The last suspect (Park Hyeon-gyu) is the killer, right?
He was the one sending the requests to the radio station, he had no alibi and also the DNA document says: '..it cannot be said conclusively that the suspect is the murderer..'
The girl in the epilogue describes his (if it is his) face as plain and ordinary.
Why isn't he the murderer??
It could be him yes, but in the ending of the film where the girl described the face as plain and ordinary and the main character looks into the camera suggests to me that the killer could be anyone, and is amongst us somewhere, hence the direct look at the audience at the end.
Cinema is the memory of life.
Well nobody here is even mentioned the last suspect. The camera doesn't zoom onto the DNA paper for more than two seconds and the translation of what the detective then says is: "It is a mistake" (or something).
I took that look as "We knew it was him but we let him go" since it fit to the story.
Anyway, you may be right. Probably that last look was more for the actual murderer out there.
I'm thinking this was to highlight a last time the character's supposed "instinct" to recognize any perpetrator, the silliness of it, but with a possible indication that maybe he's "seeing" it now in his memory of the eyes (which I found to be really what they tried to do in that scene).
share[deleted]
The last suspect (Park Hyeon-gyu) is the killer, right?
He was the one sending the requests to the radio station, he had no alibi and also the DNA document says: '..it cannot be said conclusively that the suspect is the murderer..'
The girl in the epilogue describes his (if it is his) face as plain and ordinary.
Why isn't he the murderer??
I think maybe they did catch the killer eventually (in real life, not in the movie).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Choon-jae
Just mentioned this below, but I just watched this movie for the first time and was confused as fuck, because before this movie I looked up the murders and saw the above article and how the killer was apprehended in 1994. I was so lost when the movie ended in 2003 with no one caught. Went back and finished reading the Wikipedia article and was like, "ooooooohh!..."
shareOld thread I know, but I just watched this film in April of 2020. Back in September 2019 they actually caught the guy! DNA evidence conclusive tied him to all the murders, except one deemed to be a copycat. Guy is already serving a life sentence since the early 90's for the rape/murder of his sister-in-law.
Puts an perspective perspective on the film.
I just watched this movie for the first time and was confused as fuck, because before this movie I looked up the murders and saw the killer was apprehended in 1994. I was so lost when the movie ended in 2003 with no one caught. Went back and finished reading the Wikipedia article and was like, "ooooooohh!..."
shareMay be the answer is in the title... ?
The detective at the end walks by the scene of one the murders, stops and thinks, what if he is the one that committed the murders and him being there makes all the memories of his deeds come back to him; therefore the title memories of murder.