MovieChat Forums > Salinui chueok (2003) Discussion > I hated it. Here's why.

I hated it. Here's why.

posted 18 years ago by leafletta
119 replies | jump to latest

Before we all jump to the "technical brilliance" of this and the "that's how Korea was back then" that, allow me to say why this film irked me to no end. First off, it was LONG! And for that long, I wanted something real good out of it.

The main characters had no discernable depth. Park: irascible, stupid even in his pompus belief of his clairvoyance in picking out the guilty, was constantly wrong through most of the film. His methods were coercive, brutal, unintelligent and at time, down-right superstitious. OK. So I don't care for this character.

Next, Jo. The high-kick side-kick. First, from a realistic film standpoint, his kicks are a bit over the top. It looks more like a fantasy Matrix kick than how cops actually beat people up. But I'll put that aside. He is at least consistent. He is hot-tempered, do as Park tells him, and a single-dimensioned side-kick. He's fine. But I don't care for him either, that's the point.

Next, Suh, the cop from Seoul. From the special feature, I learned that he had a personal vendetta to gripe with, which would have made his character a lot more interesting had that aspect been made clear in the film. The film, as presented, did not mention it. OK, so again, I hoped he was the voice of reason. And for a long time, he was. I was happy with that, all the way till the end, he suddenly flips a switch, and decides to ignore DNA lab test result and shoot the guy. Now, if the film had made it clear that this last suspect was indeed the killer, then fine, Suh is in the right. But the Film NEVER made that clear, which I could only draw the conclusion that Suh is acting immorally. Despite pressure, right is right, and you can't kill someone before you are sure they are indeed a murderer. So again, I don't care for Suh.

Chief police. He knew very well the operation of Park and Jo. I mean, that was pretty much implied when he talked about how the reporters are always crowding around and why so many protesters come around. So, the chief is just as backwards as Park and Jo. While I give him credit for reprimanding Jo in a later juncture of the film, he is by no means a character with the credibilitiy to be a voice of reason.

So, you see the problem here? There's no one character for you to hang onto. Perhaps this is the American in me talking, but when I watch a film, especially a long one, I want to empathize, sympathize and like at least one of the protagonists. Here, I've got nothing. This leads to the point, what the heck is the point of the film? To tell me how corrupt that society was and that's why they couldn't catch the serial killer? Or, is the film attempting to be a Mockumentary? No is the answer to both.

I've learned in the 2nd grade to not write something unless you've got a point. Not just a bunch of facts. Even documentaries have points. Here, i've got nothing, except 3 hours lost. This film was utterly unenjoyable, dissatisfying for me. I will say this much, I know I am able to be this brutal and harsh in my review of the film because I am not a Korean, so I do not have all these nostalgic links to the subtler points to the film. But what is a film? It's a story with a point. That's the basis. Here we are just presented with a bunch of facts, some awkwardly acted, and overall, dissatisfying.

[–] loyalfriend 18 years ago

You made your point well, and it was an excellent point. Thanks for pointing this out.

[–] davidchoi_ 17 years ago

spoiler

I don't blame most of you for discussing about the murder and who might the killer be and all.
But you guys are misunderstanding the point the director is trying to say.
Since you guys aren't Korean and probably won't know what happened with the Korean government in the 80-90s.
The two main cops in the movies are the two dictator presidents Jyun Doo Hwan and No Tae Woo.
Everyone born in Korea heard of their evils over the country, I my self heard of the injustice and stupidity when I was growing up in Korea.
The killer who never got caught was an actual event but Bong Jun Ho is just using the concept as a metaphor to the troubles in Korea at the time.
The cops (president) could've captured the killer (problems) if they used professionality but they turned to their stupidity and thuggish instincts and ruined their chances.
The ending where the girl says stuff to Doo Man, in Korean she says the man looked "obvious, plain and normal" then the camera is on Doo Man.
He turns and looks at the camera as if he realized it's himself.
As many of you know "The Host" was similar in the same sense it was politically driven. But in "Memories of Murder" it's less evident unless you detect the similarities in name and background history which are hard for foreigners to get a hold of.

Hope that makes you atleast appreciate what the director was trying to do than say "it had no point".
To me, as a Korean, it made me think twice about politicians and the media(because of the Host) in Korea.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ChrisIhao 17 years ago

Brilliant information! I would never have figured this one out if it hadnt been for this comment. The pieces now fit, and I thank you for this. This movie is just one of many great movies from Korea the past years, but with this input in mind I have to say it may be the best one of them all. Greets from Norway.

[–] t-d-t-m82 16 years ago

Great post. You didn't mention the black outs were a stunt of political power to protect people from the north korean threat. That's how tense it was back then. JSA to me is the ultimate war film and this to me is a very top notch serial film. If you watch enough cop stuff over the years - especially 80's - then you will recognise the competent-incompetent cop and poor management and government interest preventing chiefs to do as they please. I'm definitely going to get the 'Host' next month. Blu-ray too. I recommend Hot Fuzz from England. A good cop film. You would enjoy it.

[–] slateofmind 16 years ago

Great post! I enjoyed the film for the tension, drama, and psychological thrills, but knowing there was a deeper subtext makes me want to watch it again with that in mind. I've always had difficulty relating to films that try to capture the surrounding culture, but this one was so well made on all levels that it becomes almost transcendent, in that anyone can enjoy it regardless of their frame of reference. The dramatic tension between the two detectives was almost Shakespearian, so it makes sense now that it was written with a metaphorical context in mind.

Brilliant film! I only wish it were more widely recognized here in the states.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2100086/
http://www.slateofmind.com

[–] j_eyon-2 16 years ago

Thanks for the information. All that went over my head since I'm not familiar with the details of Korean history.

As a movie without that background, however, I still thought it was brilliant. In fact, I probably liked it more without the political layering. Now, I have no idea what was meant to represent the actual crime and what was propoganda.

[–] aks4532 13 years ago

Thanks for the great explanation! I am not Korean but I thoroughly enjoyed this movie

[–] gangzzta 12 years ago

Thank you David

[–] yy20560812 11 years ago

tks

[–] simonedwards_1 10 years ago

Brilliant explaination of an awesome film.

Should be imdb top 20 nevermind 220-odd. (replacing the overrated Matrix)

The cold, self examination ending is one of the best ever to a film ever.

Similar I find to No country for old men.

I actually watched this film in Hong Kong as I lived there for a while and the cinema applauded at the end, I saw many Asian films during this time including the brilliant Oldboy, the nearly as brilliant Hero and infernal affairs, but none got a reaction like Memories of Murder.

[–] sydneysider1002 18 years ago

The characters were not there for you to empathise. To enjoy the movie, I think you have to first come to terms with that...

The "coercive, brutal, unintelligent and at time, down-right superstitious..."
nature of these cops are there to illustrate to you the very point you made in your comment : "To tell me how corrupt that society was and that's why they couldn't catch the serial killer?" the answer is YES.

You have overlooked the fact that the film tries to capture 'zeitgeist' of Korea in the 80s.. the times when they didn't have advanced technology like "CSI", or the fact that people were so poor (and ignorant) that money solved a lot of problems, even in police investigations.

How frustrating and sad it was that they couldn't catch a brutal killer, when nowadays it's a piece of cake (ok maybe not a piece of cake but you get me)
Suh's outrage and frustration in the last scene in the tunnels is where the empathy should have kicked in for the viewers..

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] hoo8myricecakes 17 years ago

It is still not a "piece of cake". Go past your bias media-ladened image of crime. Did you know more than a majority of missing persons, murders, and thefts are unsolved and criminals are not captured in the UNITED STATES? I don't have sources at the moment as the facts were from past criminal justice classes. Just wanted to point something out.

[–] jneedleman 17 years ago

SidneySider wasn't speaking condescendingly about South Korea in the 80s or Korea in general, nor was he suggesting that 21st century investigations are always perfect. He was talking about crime investigation techniques and processes that were unavailable at the time. Said techniques have made suspect identification easier for law enforcement everywhere (provided the murderer leaves DNA behind that survives), including Korea and the U.S.

SS's tone was quite respectful, especially regarding the film itself. To convey the tragedy, failure and subjectivity of investigative work in 80s South Korea amid corruption, chaos and poverty despite reasonably good intentions -- that was the *director's* idea, not ours. I doubt you intend to complain the *director* portrayed 80s South Korea unfairly.

Of course someone could make a similar film about 80s investigators in the U.S. They probably won't, but they could.

Yes, we know that American investigators are capable of error. All investigators are. But most movies and television series rarely show their failures as honestly and intricately as Memories of Murder.

What's more, every country has its low tide. America had to deal with famine, the polarizing Civil War, the Great Depression and countless other bad times. New York City has been subject to disaster after disaster and neither the current administration nor the last has managed to apprehended Bin Laden.

So SS pointed out that 80s South Korea had to deal with the heartbreaking issues shown in this film. So what? How can noticing that historical reality be interpreted as disrespectful? And how can anyone not notice that the creator of this film and others (The Host) actually *believes* in a healthy level of disrespect -- not for other cultures, but for arbitrary authority?

[–] zaudo 17 years ago

Well said.

[–] vitaly6 18 years ago

Agreed. weak characters. weak story. total failure.

[–] jsjirn 18 years ago

Leafletta,

This is probably the most inane analysis of a film I've read in all the hours I have logged onto IMDB. First of all, if the filmmaker followed all of your suggestions, then rather than having an original film he would have produced another dumb serial killer film like the ones Hollywood is so expert at producing. If you can't appreciate what the director was trying to do here (after all, the film is based on real-life incidents involving crimes which were never solved) then I would suggest you stop watching movies and stick to CSI and Law & Order, which should match the level of your IQ.

[–] moodoom 18 years ago

"Even documentaries have points.
Here, i've got nothing, except 3 hours lost."

sad.

[–] simonedwards_1 10 years ago

Its about 2 hours

[–] ArkadyRenko 18 years ago

"Perhaps this is the American in me talking"

And with that you just doomed a whole nation of filmgoers to be presented as unwilling to see anything outside formula and desperate for morality kicks. Go read the Bible if you need your morals reaffirmed. Me, i see a film to watch a good story, morals or not.

"There is no Seyser Koze!!!" Gabriel Byrne blunder while filming The Usual Suspects.

[–] alexrunn 18 years ago

if the characters were deep. there would be no room for ridiculous behavior and jokes. which served a purpose of making fun of the situation back then as well as giving a sort of comic relief. you'll notice that by the end idiotic behavior stops so the consequences and the feel in general become serious and characters begin to reveal new sides.

there are no real heroes because there's no need for them. it's a movie about a time in history.

[–] stara1019 18 years ago

***SIGH***

If you had continued your education further than the 2nd grade, maybe you would be able to get the point of this film.

[–] pairofdox 18 years ago

I disagree with the original poster -- this is not a movie about good cops solving brutal murders. At the same time, I don't think this movie is largely made to depict the corruprtion of society at the time neither. I actually think that all 3 detectives are quite dedicated and determined in solving the case, their contrast in style reminds me more of the characters in LA Confidential.

The most interesting part is of course towards the climax when Suh lost his cool, it's intriguing because Suh is supposed to be the smart one, the reasonable one, the one with ethics in his method; Ironically, Park is the one who retained his sanity towards the end -- Park, who typically utilizes physical abuse and force confession out of suspects. And yet, there is a reason for this irony, Park's lament towards his suspects were methodical, where as Suh's were emotional.

Most of the Korean audiences probably knew that this case will not be solved as it's based on a real event, the characters in the movie however did not.
So all and all, I think the point of the film is ultimately about 3 people with distinct ethical backgrounds and personalities, dealing with the desparity of this situaion. Via Suh's final act, I was made to think perhaps that, those 3 are not so different after all, at least in the sense that how much they want to get this case solved. And by that implication, perhaps in the end, they are not so different even from you or me, just "plain, ordinary looking" people.

I AM... BORED!

[–] ross-joo 18 years ago

If you couldn't care for ANY of the characters, diverse film-watching is definitely not your thing. To watch a KOREAN movie with an American point of view, you're almost bound to dislike the movie. Generally, when watching ANY movie, keeping an open mind will help you enjoy the movie more. So yeah, a movie is a story with a point, but you can't catch the point with a closed mind.

Read the title again, the point is right there anyways.

[–] legendlength 14 years ago

KOREAN movie with an American point of view, you're almost bound to dislike the movie. Generally, when watching ANY movie, keeping an open mind will help you enjoy the movie more. So yeah, a movie is a story with a point, but you can't catch the point with a closed mind.

Wow. Some of the racist immature comments defending this film are intolerable.

For you in particular: If you haven't grown up in the 4 years since your post and come to realize 'american' is not equal to 'closed-mindedness' then you really need to get out and meet some people from other countries face to face.

[–] arundas09 12 years ago

Wow what?

When did he descend into racism? His defence was on emphasizing the fact that if you are to truly understand or enjoy this film, you will have to abandon any frame of reference in terms of nationalistic or cultural feelings. You have to look at it more from a perspective of a humanist. Didn't he say to keep an open mind?