MovieChat Forums > Bom yeoreum gaeul gyeoul geurigo bom (2004) Discussion > FAQ

FAQ

posted 15 years ago by Mandy_Whitsands
8 replies | jump to latest

I'd be thankful if you could answer any of these (or have questions on your own) :

1) Why did the girl's mother (Jung-young Kim?) always cover her face after the murder? Because she didn't want to see the murderer of her daughter? If so, then why does she bring him her grandchild? And if she doesn't want to see him, then why does she touch his foot with her hand during the night? And why did the film not show the mother's face when it was uncovered after her death ?

2) why did the "father monk" not save the animals from dying ? No animal should die just to "teach lessons" IMO !

3) why did the "father monk" separate his son from his inamorata ? OK, he was right about "this leads to murder" ... sure. But this was only because he knew the film's script, LOL. But more seriously, the two lovers didn't do anything wrong, except for loving each other. So why separate them? Is the better alternative to never fall in love? There wouldn't be much folks around that way ...

4) Is the concept of punishment (as demonstrated by the father monk's blows) part of buddishm ?

thanks for any answers and feel free to add your own questions.

[–] oOgiandujaOo_and_Eddy_Merckx 15 years ago

how do you know that the masked woman is the mother of the girl who had been there previously?

animals dying to teach a lesson is all part of karma no? it was not the father monks duty to save the animals, it was his duty to mentor the child, who would have learnt no lesson if the animals had been saved. It is not a monk's duty to save the world, if you look at a proactive religion like Zoroastrianism, they don't believe in monasticism at all, because monks are inactive. You can look at the search for enlightenment as ultimately selfish.

I don't think the "leads to murder" was prescient, I think it's just a general buddhist principle, you have to eschew attachment in order to reach enlightenment, because attachment creates negative emotions. In any case he said the intention to murder, not murder, which is different. Most men I would think harbour violent thoughts of jealousy if their female s/o is flirting with other men, or has an affair or some such.

violence for the greater good or the benefit of others is tolerable in buddhism. karma is a system of punishment for bad deeds in and of itself as an aside.

"He was pink and white, and all the colours you'll never see."

[–] doe_a_deer 15 years ago

MatthewScott8, I greatly appreciate your explanations/insight. It's been over a day since I rewatched this and the few ?'s I have still linger, so thanks for your POV.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] oOgiandujaOo_and_Eddy_Merckx 15 years ago

With the last bit, it is to do with heartbreak, most people get this I think the first time they fall in love. If a boy falls in love with a girl solely because she's pretty for example, and she sleeps around, that is only going to end harshly, via murderous thoughts or self-murderous thoughts. And I think the monk is also saying that there's an inevitability to this, to negative thoughts of sexual jealousy and also obsession. I think the problem with romantic love from a Buddhist point of view is that it relies on attachment, whereas the ideal is to not have attachments.

With fire it is associated with desire in buddhism but it is also associated with enlightenment, ie. the simultaneous extinguishing of the self and the spreading of light.

"He was pink and white, and all the colours you'll never see."

[–] vedrana_a 14 years ago

I realised that the old monk was reincarnated into a snake.

[–] jukierubixcube 14 years ago

Well to answer #1, that's not the girl's mother; if the young monk had had a child, he would've been a teenager at that point of the movie, since the young monk was like 50.

3, Sure, all they did was love each other, but then she slept with another man. He wanted something from the world, so he had to deal with the negatives in the world.

I think the main problem is overanalyzation from an American standpoint. Many of us don't know anything outside our box, so we don't understand the things outside of it, either.

[–] Woody_Allen_Binoculars 14 years ago

"I think the main problem is overanalyzation from an American standpoint. Many of us don't know anything outside our box, so we don't understand the things outside of it, either. "

Besides that, I think that the film in any case does not open up in the same way to an Asian (Korean) and to a "Western". I mean, you can look up the meanings of several symbols and hints and clues and whatnot but the truth still remains that this is a lot accesible to a native. I think this also is the film's main attraction to an American or a European; the fact that it's so mysterious when it in fact might be quite the opposite to a person from that country or region. Dunno, it would be cool to hear some thoughts from an Asian writer here at imdb.

[–] Woody_Allen_Binoculars 14 years ago

The themes, I think, are debateable and the film's true genius to me still is somewhat undecided. The cinematography, however, is breath-taking, and that's a given. Really beautiful. It's so beautiful that it almost doesn't matter whether there is anything going on behind the pictures we're been shown.