|
Post by Zos on Dec 3, 2019 9:29:38 GMT
It's very good but still not as good as the praise heaped on it, mind you, just wait and see how piss poor the American remake will be.
|
|
|
Post by joekiddlouischama on Dec 3, 2019 11:17:55 GMT
In my top 5 movies of the year. Bong Joon-Ho is a master at creating a weird, tense atmosphere. It's almost like a play that explores family, class divide and wealth. Fabulous film 8.5/10 but it felt so mundane in its theme. like class divide has not been done before...? But that aspect is handled so much more intricately, and with so much more humanism and rawness, than generally seen (think Titanic).
|
|
|
Post by joekiddlouischama on Dec 3, 2019 11:21:57 GMT
I'd be quite surprised if a better film is released this year. I thought it was tremendous, funny, gripping and shocking - and such a crowd-pleaser, the kind of film that plays beautifully with an audience. funny? crowd pleaser? boy did we see a different movie? my association is disgusting and slightly boring. Nora, Parasite may be too "anti-Hollywood" for you. The squalor and grime, both visually and morally, is usually not seen in major American releases, but I would argue that those elements prove refreshing and give the film a greater quality than usually witnessed.
|
|
Honolulu
Sophomore
@jrvarsityrules
Posts: 389
Likes: 93
|
Post by Honolulu on Dec 3, 2019 13:08:51 GMT
The movie trailer looked overrated too.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Dec 3, 2019 14:08:50 GMT
but it felt so mundane in its theme. like class divide has not been done before...? So only films about new things should be made now? What awful logic. And if you felt it was mundane, then I really don't know what sort of movies you're after. Try Michael Bay perhaps. Nobody is saying only films about new things should be made now, relax. It’s just for me personally, for a movie to be great, amazing or mind blowing (let alone perfect) there has to be something about it that is unique. Either the theme, or the way it is executed. To me personally this movie (while well made and pretty looking) didn’t offer that. The theme (classism) has been done a lot, and the execution while good, didn’t strike me as anything that has not been done before. So it’s “just” a well made good movie, one that I personally don’t find so interesting, and yes to me it’s messaging felt mundane.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Dec 3, 2019 14:18:11 GMT
funny? crowd pleaser? boy did we see a different movie? my association is disgusting and slightly boring. Nora, Parasite may be too "anti-Hollywood" for you. The squalor and grime, both visually and morally, is usually not seen in major American releases, but I would argue that those elements prove refreshing and give the film a greater quality than usually witnessed. your are correct in your assessment that in traditional Hollywood movie you will almost always see at least one morally uncorrupted character or one that is likable even though they are corrupted. Here I struggled mostly because I felt like the director wanted to viewer to like and excuse the parasitic family and while I did root for them at certain times I had a problem excusing them, maybe because of the way they handled the pizza boxes, to me that was the most character revealing scene. I had the same problem with hustlers. They wanted the viewer to feel sympathy for the girls, who demonstrated nothing than horrible characters and no redeeming qualities. The problem both of these movies had to me is pretty much the same actually now that I think about it. Its not that the movie want me to like criminals, that I don’t have a problem with; I like Vincent Vega I loved Scarface (and happily rooted for both) but it’s the fact the movie is trying to tell me “these are good people.” “You should sympathize with them because they are actually good people, just in unfortunate conditions”. That’s what irks me. No they were not good people in unfortunate conditions. They were murderers, robbers, con artists, cheaters, yes parasites. Don’t try and tell me otherwise. and don’t ask me to like parasites for being good people. Now maybe I misunderstood the intention and the movie was not trying to make me like them as good people. Either way, my loyalty throughout the movie was mostly with the rich family who I failed to see as Parasites even though some reviewers are telling me I should see them that way.
|
|
|
Post by nostromo on Dec 3, 2019 15:08:22 GMT
So only films about new things should be made now? What awful logic. And if you felt it was mundane, then I really don't know what sort of movies you're after. Try Michael Bay perhaps. Nobody is saying only films about new things should be made now, relax. It’s just for me personally, for a movie to be great, amazing or mind blowing (let alone perfect) there has to be something about it that is unique. Either the theme, or the way it is executed. To me personally this movie (while well made and pretty looking) didn’t offer that. The theme (classism) has been done a lot, and the execution while good, didn’t strike me as anything that has not been done before. So it’s “just” a well made good movie, one that I personally don’t find so interesting, and yes to me it’s messaging felt mundane. Can you name some of these amazing mind blowing films that are unique then?
|
|
|
Post by kevin on Dec 3, 2019 15:10:57 GMT
Nora, Parasite may be too "anti-Hollywood" for you. The squalor and grime, both visually and morally, is usually not seen in major American releases, but I would argue that those elements prove refreshing and give the film a greater quality than usually witnessed. your are correct in your assessment that in traditional Hollywood movie you will almost always see at least one morally uncorrupted character or one that is likable even though they are corrupted. Here I struggled mostly because I felt like the director wanted to viewer to like and excuse the parasitic family and while I did root for them at certain times I had a problem excusing them, maybe because of the way they handled the pizza boxes, to me that was the most character revealing scene. I had the same problem with hustlers. They wanted the viewer to feel sympathy for the girls, who demonstrated nothing than horrible characters and no redeeming qualities. The problem both of these movies had to me is pretty much the same actually now that I think about it. Its not that the movie want me to like criminals, that I don’t have a problem with; I like Vincent Vega I loved Scarface (and happily rooted for both) but it’s the fact the movie is trying to tell me “these are good people.” “You should sympathize with them because they are actually good people, just in unfortunate conditions”. That’s what irks me. No they were not good people in unfortunate conditions. They were murderers, robbers, con artists, cheaters, yes parasites. Don’t try and tell me otherwise. and don’t ask me to like parasites for being good people. Now maybe I misunderstood the intention and the movie was not trying to make me like them as good people. Either way, my loyalty throughout the movie was mostly with the rich family who I failed to see as Parasites even though some reviewers are telling me I should see them that way. First of all I want to say that this isn't an attack on your opinion , having discussions about movies like this when people disagree is my favorite thing about movie discourse (as long as it stays civil ofc). Also, I'm writing this in an improvised manner so it might be a bit messy. I interpreted the movie differently. Constantly, I see people throw around the 'poor taking down the evil rich' theme, but I don't think that's the point of the movie. As you mentioned, the rich people are quite sympathetic and seem like at least semi-good people. Similarly, the protagonists aren't as sympathetic in the traditional sense as protagonists usually are. They care about each other and they don't come across as inherintly evil people (at least to me), but they are survivors, which they needed to be due to their condition, and do very questionable and immoral things during the movie. The great thing about Parasite is that, for once, it feels like a movie that is not a traditional 'sympathetic poor people taking down the evil arrogant rich people' story. Instead it arguably shows the rich family in a more sympathetic light than the poor family. The point it's trying to make (or what I took away from it) is that it's not poor people that are inherintly evil. It's not rich people that are inherintly evil. It's the system that is evil. It's this concept and also ofc the execution of this concept that separates it from nearly all home invasion and class themed stories and makes it this unique movie. It's similar to his message in Snowpiercer and Okja. The poor family doesn't seem evil, they did what they had to do because otherwise they wouldn't survive. The rich family doesn't seem evil, they're simply naive and (unknowingly) arrogant due to how they were raised and taught about the class difference in the world. In both cases, it's the system (or 'society' if I want to go full Joker) that's ultimately to blame. That's why I'd say this movie is way more similar to Joker than to Hustlers in terms of its themes. The climax of the movie isn't to be seen as a big triumphant win for the heroes. It's more like a tragedy, a point where everyone loses, both the protagonists and the antagonists. There are way more things that make Parasite phenomenal imo, but this is what I first thought of when I read your post.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Dec 3, 2019 15:16:30 GMT
Nobody is saying only films about new things should be made now, relax. It’s just for me personally, for a movie to be great, amazing or mind blowing (let alone perfect) there has to be something about it that is unique. Either the theme, or the way it is executed. To me personally this movie (while well made and pretty looking) didn’t offer that. The theme (classism) has been done a lot, and the execution while good, didn’t strike me as anything that has not been done before. So it’s “just” a well made good movie, one that I personally don’t find so interesting, and yes to me it’s messaging felt mundane. Can you name some of these amazing mind blowing films that are unique then? sure. Last Temptation of Christ, The Graduate, Manchester By The Sea, Birdman, Isle of Dogs, Hell or High Water, Florida Project, Punch Drunk Love, 12 Angry Men, Fight Club, One flew Over the Cuckoos Nest... to me all of these were mind blowing and had that unique element.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Dec 3, 2019 15:26:04 GMT
your are correct in your assessment that in traditional Hollywood movie you will almost always see at least one morally uncorrupted character or one that is likable even though they are corrupted. Here I struggled mostly because I felt like the director wanted to viewer to like and excuse the parasitic family and while I did root for them at certain times I had a problem excusing them, maybe because of the way they handled the pizza boxes, to me that was the most character revealing scene. I had the same problem with hustlers. They wanted the viewer to feel sympathy for the girls, who demonstrated nothing than horrible characters and no redeeming qualities. The problem both of these movies had to me is pretty much the same actually now that I think about it. Its not that the movie want me to like criminals, that I don’t have a problem with; I like Vincent Vega I loved Scarface (and happily rooted for both) but it’s the fact the movie is trying to tell me “these are good people.” “You should sympathize with them because they are actually good people, just in unfortunate conditions”. That’s what irks me. No they were not good people in unfortunate conditions. They were murderers, robbers, con artists, cheaters, yes parasites. Don’t try and tell me otherwise. and don’t ask me to like parasites for being good people. Now maybe I misunderstood the intention and the movie was not trying to make me like them as good people. Either way, my loyalty throughout the movie was mostly with the rich family who I failed to see as Parasites even though some reviewers are telling me I should see them that way. First of all I want to say that this isn't an attack on your opinion , having discussions about movies like this when people disagree is my favorite thing about movie discourse (as long as it stays civil ofc). Also, I'm writing this in an improvised manner so it might be a bit messy. I interpreted the movie differently. Constantly, I see people throw around the 'poor taking down the evil rich' theme, but I don't think that's the point of the movie. As you mentioned, the rich people are quite sympathetic and seem like at least semi-good people. Similarly, the protagonists aren't as sympathetic in the traditional sense as protagonists usually are. They care about each other and they don't come across as inherintly evil people (as least to me), but they are survivors, which they needed to be due to their condition, and do very questionable and immoral things during the movie. The great thing about Parasite is that, for once, it feels like a movie that is not a traditional 'sympathetic poor people taking down the evil arrogant rich people' story. Instead it arguably shows the rich family in a more sympathetic light than the poor family. The point it's trying to make (or what I took away from it) is that it's not poor people that are inherintly evil. It's not rich people that are inherintly evil. It's the system that is evil. It's this concept and also ofc the execution of this concepts that separates it from nearly all home invasion and class themed stories and makes it this unique movie. It's similar to his message in Snowpiercer and Okja. The poor family doesn't seem evil, they did what they had to do because otherwise they wouldn't survive. The rich family doesn't seem evil, they're simply naive and (unknowingly) arrogant due to hoe they were raised and tought about the class difference in the world. In both cases, it's the system (or 'society' if I want to go full Joker) that's ultimately to blame. That's why I'd say this movie is way more similar to Joker than to Hustlers in terms of its themes. I appreciate the debate just as you do, to me it’s also really interesting to see how others view things. I agree with you for the most part. And I like the directors previous movies. Much more than Parasite. Which is a movie that I admit is done very well and looked great. Yes it’s more similar to Joker maybe that way, but then even in this comparison it fails because in Joker a) was presented clearly as a fairy tale and b) I saw a really tortured soul who the system sand the family he grew up with really damaged. But in the Parasite we didn’t get to see Any reason why the family of 4 healthy and fairly young and capable looking people would Have to resort to being crooks. there was a hint that the unemployment is high there but then when they Had a chance to make money (folding the pizza boxes) they didn’t do a good job (at all) and were pouty about it. The kids very both obviously smart and talented and the movie didn’t show enough systemic reasons for them to turn this way. It showed their parents corrupting them sure. But not the system. The rich family was not evil in any way as far as my opinion. I guess in that aspect it was fairly original. I think part of my disappointment is also my very high expectations going into it. I have to say the garden party scene was done very well and I enjoyed it and I was surprised to find the husband in the hide out so it did bring some good emotions too.
|
|
|
Post by nostromo on Dec 3, 2019 15:28:53 GMT
Can you name some of these amazing mind blowing films that are unique then? sure. Last Temptation of Christ, The Graduate, Manchester By The Sea, Birdman, Isle of Dogs, Hell or High Water, Florida Project, Punch Drunk Love, 12 Angry Men, Fight Club, One flew Over the Cuckoos Nest... to me all of these were mind blowing and had that unique element. All those films have huge lineage with other films and art forms. Some way more than Parasite. I mean I enjoyed Hell or High Water alot, but what the hell is unique about it? It's a neo-Western.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Dec 3, 2019 16:00:22 GMT
sure. Last Temptation of Christ, The Graduate, Manchester By The Sea, Birdman, Isle of Dogs, Hell or High Water, Florida Project, Punch Drunk Love, 12 Angry Men, Fight Club, One flew Over the Cuckoos Nest... to me all of these were mind blowing and had that unique element. All those films have huge lineage with other films and art forms. Some way more than Parasite. I mean I enjoyed Hell or High Water a lot, but what the hell is unique about it? It's a neo-Western. The movies don’t have to invent a new genre for the movie to have a unique element to it. But ok let’s agree to disagree? to me Parasite didn’t feel unique, to you Last Temptation of Christ didn’t feel unique, maybe different people see things differently?
|
|
|
Post by nostromo on Dec 3, 2019 17:54:32 GMT
All those films have huge lineage with other films and art forms. Some way more than Parasite. I mean I enjoyed Hell or High Water a lot, but what the hell is unique about it? It's a neo-Western. The movies don’t have to invent a new genre for the movie to have a unique element to it. But ok let’s agree to disagree? to me Parasite didn’t feel unique, to you Last Temptation of Christ didn’t feel unique, maybe different people see things differently? Surely this isn't subjective......you claimed 'movies should have something unique about them, which Parasite didn't.' Then you claimed to love The Last Temptation of Christ which is a fictional riff on one of the oldest, most recognised stories in the history of humanity! You must be taking the piss at this point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 3, 2019 18:20:20 GMT
All those films have huge lineage with other films and art forms. Some way more than Parasite. I mean I enjoyed Hell or High Water a lot, but what the hell is unique about it? It's a neo-Western. The movies don’t have to invent a new genre for the movie to have a unique element to it. But ok let’s agree to disagree? to me Parasite didn’t feel unique, to you Last Temptation of Christ didn’t feel unique, maybe different people see things differently? parasite was pretty unique. Its not enough it starts off as a highly narrated slitglty off kilter yet pretty cute almost romantic almost black comedy, but then imperctobly transforms before your eyes into a stark existential film noir bordering on horrific, and you're not even sure at what point it actually changed because in a way, you're still a little nervous even during the lighthearted moments, if maybe a little bored.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Dec 3, 2019 18:32:58 GMT
The movies don’t have to invent a new genre for the movie to have a unique element to it. But ok let’s agree to disagree? to me Parasite didn’t feel unique, to you Last Temptation of Christ didn’t feel unique, maybe different people see things differently? parasite was pretty unique. Its not enough it starts off as a highly narrated slitglty off kilter yet pretty cute almost romantic almost black comedy, but then imperctobly transforms before your eyes into a stark existential film noir bordering on horrific, and you're not even sure at what point it actually changed because in a way, you're still a little nervous even during the lighthearted moments, if maybe a little bored. I agree the twist was unexpected. And welcome.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Dec 3, 2019 18:43:56 GMT
The movies don’t have to invent a new genre for the movie to have a unique element to it. But ok let’s agree to disagree? to me Parasite didn’t feel unique, to you Last Temptation of Christ didn’t feel unique, maybe different people see things differently? Surely this isn't subjective......you claimed 'movies should have something unique about them, which Parasite didn't.' Then you claimed to love The Last Temptation of Christ which is a fictional riff on one of the oldest, most recognised stories in the history of humanity! You must be taking the piss at this point. no I am not. You broaden the parameters too much. your argument against me chosing Hell or High Water was “its a neo western” (indicating that because its a genre that already exists the movie cannot be unique). Thats too wide of a parameter. your argument against LToC is “its a fictional riff on another wll known story” (or even the most known story perhaps). But in your own argument you pointed out whats unique about it. Its the fictional riff. I think these things are higly subjective because of two reasons 1. everybody has seen different scope of movies so whats novel to you might not be novel to me simply becuase I saw something you may have not. Not saying thats the case but this factor is portant in defining what somebody interprets as unique. 2. unless the parametrs of the discussion as defined clearly beforehand each person goes into ut with theur own idea of what consitutes as unique. you for example seem to think that only movies creating new genres or telling stories that are in No Way connected to any other stories previously told could be seen as unique. But if thats the case, Parasite wouldnt really fulfil these requirements as it didnt create a new genre and it certainly told a story with a theme that has been done before. So lets first try to agree in definitions of what constitutes “new/unque” mean to us and then continue if you want to? As I mentioned before for me it has to be either the theme or the execution that stands out as new/unique. Parasite to me dint fullfil this. Its still a well made movie, but to me it doesnt feel great because its missing on that element. It talks about a fairly mundane theme (classism) and while the individual characters are certainly unique and the execution is pretty it just didnt stick with me as much or made me think “wow, I have never seen this take on things before”. Except od the Jessica jingle, I thought that was pretty unique but you know what, turns out its not, I just didnt see the original
|
|
|
Post by nostromo on Dec 3, 2019 18:56:45 GMT
Surely this isn't subjective......you claimed 'movies should have something unique about them, which Parasite didn't.' Then you claimed to love The Last Temptation of Christ which is a fictional riff on one of the oldest, most recognised stories in the history of humanity! You must be taking the piss at this point. no I am not. You broaden the parameters too much. your argument against me chosing Hell or High Water was “its a neo western” (indicating that because its a genre that already exists the movie cannot be unique). Thats too wide of a parameter. your argument against LToC is “its a fictional riff on another wll known story” (or even the most known story perhaps). But in your own argument you pointed out whats unique about it. Its the fictional riff. I think these things are higly subjective because of two reasons 1. everybody has seen different scope of movies so whats novel to you might not be novel to me simply becuase I saw something you may have not. Not saying thats the case but this factor is portant in defining what somebody interprets as unique. 2. unless the parametrs of the discussion as defined clearly beforehand each person goes into ut with theur own idea of what consitutes as unique. you for example seem to think that only movies creating new genres or telling stories that are in No Way connected to any other stories previously told could be seen as unique. But if thats the case, Parasite wouldnt really fulfil these requirements as it didnt create a new genre and it certainly told a story with a theme that has been done before. So lets first try to agree in definitions of what constitutes “new/unque” mean to us and then continue if you want to? As I mentioned before for me it has to be either the theme or the execution that stands out as new/unique. Parasite to me dint fullfil this. Its still a well made movie, but to me it doesnt feel great because its missing on that element. It talks about a fairly mundane theme (classism) and while the individual characters are certainly unique and the execution is pretty it just didnt stick with me as much or made me think “wow, I have never seen this take on things before”. Except od the Jessica jingle, I thought that was pretty unique but you know what, turns out its not, I just didnt see the original I just think it's a really tenuous criticism to say Parasite hasn't got anything unique about it, yet something like Hell or High Water has.
|
|
|
Post by Nora on Dec 3, 2019 18:58:53 GMT
no I am not. You broaden the parameters too much. your argument against me chosing Hell or High Water was “its a neo western” (indicating that because its a genre that already exists the movie cannot be unique). Thats too wide of a parameter. your argument against LToC is “its a fictional riff on another wll known story” (or even the most known story perhaps). But in your own argument you pointed out whats unique about it. Its the fictional riff. I think these things are higly subjective because of two reasons 1. everybody has seen different scope of movies so whats novel to you might not be novel to me simply becuase I saw something you may have not. Not saying thats the case but this factor is portant in defining what somebody interprets as unique. 2. unless the parametrs of the discussion as defined clearly beforehand each person goes into ut with theur own idea of what consitutes as unique. you for example seem to think that only movies creating new genres or telling stories that are in No Way connected to any other stories previously told could be seen as unique. But if thats the case, Parasite wouldnt really fulfil these requirements as it didnt create a new genre and it certainly told a story with a theme that has been done before. So lets first try to agree in definitions of what constitutes “new/unque” mean to us and then continue if you want to? As I mentioned before for me it has to be either the theme or the execution that stands out as new/unique. Parasite to me dint fullfil this. Its still a well made movie, but to me it doesnt feel great because its missing on that element. It talks about a fairly mundane theme (classism) and while the individual characters are certainly unique and the execution is pretty it just didnt stick with me as much or made me think “wow, I have never seen this take on things before”. Except od the Jessica jingle, I thought that was pretty unique but you know what, turns out its not, I just didnt see the original I just think it's a really tenuous criticism to say Parasite hasn't got anything unique about it, yet something like Hell or High Water has. ok
|
|
|
Post by joekiddlouischama on Dec 4, 2019 7:37:42 GMT
Nora, Parasite may be too "anti-Hollywood" for you. The squalor and grime, both visually and morally, is usually not seen in major American releases, but I would argue that those elements prove refreshing and give the film a greater quality than usually witnessed. your are correct in your assessment that in traditional Hollywood movie you will almost always see at least one morally uncorrupted character or one that is likable even though they are corrupted. Here I struggled mostly because I felt like the director wanted to viewer to like and excuse the parasitic family and while I did root for them at certain times I had a problem excusing them, maybe because of the way they handled the pizza boxes, to me that was the most character revealing scene. I had the same problem with hustlers. They wanted the viewer to feel sympathy for the girls, who demonstrated nothing than horrible characters and no redeeming qualities. The problem both of these movies had to me is pretty much the same actually now that I think about it. Its not that the movie want me to like criminals, that I don’t have a problem with; I like Vincent Vega I loved Scarface (and happily rooted for both) but it’s the fact the movie is trying to tell me “these are good people.” “You should sympathize with them because they are actually good people, just in unfortunate conditions”. That’s what irks me. No they were not good people in unfortunate conditions. They were murderers, robbers, con artists, cheaters, yes parasites. Don’t try and tell me otherwise. and don’t ask me to like parasites for being good people. Now maybe I misunderstood the intention and the movie was not trying to make me like them as good people. Either way, my loyalty throughout the movie was mostly with the rich family who I failed to see as Parasites even though some reviewers are telling me I should see them that way. I feel that Parasite proves rather objective regarding the "parasites." Yes, one might naturally applaud their pluck, chutzpah, and ingenuity, but one also feels for some of the people that they end up victimizing—the original driver, for instance, and especially the original housekeeper. Therefore, I do not feel as if the film is promoting them as "good people" worthy of being "liked." After all, they are manipulative schemers and opportunists. Rather, through their saga and questionable actions, the viewer might become more sensitive to the plight of the poor and the condescension of the rich. Indeed, there is a level of rawness and humanism here reminiscent of John Ford's The Grapes of Wrath (1939), starring Henry Fonda. Of course, in that transcendent classic, the poor characters proved much more likable, while the plot was not nearly as outlandish.
|
|
|
Post by nostromo on Feb 13, 2020 14:20:29 GMT
nostro is our resident film snob
Nah. I just like things that you don't.
|
|