Best Picture, creating a momentous end to what has actually been a momentous decade of Oscar winners. 

Highlight
The scene in which the Parks leave for camping, so the Kims help themselves to the food and drink in the house and have an impromptu party. Throughout the scene there is a growing, intangible sense that something significant is about to happen, and bloody hell it does.

Lowlight
Absolutely none. This is tightly and perfectly constructed.

Mark
10/10


Doug says...
This is the final film in our reviewing project. It has taken us almost exactly three years to watch our way through nine decades of Oscar winners, and I have to say I’m a little sad it’s over. 

But what a way to end it. 

Parasite is an extraordinary win in so many ways. The first ever non-English speaking film to take the prize, seeing a stage filled with Korean film-makers and producers, delivering speeches in their native tongue, and translated by a charming Korean translator (herself a film director) was utterly wonderful in what is so predominantly a white male environment. Seeing Jane Fonda, an actress devoted to diversity and the promotion of liberal, vital issues, allow herself the tiniest of smiles before announcing the winner was also wonderful. Seeing the Hollywood elite refuse to allow the Oscars producers to dim the lights on the speeches, chanting as one in their seats and forcing them to turn the lights back on so the producers could finish their speeches - magical. 

It was the best result we could have hoped for. 

Parasite is an extraordinary film. The director Bong-Joon Ho hasn’t left a thing to chance. From the scuttling motions of the Kim family as they crawl about the Park’s house to make less sound, to the gentle, uneasy shots of the glamorous shelves that surround the darkness of the cellar entrance - we are aware something is up. 

It’s very hard to go into why this film is so clever and intriguing without ruining everything. Suffice to say that when a character turns to the others and invites them to follow her, chills run down your back without you knowing why. After the set-up invites you to understand, if not like, the ambitious Kim family, the rest of the film leaves you growingly uneasy about their actions. The Park family, while rich and thoughtless, are kind and loving. No one is a real villain or hero - one film review posited that the real villain is capitalism which rings increasingly true. 

What we see is the desperation of those in need. People turn on each other with astonishing rapidity. Without revealing anything, the use of the endearment ‘sis’ in one scene becomes weaponised, a plea to the more powerful person, which can flip entirely in a moment. We see the Kim family, literally scuttling home, leave the high up Park family home, climbing down flights of stairs. What begins as light rain at the top of the mountain, is flooding sewage water by the bottom. The Kim family home, floating with sewage, is grotesque. They smell of it - as the Park’s son unwittingly says. 

And yet the next day the Park matriarch brightly delights in the rain, in front of the Kim family, saying that it’s washed the streets clean. It’s not barbed, but it’s cruel, and Bong-Joon Ho doesn’t miss a trick in showing how these micro-aggressions begin to build and build. The Park family aren’t horrible at all, but the sheer way in which they can live their life is an affront to the struggling Kim family. The denouement, while dramatic, feels entirely real. It’s captivating and ghastly. 


Ultimately, this is a film that touches on so many things - privilege, class, hunger, desperation. As the Kim matriarch drunkenly says - anyone can be kind if they don’t want for anything. It’s a savagely delivered line (side note - where were the acting nominations? There should have been at least five) that sums up the whole film to some extent. In a society that deprives some so entirely, how can we expect anything but desperation and anger? 

Highlight
I can’t tell you because it’ll spoil the film. Just take it as a plea to go watch it. 

Lowlight
None. 

Mark
10/10 

Sunday, 9 February 2020

Oscar Season: 'Le Mans '66', 'Parasite', 'Joker'




We'll be doing our final round up of all the Best Picture nominees for this year's Academy Awards. This week: Le Mans '66, Parasite and Joker. 

Le Mans '66


Plot
The car manufacturer Ford are struggling financially, so they set about winning the prestigious 24-hour car race, Le Mans. But perennial winners Ferrari are tough to beat.


Paul says
Neither great, nor terrible, this is a pretty conventional sports-underdog film. What stops it from rising above the level of most other films in this genre, is that the whole thing is carried by Christian Bale, who has the most interesting and vibrant character, and gives the only performance that doesn’t seem to be on autopilot (or, in this case, cruise control). He’s characterised very well as a maverick, but one with a strong sense of family and duty to make him genuinely likeable. While Bale is driving in the fast lane, all other characters and plot strands are stuck in mediocre gridlock. 

The film also spends too much time building up towards the race itself. I didn’t feel like a needed to know the ins and outs of how they re-adapted cars, and most of the obstacles they face don’t feel particularly dramatic. The film stops stalling when it reaches the Le Mans race itself, which is excitingly shot and has a few other plot strands going on within it that put the pace into 5th gear. But there are also events after the race I felt were rushed through because too much time was spent on the set-up.


If you like cars, car races, and men doing triumphant things against jobs-worths, idiots, and people who don’t speak much English (in this case, the Italians, mostly characterised as hot-tempered, stupid and nationalistic), then you’ll like this. If you’ve seen and enjoyed Cool Runnings, The Blind Side, Dodgeball, or The Karate Kid, you won’t get anything new here.


Mark: 4/10 


Doug says
I pretty much agree with Paul. It’s not a very exciting film and while it’s entertaining enough to pass a couple of hours, the Oscar nomination is a bit out of the blue. It’s a ‘man’s film’, full of cars, stern-jawed heroes being silent and brave, and a climactic car race with a crucial decision for Christian Bale’s hero to make at the eleventh hour. It’s fun, but not anything new. 


I did enjoy how the film doesn’t ever let you forget that the Ford company, despite all their talk about being ready to embrace innovation, will brush all that aside if it means they get good PR. There’s a fun villain in the Marketing Director, and Ford’s ultimate betrayal of Bale’s character is matched nicely by a small moment of recognition by Ferrari’s loud Italian boss. You leave thinking perhaps he would have had a better time if he’d worked for the ‘enemy’. 

Mark: 4/10



Parasite














Plot 
An impoverished family con their way into the service of a much wealthier family. But an unexpected discovery sends their con wildly out of control.

Paul says
This film has taken the world by storm, and it’s easy to see why. It’s received an unprecedented nomination for both Best Picture and Best International Feature Film and for me it’s evidence that the Academy should be expanding the Best Picture category to include non-English language films more often.

This movie will absolutely surprise you- I beg you not to read spoilers. What starts as an amusing con-artist tale evolves suddenly into an intense thriller, and then a cutting social commentary on the relationship between the wealthy and the poor, all the while remaining convincing and coherent. Bong Joon-Ho directs very carefully, with every shot containing lighting, movement and symbolism that is subtle but obvious enough to captivate and move the audience, from the way in which the poor family scuttle about the house on all fours like insects (the parasites of the title) to the way in which the stairs to the basement are so ominously framed by objects denoting wealth and status.

The acting also deserved more note. I especially enjoyed Cho Yeo-jeong as the stressed rich housewife, and Lee Jung-eun as the housekeeper who manages to ooze kindness, menace and tragedy all within the space of two hours.


This is an extremely strong contender and while it may be up against the current titan, 1917, the 2010s trend is for underdogs to win through. Could this be the first non-English language winner of Best Picture? 

Mark: 10/10 

Doug says
Don’t read about this film, just go see it. It’s a startling dichotomy of class and while I’m certain that the Oscars won’t celebrate it purely because they can’t bear to think a non-English speaking film would be better than anything of theirs, it should easily be this year’s winner. 

Parasite stylishly and powerfully shows the differences in class, and seeing the poorer family’s semi-underground flat and restricted lifestyles makes you understand, if not approve of, their decisions. Director Boon Joon-Ho has produced a clever, beautiful film where every shot is stunning and often loaded with meaning. 


It’s also brimming with fabulous performances - particularly both sets of parents. Characters shift and change as you learn more about them - just as in real life. And ultimately the question is raised - can you ever really escape the class that life has put you in? 

Mark: 10/10




Joker



Plot 
A wannabe stand-up comedian in crime-stricken Gotham City has some issues. 


Paul says
Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy establishes Gotham City as riddled with crime and desperately in need of a sexy, black-clad vigilante to help the police catch the criminals and either arrest or kill them. And with that, social order is restored. What Joker sets out to do, is point out that crime does not just grow organically out of some obscure “evil”, but is rather a result of bad government causing poverty, disenfranchisement and oppression, and the solution is far more complex. Arthur Fleck, or the Joker of the title, is very much a victim, not a super-villain, while the Waynes are not wealthy do-gooders, but the causes of all Gotham’s woes. The movie has obviously been written with American gun crime and London-based knife crime in mind.

Is it effective? Sometimes, yes. Joaquin Phoenix is incredibly intense, especially in the climactic scene between him and Robert De Niro. I can see why he’s the hot favourite for Best Actor. Atmospherically, director Todd Phillips, better known for comedies such as The Hangover and Borat, does a great job.


But the problem is that we know exactly what’s going to happen- it’s a bygone conclusion that the Joker will turn out bad. So really we’re put through two hours of relentless misery, humiliation and tragedy only to reach the very character conclusion we expect. Not my particular choice of entertainment but hey, it’s proven to be pretty popular.

Mark: 7/10 


Doug says
I enjoyed this and as a film it’s an easy watch, gripping and unsettling. Joaquin Phoenix does a sterling job, with a manic mechanical laugh that is pretty terrifying. He deserves the nomination for the glassy-eyed close ups alone. It’s making some valid points about people being pushed to the limit - the riot scenes at the climax of the film made me think of Brexit - how some people turned violent in the hope of change - any change. 


It’s very well shot, and this is a glossy thing, but it doesn’t deserve to win. It’s not doing anything particularly new and compared to its fellow competitors, this is just a bit unrelentingly grim in a way that almost feels gratuitous. I think sometimes film-makers tend towards this, the embracing of total misery. It’s not actually artful though, and I think a film that works out moments of light and shade is a far more difficult and interesting thing. 


Mark: 6/10