MovieChat Forums > Gisaengchung (2019) Discussion > Thoughts

Thoughts

posted 6 years ago by Fandango (535)
16 replies | jump to latest

Throughout the film we're shown how the Parks' family has an aversion to the way everyone smells. The Parks associate the scent of Mr. Kim to poverty. For Mr. Kim, he sees this open disgust of their smell as an affront to their underprivileged circumstances. When Mr. Park attempts to take the keys from Geun-Se, he covers his nose because the smell becomes overpowering again. This is the tipping point for Mr. Kim, because he sees that despite all of the madness, Mr. Park is caught up in the minutiae of how people smell.

Mr. Kim sees this as a sign of extreme opulence--an unnecessary luxury, if you will. Mr. Kim believes that his family is giving more than they're receiving in the form of payment. He believes that the reason the Parks are so kind and welcoming is a function of their wealth.

In the end, human jealousy takes over, and we're presented with the madness in the end. Although I'm not quite certain about the impact Geun-Se and Yoon are supposed to have on the audieince, as that reveal felt a bit underwhelming to me.

I found the Kims to be pretty unlikable. They are, as the film depicts, "parasites", in the sense that they don't appear to put any effort into bettering their situation. They want to take from others and give very little in return. This is seen from the way they fold the pizza boxes in the beginning. Their jealousy is unfounded, as Mr. Park worked for his lot in life. He is the product of a strong work ethic and ambition. Was luck involved in some of his success? Sure. But I like to believe a large part of his circumstance could be attributed to personal agency and the pursuit of self-improvement.

The saddest part isn't that the Kims were living in poverty, but that they had the knowledge and skillset to become meaningful and successful members of society. They wasted a lot of their energy wallowing in self-pity. They could have sublimated some of their anger towards something productive. It's one thing to be content with mediocrity, it's another to hate others who aren't and view them as the root of your problems.

Wasted potential in the end. They programmed themselves for self-destruction, even when circumstances opened up for them.

[–] asom (6894) 5 years ago

That was the idea for which the boy writes his answer. Found a motivation to actually become successful.

[–] Fandango (535) 5 years ago

I wonder if South Koreans find this film more impactful, as they understand some of the social mores depicted more than I do.

[–] Cathexis (112) 5 years ago

Who said the Kims were the "parasites?" The metaphor could apply just as well to the Parks.

[–] Fandango (535) 5 years ago

By conventional metrics, the Kims were parasites in the sense that they didn't work or contribute to society.

Sure, we can view the Parks as parasites because they're using the work that is produced by the Kims (i.e., meal preparation, house cleanliness, tutoring, chauffeuring).

At the end of the day, however, the Parks payed their share of the taxes and attempted to raise and integrate meaningful members into society. The Kims, on the other hand, were merely using the system, never truly giving anything in return. Their take was not commensurate with their give. This was made apparent early on, when they could barely put in the effort to fold pizza boxes.

I'm interested to hear your take on it.

[–] Cathexis (112) 5 years ago

Yes, the Kims definitely fit the classical definition, and for the first part of the film we do regard them as the parasite worming its way into the host/home. But if we consider the larger picture, opening up the social and economic context beyond the immediate events of the film, we can also interpret the power elite (private citizens as well as governments) feeding off the labor and livelihoods of the lower classes. I concede this angle isn't as explicitly explored, but the general attitude of the Parks toward the Kims, the constant condescending put-downs about their odor, make it clear that they are using their labor only as a means of advancing themselves, without caring about the Kims as humans.

And I would argue the point about the Parks attempting to "raise and integrate meaningful members into society." Again, it seems the only attention given their children (which is meagre to begin with) is to reproduce their (the family's) success and lineage.

[–] Fandango (535) 5 years ago

Excellent points.

We can view the Kims as the underprivileged black Americans who may be more likely to mug someone, and the Parks as the corporation that, through their negligence, may harm people by commodifying waste as a potential nutrient and selling it to the masses in the form of flouride water.

I suppose ultimately both sides are wrong, and the real fact is, regardless of wealth or opportunity, humans are deplorable in their actions.

[–] FilmBuff (7436) 5 years ago

The beauty of the film, for me, is that parasite is applicable to nearly everyone.

Are the Parks the parasites? They suck up so much wealth for themselves that there is very little left to go around.

Are the Kims the parasites? They latch onto the Parks and suck away every bit of wealth that they can get.

Or, as I think, is the real parasite the hope for something better or different? The parasite of hope pushed the Kims to use every trick they could, ending up with people dying, all as they strived to improve their lives. The parasite of hope pushed the Parks to hire tutors and cooks and chauffeurs to improve their children and streamline their lives so they could focus on earning more money.

One of the most telling scenes in the film is when the Parks think they are alone, and are fantasizing about what they had been belittling earlier. Mr. Park wants his wife to wear the panties and she pretends to want drugs. They aren't satisfied with who they are. They play along, and say the right things at the right times, but when passion overtakes them their true desires come out.

I think everyone in the film is a parasite in the eyes of someone else, and the real, hidden, parasite is human nature that forces us to strive for more, different, and better.

[–] Fandango (535) 5 years ago

If looking at the film through subtext, which I suppose this film has a lot of, I would say your analysis is very provoking.

I would argue, however, that there are some objective elements in the film that aren't easy to dismiss and, as such, make it difficult to side with the Kims and the idea that they are being "suppressed", as it were, by the system or external factors.

Imagine, you're in these dire straits, struggling to obtain a "wi-fi" connection, and the few opportunities that are available to you to make money are being squandered. Even if we consider the fact that the job of folding pizza boxes likely payed a miserly sum, I believe most ethically sound people would have put their best foot forward.

I do understand that there is a marked contrast in Eastern vs. Western thought, where the West believes in a more "master of your destiny" (internal locus of control) mindset, and the East believes that outside factors influence your trajectory in life. I believe Easterners have a saying that Westerners tend to go against the grain.

Ultimately, the disgust of the Kims and the Parks was wholly mutual. On a bioenergetic level, this mutual anger only exacerbated their inner aggression, eventually manifesting in their physical destruction.

They primed themselves for self-destruction: The Kims through their hatred and envy; the Parks through their indifference and material worship.

On a deeper level, this is Eastern religiosity (Karma) played out, with its implications.

[–] bounce (82) 5 years ago

SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER

I didn't see her as pretending to want drugs. The point about when they get horny their true natures come through may be key here - HE wants her to be cheap, slutty... she really wants drugs ... the first scene where we see her is the old housekeeper having to wake her from a deep sleep/mild coma whatever ... drug induced? (that was my intial reaction before the "buy me drugs scene).

Then again.. I hadn't considered the "pretend" scenario until i read the above. Maybe she was role playing after all? Playing the part of s street whore asking her "punter" to get her drugs for sexual favours, as she knows this is what turns hubby on ? Or maybe this is a hint that he initially found/net her as a street whore wantig drugs, married her, and this is just a revesiting of their "courtship" ? I wondered if Kim's mentioning the husband's "love" for his wife being a suggestion (to the audience) that in fact the marriage was not based on love, but appearances and mutual benefit - she gets out the gutter, he gets a beutiful wife that will not "cross the line".

I'm probably overthinking this all! But good point!

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 5 years ago

Precisely!

😎

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 5 years ago

You make some excellent points!

😎

[–] Boricanator (1469) 5 years ago

Mr. Park worked for his lot in life. He is the product of a strong work ethic and ambition.

You are making a lot of assumptions here. The film hints that Mr. Park was born into wealth. The same thing with his wife. Their inability to stand the smells, their disgust with the Metro and extreme condescension to the Kims point to that. And let’s not forget about their naiveté and inability to do basic household chores or even cooking.

And this is the main message of the film. There is a huge problem of social inequality where it is hard, if not impossible, to climb out of poverty. The son had to keep postponing going to school to support his family. The place were they lived was horrible. Without internet connection, they were limited in earning options. A rain could wash away the few things they had, pushing them back.

Obviously, they were wrong in hurting the Park’s employees and and in many of the other things they did.

But when you have a very unequal society where the rich have everything and the poor have little to no hope, class resentment takes place with unfortunate consequences like the ones we saw in the film.

[–] Fandango (535) 5 years ago

That's an interesting analysis and perspective I haven't considered.

You're right, life is not binary and there is gray that we must consider.

[–] TheKeel (104) 5 years ago

I enjoyed reading your analysis - a lot was said about the Kims in the way the daughter, or was it the mother, shoved the dog away when they were squatting in the Parks' living room. Cruel! I was still able to sympathize with them at times, though. I think this is one of the things that made the movie so great.

[–] Fandango (535) 5 years ago

Thank you. I agree, I think the film did an excellent job at portraying the characters and making us feel for them.

[–] Maya (116) 5 years ago

How can you say they don't put effort into bettering their situation? They get the pizza box job, the son pitches himself to get hired within the first couple scenes of the movie. He also takes the job as the tutor--hellloo? That family is hustling the entire film trying to get themselves out of poverty. They DID become meaningful members of society in providing skilled labor for the Parks. They were also never jealous or angry at the Parks, they literally did a toast to Mr. Park for providing them with income. They unfortunately had to step on others to get to where they were, but that's what poverty does to you. When it's between having food on the table for your family or not, you'll do anything you can to get ahead.

Sure Mr. Park works, but the Park family is arguably also parasitic in leeching day-to-day human experiences off the Park family. Cooking, cleaning, studying, even simply sitting with your child and coloring. These are all things the Park family is too good for, so they latch onto the lower class family who is willing to do these things for compensation.

And I think you're giving Mr. Park too much credit. His job was never even explained, who knows what his work ethic is even like? Might want to stop banging your head up against that light switch.