ADAM ALBERT
20 year old writer and filmmaker. Check out the content below if you fancy.
FILM REVIEWS
THE SADOMASOCHISTIC ANGEL
9 sequels, one classic. This legendary horror franchise is a tough one to conquer, but I’ll get there some day.(Most) horror movies have a reputation as being social commentaries on underage sex, drugs, or any other reproductive immoral activity generally aimed at teenagers or young adults. The ethical conundrum of pre-marital sex is spotlighted (unintentionally) in Halloween, the issue of sexually transmitted disease perfectly used as the core source of fear in It Follows, the grotesque image of Jeff Goldblums creature in The Fly during the raise of the aids crisis in the 80's... there are many examples. This film seems to be a lot more 'on the nose' with its moral bombardment of a personal social commentary about pleasure and the unadulterated desire for sin, or worser yet the reverberations of lustful existentialism dramatized with the fearful and iconic images of the cenobites - and most famously with the intimidating and fearful Pinhead beautifully portrayed by Doug Bradley. So you can only expect that this film will not only be a creepy flick, but a conversation about temptation and problem of desiring pleasure. The movie depicts a once troubled and now settled Mum who moves into her old house. She remembers her affair with a man she loved so dearly and begins to lust for it. Her duality only expands when a drop of her husband's blood resurrects her past lover who previously gave his life to the cenobites. As the character of the Mum becomes more and more tempted by pure evil in her ex lover, the narrative shifts entirely to her daughter, who accidentally summons the cenobites in one of the scariest scenes of the movie, and tries anything to survive. The film takes its time in pacing, getting to know and love the characters as well as build a connection with their stories. We see a descent into madness as well as a preservation of will in different people, all heightened to questioning when the temptingly hungry cenobited come to play, and, once again, endless pleasures, one way or another, is what’s on the table.The ghastly ghouls seem to have a lifestyle of unimaginable pain and suffering, and, in turn, they've developed an aesthetic for themselves. Having been torn from limb to limb, inside out, with nerves and muscles replaced by chains and piercings of immeasurable agony; but it's not the look of them that is the scary part, it's the tease of a hell bound inevitability that is most frightening of all. That's where this film is uniquely petrifying. If you look at the old Universal horror movies, they're not scary like 80's films of the time where; and now, looking back, modern viewers see neither eras as frightening! Films like Frankenstein (1931) especially had the awfully threatening concept of bringing the dad back to life. It was a very 'of it's time' scary movie as, in the heat of everyone being afraid of science and seeing it as a threat to humanity, here comes this movie posing big big questions about man playing god (in fact upon initial release the line “now I know what it’s like to be God” was removed from the cut). What I’m getting at is it’s a concept that is scary, not Frankenstein himself despite his intimidating creepy looks. Now, the idea of resurrection is in every Halloween special of kid’s TV programmes and featured in countless horror comedies. In the 80’s they tried to invent their own source of fear now that the idea of being scared by an idea was gone. So welcome to the rise of great practical effects. Pioneers like Rob Bottin, Mark Shostrum, Rik Baker and Tom Svaini made it impossible not to squeal at the never before seen ways of killing people that make audiences cringe and rating boards mad. However, much like the Universal Monster movies where no longer scary in the 80’s, nobody now finds that element of fear scary in 80’s movies anymore. We’ve evolved to just jumpscares… that’s about it nowadays. And I’m sure, in twenty years or so, horror will have changed completely and The VVitch (2015) will never be scary again!So this is where Hellraiser is inventive. It has some of the coolest and grittiest gore effects that are done in such a pain inducing, torturous way, that they have stood the test in time. Instead of cringing but laughing at the gore like usual, I genuinely hid under the covers. The hooks going into flesh was a real tough watch. But! They use that well shot and well made gore, not shown too frequently, as a tease of the route of this movie's fear. Lo and behold, a concept! The concept of having to live the rest of your life as a living corpse, always in pain, the idea of pain as pleasure, the idea of pleasure entailing pain, the fear of a sadomasochistic world... When the cenobites and scariest of all the ruthless Pinhead turn up they are the representatives of a life of pain. They are the deliverers of a world of pain. “Demons to some, Angels to others”. Pinhead isn’t just scary because he’s tall and has pins in his head, he’s scary because we know he can give you a life of pain, and by never showing us the full extent his merciless wrath or better yet, the unimaginably awful world they bring with them, we can only imagine how threatening he is to the world, and that’s how effectively petrifying he is the audience…This film is a masterpiece. Clive Barker is a genius. Every time Pinhead came on screen I dreaded the thought of ever seeing him in real life, which is what films like Elm Street and Friday the 13th where trying to do but failed. This film is genuinely petrifying as well as fascinating and bold. If I learned anything from this, it’s never do a Rubix cube from a random market owner. It doesn’t give into any cliches, the cenobites are not shown much at all but you fear them all the way. The score is incredible and cinematic. If you want a big boy scare as well as a think, check out this classic that it took me a surprising amount of time to get to! You won’t regret seeing how clever a horror movie can be.It’s hard to see Pinhead go MTV, but I recon it happened somewhere along the line of, again, nine sequels!Feburary 2021
EVERY SIDE TO THE STORY
This film is Get Out 50 years before Get Out, but only a comedy!I discovered this film because I'm a massive fan of Alexander MacKendrick's British comedy from 1955 The Ladykillers. Willaim Rose wrote both this and that. His script in the British classic is phenomenal with many laugh out loud moments, clever situations and poetic wording for the oddball character of Alec Guiness... it would seem. But in actuality Rose and MacKendrick didn't want to work with each other in the first place (having fell out during a previous Ealing Comedy production) and fell out again during production of The Ladykillers, leaving MacKendrick and the producers only with his notes. They managed to salvage the comedy by writing their own script and upon first viewing Rose said that it was better then he ever could've done. So, despite my high hopes for Guess Who's Coming To Dinner were still high, maybe Rose wasn't the writer that I thought he was.Boy, was I wrong.So what’s it about?In 1967 a black man and white women are getting married. They only recently met weeks before this film takes place and have not told either of their parents. Sidney Poitier plays a doctor in his late thirties passionately in love with Katherine Houghton character, a girl in her early twenties. Returning from the holiday they met in, Katherine Houghton introduces her parents to Sidney Poitier. Although the parents are by no means racist, they still have an old fashioned way of thinking and expect him to be white. Sidney says to the parents that he will only marry Katherine if they approve, if not its off. Although he tries to charm them over with his good manners and intelligence, the father will not have it, he says it's too fast and interracial couples get looked down upon (but you know race is in the game for him). Things get much more heated when 'guess who's coming to dinner' Sidneys parents decide to visit. They also expect Katherines charcter to be black and are shocked the same. Both the father's are on the same page and so are the mothers in their acceptance, their ideology of love matters most. The film takes place in one day and concludes at the dinner with a large and extremely well written/performed monologue that wraps up and even sums up the whole film... and bloody hell is it good!It's a film where all the scenes are long but for good measure, as every character and every conceivable dynamic is developed so not a cast member is wasted. Their relationship is like an unbroken block of sugar that comes fresh from the bowl. Sweet and together. But when they must confront the inevitable and are dropped into the boiling cup of tea that is the many considerable people in their lives of which they must face, they must work extra hard not to dissolve in their controversial views. The brilliance of it is that we get every perspective on a relationship being introduced to a family and each gets time to express themselves fully so you understand their points of what should be their fate. None of it is rushed, they all get their say and take their time in doing so. Of course, as expected, the couple question whether others should decide their fate causing the best and most compelling outburst of a monologue of the film from Sidney Poitier showing the power of both his acting and this - at the time - touchy and controversial subject being explored like never before in the golden age of cinema. Although the film clearly addresses racism in all adversity, it does so by talking mostly of interracial couples. The struggles society give them and their protective parents dictatorship of whether they are ready to face it. It's all a testament to the strength of the two's relationship rather then to the strength of hate and that's what's most explored through the 'every body get's a say' dialogue that, again, fully develops each character and every opinion. Everybody in this movie has both good points and bad points in their outlook. And just as a fun fact that shows the mighty power of this film, it features the first interracial kiss on camera in the history of cinema!Everybody turns a blind eye to some points and dwells on others to fit their prejudice, and everybody's thoughts clash with others to change their mind's or do the opposite. This makes this movie different to others that are biased, undeveloped and don't state the full debate of the delicate matter, this film has it all. It’s brutally honest and doesn’t hold back on the honesty of real world opinions. Not to mention two other important characters cleverly intercept the views of the ensemble: A black female maid for the white family who wants the best for Katherine and doesn't like Sidney (cause for a hilarious outburst). And a priest also friend of the family who stays for dinner and is totally fine with the situation. Things get tenser and tenser making for an entertaining and powerful film. Not as funny as The Ladykillers, not as much happens as The Ladykillers but, and I never thought I'd say this, it's just as good and clever!January 2021
A QUESTION OF SANITY
So yeah, I finally watched it. Often regarded as one of the greatest movies of all time, this film has always been on my watchlist. I’d never seen it before and got it on blu ray for Christmas, so... here are my thoughts on the critically acclaimed masterpiece!A question of sanity...One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest is a psycho-drama at parts, a feel good movie at parts, a disturbing movie at parts, a romance at parts and an almost coming-of-age movie at parts. It can land at a scene of deep psychological endeavour one time, straight from an upbeat scene of bonding and fun. It’s a rollercoaster of emotions much like the crazy mind of McMurphy, but at its core, it’s a film about a dangerous man in a mental institution who may or may not be mentally ill.Take Jack Nicholson’s character in another setting: It’s a party, everyone’s getting along well, drinking, playing games, and McMurphy suddenly goes all... McMurphy. A sick sense of humour, almost no moral compass and a laugh that truly shakes ones soul. It’s clear that he is mad. Bat-shit insane! But here, we see McMurphy in a mental institution, surrounded by wacky insane characters, all distinguished by why they are seen to be outta-place from the general consensus of how people should act. You’ve got anxious stutterers, child-minds, anger issues, people who can’t talk, people who won’t talk, even Doc from Back to the Future! And here amongst these strange folks. McMurphy is now under the spot light as, to us, a voice of sanity and acting as you’d expect a rebellious, but sane, man to act. Now it’s up to you to decide, is he mental, or just dangerous?He’s not a goody-two-shoes that’s for sure.Fade in: Mental Institution...Films that are set in one location are stripped of the, often admired, ability to linger on a beautiful tracking shot or drone recording of an incredible landscape or set, whilst beautiful music plays over, progressing the story and adding tonal value. Just look at 12 Angry Men or His Girl Friday - visually, they’re nothing Oscar worthy, but now it’s up too the script and acting to carry the vision of the film. Despite the temporary ‘school-trip’, this is all set in the single location of the institute, where meetings are held, people sleep, eat, pray and piss... they do everything there! And what stands out when cinematography is restricted to nothing more then tracking foreword in a hallway? the acting! Of course! The cast really well portray people that are clearly mad, and not just by what they say, but their mannerisms. Small ticks or strange habits. Any small gesture that is out of the norm causes us to subconsciously determine their sanity which is helpful in distinguishing the nutty from the normal. The acting is just sublime and one of Jack Nicholson’s best who has many great films to his name (The Shining, The Departed, Chinatown etc).What else does the film do?It questions authority. I quite often find that my favourite films are less black and white. I don’t mean in colour of course, I mean in the way good guys and bad guys are shown. Lots of films quickly establish, these guys are the bad guys who we don’t like, but you do like these guys. It’s all very easy. But this one audaciously questions authority, as the nurses and doctors are shown in an antagonistic light to the victimised and likeable lunatics that are the patients. We grow fond of the patients, following them on journeys, learning about their past and struggles, watching them get into this new found McMurphy form of mischief that suddenly interrupts their daily routine, giving it that coming-of-age feel like I mentioned earlier. However, the people that society tells us to like (nurses and doctors) are now seen as the ‘no fun’ party poopers, giving restraints on the patients possibility for growth despite the nurses and doctors just doing their job. Funny isn’t it. An Alex DeLarge twist with McMurphy.Anyway, if you haven’t seen this film watch it, it’s truly powerful, interesting and compelling with moments of sadness, laughter and pure psychological fuckery.January 2021
A TELEPATHIC LOVE STORY
From the maker of a tranquil Korean masterpiece, comes a hard hitting romantic modern classic set in the streets of Seoul.Whats it about...The film depicts a homeless man who breaks into vacant houses to stay over night, covering his tracks and leaving a trail of undiscovered crimes that he’ll (seemingly) never get convicted for. This all changes when he makes the mistake of breaking into a house with a women still in it, hiding. A mistake... or fate. The homeless man purely trying to put a roof over his head, and women who is in a bad relationship at that time, form an unspoken connection, and I mean that because neither two speak in the duration of the movie. Their not mutes or people who can’t hear, it’s just a plot device that sets this film apart and makes it much more wholesome and original. Only a master like Kim Ki-duk could handle the task and never make the film boring or slow. It just demonstrates the magic of cinema that doesn’t always have to be reliant on having an overwritten script or cliche love story.Kim Ki-duk is the master of silent dialogue. Now I know that’s an oxymoron, after all dialogue is information given via speech. Silent movies like The Red Turtle that have no speech or title cards give information by visuality. But this film feels different, this film doesn’t express information in a ‘first-ten-minutes-of-Up’ kinda way where dramatic actions and extreme facial queues feed you all you need to know, this film behaves exactly like a film with a script would do with its characters actions, situations, and even pacing, but seems to mimic the character's thoughts and words through its surroundings.Just look at the opening. The film wants to tell us that that the protagonist breaks into houses to stay overnight then leaves. How does it tell us this? It doesn’t have the film open with a phone call of him talking about how he’s gonna do business as usual and break into another house - or have his narration give context to another day in the life. Instead we see him suspiciously enter the house in an unconventional method and then play the answer phone’s home recorded message that says “we’re out on a family holiday call back on Monday”. Now we know he doesn’t live here, we know he has a time limit till they return, and a sequence of chores and careful track coverings show us he’s done this many times before and is not taking any chances. Which is so much more enlightening and natural, then the alternative dialogue or narration (the easy way out).The two main characters have a seemingly telepathic connection. Neither speak nor do they need to, and (luckily) it’s never referenced that they don’t. The film forces us to figure out what’s happening, it’s ‘show, don’t tell’ of which we already know Kim Ki-duk has mastered in his phenomenal and visually inspirational masterpiece Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter... and Spring. 3-Iron manages to move like any other romance flick but does so in a much more entertaining and fascinating way that perfectly examples the beauty of cinematic visuality. I love this film, and I love Kim Ki-duk. Genius throughout as well as genuinely heart felt and sincere. I cannot recommend it enough, and I recommend the frustratingly named Spring, Summer, Fall, Winter and... Spring even more. It’s not long, watch it!Feburary 2021
THE PHOTOPLAY PHANTASM
I hate using the phrase 'ahead of it's time' because it's used so freaking often that it defeats the purpose. But this film is from 1921 so yeah, we're safe, this film is light years ahead of it's time!The films clever structure is of a Salvation Army sister on her death bed who requests to see David Holmes one last time (for reasons unknown). Well, we think the film is about her until we do see David Holmes and he drunkard friends on that same day of New Years Eve, gathered in the streets trying to keep warm and exchanging stories; David's spooky tale was of the Phantom Carriage. Don't worry, this film isn't all some tale that starts with a couple people saying it by a fire and we never see them again until the end, this film is different. There's a tale within the tale that then links back to David who links to Salvation Army sister and there are flashbacks to explain how they are acquainted and the spooky story links to why this all being addressed now and... it's impossible to explain without giving a full synopsis of the narrative.It's an episodic structure never before seen that'll continue to surprise you along the way. It never get's boring or stays on a flashback for too long or has pointless plot points, all of it links which is what gives it such a 'scary story' like structure that'll make it easy to tell this whole film over a campfire (if you remember the details). Some things will be unexplained until you learn why that happened later, a bit like Pulp Fiction, so there are many 'that's clever' moments in this film which is always good to have. With a poetic story, a similar (and better then in my opinion) narrative much like A Christmas Carol this film is all about man's ability to change from hopeless to renewed in one night through multiple life changing events, re-imaginings of the past, dances with death all to blossom a new found respect for life and what you have in such a pitiful time. There’s even a prayer in it recited by David about him wanting to reach maturity before death so he will never be Deaths ‘Phantom’. The film shows a plethora of different characters, ones that never give up hope for mankind to thrive, and ones that believe the complete opposite, making this a high concept character study on opposing outlooks for human nature under layers of spooky scary imagery (not unlike Spirited Away) . Speaking of re-imaginings, it would be interesting to see this story re-imagined by modern minds much like how A Christmas Carol has done again and again and again and again as it's the genius story that has stood the test of time with the powerful themes it proposes and how it is handled in the structure. Maybe even on stage... all I know is that I will be reciting this whole thing word for word next time anybody asks to hear a scary story...Plot and heart aside, the visuals are pretty damn impressive too. When you look back on a film the first few images that pop into your head are the most memorable and un-mundane ones in there. This film has so many. The few scenes with the phantom carriage are visually breathtaking, with a transparent ominous looking silhouette of the grim reaper being carried by the horse and carriage over streets or oceans, collecting the dead - it reminded me very much of the visual poetry in Ingmar Bergmans The Seventh Seal who also features Death as a person. Not to mention that this is one of Kubrick's favourite films and an almost shot for shot prophetic imagining of the 'here's Johnny' scene in The Shining features in this 1921 classic (look it up on YouTube, the resemblance is uncanny). Mixing those shots of visual despair with the unbelievably amazing soundtrack and this film had me giving it a round of applause.I genuinely cannot explain how incredible the score was. By the time of (and I hate to give this unbelievably racist film any credit) The Birth of a Nation (1915) photo-play had been completely perfected with a combination of ragtime and alterations of certain famous music pieces to associate certain sound to certain scene emotions (like we still have to today), and out of all the silent movies I have seen this film easily had the best soundtrack. Genuinely scary scenes that shook my core carried not only by the horrendously haunting concept of the phantom carriage and the dim visuals but by the bleak and somber soundtrack, ameliorated to Bernard Herrman Psycho level scary at scenes of upmost anxiety inducing fear. Hauntingly beautiful and this was 1921!I can't explain how much I loved and was surprised by this 'better-then-A-Christmas-Carol' century old movie that scared me a surprising amount as I'm getting harder and harder to scare, moved me by all the heart and message in the film and had me cracking up of laughter at the end. Why? This film is Swedish okay, and does anyone know what the Swedish word of 'The End' is? Anyone? Anyone?! Slut. So right at the end of a heartfelt ending that I'm not gonna lie I got a bit teary at, what appeared on the screen...slut.Never laughed so hard in my life.January 2021
THE CRISIS WITH CHRISTIAN CINEMA
I was expecting, from the IMDB and Letterboxd ratings, for this to be a masterpiece, but I wasn't expecting it to be a Christian masterpiece!As a Christian and a cinephile, I often find it hard to find great films that are explicitly theological. You'll often find great Art House foreign films like that of Ingmar Bergman and Carl Theodor Dreyer's that implicitly reference scripture and imply biblical values with unspoken but parroted liturgical narrative intent, but usually films that are aimed at a Christian audience tend to loose integrity of film-making by purely trying to brainwash the audience with an extremely boring story... mostly aimed at kids which is okay for what it is. I say boring because films should draw off the sin of the world. The sin of people, the sin of society. It can be used destructively to promote that sin but it usually has a hope-restoring narrative that is for human kind and promotes the way us, as humans, should live. But Christian marketed films seem to handle these subjects of life with a small minded bias that has no entertainment when only handling an extremely innocent story that disregards half their audience (again these are mostly aimed at kids). For this, it was fantastic to find a film from the Catholic heavy (64.6%) country of Brazil that was genuinely brilliant and effectively compelling. It deals with the hard to handle topic of religion that sticks to Christian morals but doesn't force it down peoples throats with a brainwashing plot intended to scare people to Catholicism. It does this with an edge... it's a comedy.Originally a TV mini-series of four parts, A Dog's Will shortens a 2 hour and 54 minute version to the feature length 1 hour and 44 minute film that is better known. You can really tell it was originally a series as, at first, it felt very rushed. I actually checked to see if it wasn't mistakenly on 2x speed as the dialogue was rapid, the plot points where hitting like bullets... the film never breathed and that stayed true throughout. You've just got to adjust, and hope your a fast reader because the conversation speed was close to that of a western auctioneer. As you can expect, I wasn't sold immediately. It felt very made for TV with it's comedy, cuts, even music and I really didn't want what was happening to carry on throughout. After an hour and six minutes however, it all changes and becomes something that puts the rest of the film in perspective (more on that later). It's not like Audition or Don't Look, Now where it get's good near the end then you'll love it on re watch, as for the first, what I assume are three episodes in the mini-series, it's just fine. We follow Chicó and Jack the Rat on their mischievous adventures all well stringed together in a fun, well moving and clever narrative that I liked. However, I found myself asking is it really the kind of thing that is top 10 Letterboxd worthy, regarded in the same right as Parasite, The Godfather duo even Seven Samurai! Not quite. I knew it hadn't fully picked up yet and despite my many laughs, my adapting to a break neck pace and the amount of times I went 'oh, that's clever' it still felt made for TV and still didn't feel like the holy grail it's referenced as. Until......something remarkable happened. The narrative shift at an hour and six minutes is such a strange one that soon makes sense. Through an event (of which I won't reveal for your sake) we see the first narrative tone of a fun, offbeat, clever comedy be forced to look at itself again and re evaluate what it means when it comes to the presence of God and eternal life. If you can overlook the insanely bad cheap special effects, the scenes with Jesus, the Devil and a surprise cameo from Fernanda Montenegro who is the leading lady in the only other Brazilian film I've seen and adore (Central Station) are excellent and so well written. We see all the characters previously introduced challenged to redeem their actions in the form of a clever McGuffin with genuine theological insight. We see the meaning of the strange first hour or so that has previously ran past our eyes, it all links for the perfect re evaluation of something that seemed fairly basic, now becoming a transcendent masterpiece. However, the comedy doesn't fade.When dealing not just with archetypes of Jesus and the Devil but the actual Jesus and the actual devil, it's easy to make a cheap and slightly offensive comedy that goes against liturgy for cheap laughs (just look at most CollegeHumor shorts)... which is fine, however with this, here we meet the huge omnipotent figure of Jesus and the merciless Devil matched with the well played and mischievously clever Jack the Rat who knows he can never justify his sins. With a situation that plays out like a court case, morals are questioned, and the film becomes something much much bigger then a silly TV comedy. With laugh out loud moments as well as compelling scenes of biblical reasoning it propels the narrative at not just something that makes jokes in the confines of Brazil at the people in a village who are trying to get by, but it's now making jokes at something of abstract theology. The comedy is a reminder of the light-hearted tone, but not distraction from the overwhelming themes it deals with. Because of this, I feel the TV show would be even better as we'd get to know the characters better in the first hour and six minutes of the movie. It's both funny and deep.So yeah, that's my thought’s on A Dog's Will or O Auto da Compadecida, a film of motivated passion derived from Christianity as well as a well formed comedy/ drama that cleverly twists on it's head. It also has a certain social commentary edge that is briefly addressed when displaying Jesus as black and playing off the common racism in Brazil. Check it out if your interested you won't regret it and it's one to tick off from the Letterboxd top 250 (top 10 for that matter). Just please do not read any descriptions as it gives away what the twist is and I tried to be as vague as possible whilst still saying my thoughts on the film. I really enjoyed it and hope to watch more Brazilian films in the future as the two I've seen are great. Any recommendations are welcome I've just bought the DVD for City of God which I'm excited for. Also if any of you know how to find the TV version of this please tell me I'm desperate to watch it.Febuary 2021
THE FACADE OF CLASS
Before Parasite, there was The Housemaid...Parasite is a film about a higher class, rich family who’s lives are totally ruined by one much lower class, poor family. The dirtier, semi-basement living group decide to infiltrate the beautiful two story house of the rich family in a clever scheme to bring them all in one by one and, in turn, they bring out the worst in the, once happy upper class family. Of course there’s loads more too it but, in a way, that small synopsis was totally this film too. Bong Joon-ho himself has talked openly about this film being the main inspiration for last years best picture winning epic, and it’s easy to see why. Kim Ki-young use of semiosis to suggest character authority is very similar to that of Joon-ho’s in all of his movies especially The Host. The linear structure that escalates rapidly from one plot point to another couldn’t be more like Parasite. And of course the overarching themes of this movie that’ll I’ll get into later are also explored by Joon-ho who, like Ki-young, has a lot to say in these films, from a political and filmmaking standpoint.“Housemaid is a melodrama, a crime drama, as well as a horror movie.” - Boon Joon-hoRight from the start of the film it is clear that it’ll be character-driven. We are introduced to the Kim family and the actions/script have already shown us that the father is in authority, the mother is kind but submissive, the son is mischievous and the daughter is patient and rule-abiding. We know that they are moving house and Mr. Kim is a piano teacher at a school and does lessons from home; a simple and traditional family status to follow. However, interactions with others outside the middle class household suggest a change in characteristics all linking to how much of human nature is down to your living situation.For example, when we are first introduced to the housemaid (who through most of the film is seen as an antagonistic figure) the first thing we learn is that she can kill a rat by poisoning food. A clear omen of the trouble that’ll be caused later. We now know from her class that she isn’t in authority, but by her actions that she won’t be a goody two shoes throughout the duration of the film. Bong Joon-ho also noted that in Korea 1960, to have a house with two floors showed wealth as most only had one. This is why (as the film is mostly all set in the house) stairs are constantly shown in different scenes to remind the audience of the Kim family’s social status, in the same way that Parasite uses windows and a High and Low style visual representation of upper/lower class to indicate the clear disparity in social authority.As I mentioned earlier, the film is also notably linear. It has an almost ‘keep-up-with-me-if-you-can’ structure as an important narrative moment is shown in almost every cut, to a extremely focal extent. The film gets straight to it, plot-wise. No Tarantino-esk random pieces of dialogue, no outta place comedic moments, no random gratuitous sex scenes or off track character ahrens, it’s just plot, it’s just story, which gives the melodrama that narrative inducing edge that puts others to shame. In fact, early in the film, certain plot twists are already revealed to the audience in a way that most movies would present them near the end. It’s truly unique and fantastically executed leaving you leaning in, and never boring you once you’ve adjusted to the distinctive narrative pace.Who did it better?When it comes to the comparison of 1960’s The Housemaid and 2020’s Parasite, I am more in favour of the latter. I first saw Parasite months after its UK release. I’d heard about the domestic box office success in Korea and later learnt about the ground breaking Oscar wins (it being the first foreign film to win best picture and all). When I sat down to watch it I knew nothing. I was totally blind and extremely excited for what was to come. And (surprise) loved it! I’ve seen it twice since and it’s held up each time, always something new to notice or/and analyse. I haven’t met or heard from a soul who could possible conjure a pessimistic word about this holy grail of a movie with an impossible-to-pidgeon-hole genre. Visually, it’s INCREDIBLE and I plan on watching the black and white version in the future as Bong Joon-ho said it is important to showing the contrast in class. I could watch it any day of the week, any mood and it’ll still captivate me. But! Does watching the similar The Housemaid take away from Parasites originality? No! If anything it enhances my understanding of Parasite. The Housemaid is slightly more obvious in its themes as in the end we have a literal fourth wall break telling us about the urges of men, so you can even view this as a pre-parasite analysis on Parasite and what it was trying to express to us. Still, The Housemaid is its own, uniquely enjoyable and unpredictable masterwork from Kim Ki-young and continued to hold up as a fantastically ‘edge-of-your-seat’ thriller.So what makes Parasite better then? Again, Parasite is much much more visually inclined. In fact, about half of what made Parasite so unique and Oscar-worthy was the bold cinematography and plot carrying visuals. With The Housemaid, there were lots of nice looking shots and nothing about the camera work was boring... but it just didn’t compare (visually) to the many locations, bigger budget and incredible design of Parasite at all. As well as that I did also find Parasites plot much more mind bending and unpredictable with so many jaw dropping moments of fear, laughter or tension. It had so many recurring moments that will stun you and make you go ‘oh yeah, forgot about that’ served up with ingenious plot points that’ll make you wanna give the film a stand ovation. When it comes to similarities between The Housemaid and Parasite, it’s generally in what they are politically saying and the way they execute that. Kim Ki-young and Bong Joon-ho seem to be very similar minds and I’m sure would be best of mates if he was alive today, as well as really enjoying each other’s movies. Parasite is the opposite of a rip off of The Housemaid, just an emilioration of what The Housemaid got right!All in all, without spoiling anything, this film is about human nature, sexual urges, blackmail and of course class, with people of all different social status bringing out their dark side when inner human temptations come out in a flood of unavoidable sin, as classes mix... not to mention the string of consequences that come after the initial point of contact with dissident young outsiders. The film shares many similarities with Parasite in its character roles and it’s political Korean commentary on the dispersion between social classes, yet both still seem very unique and, if anything, it’s boosts my understanding of the complex masterpiece that is Parasite. The film isn’t about good guys and bad guys, it’s about deep human instinct and how that can be exploited by class and temptation (again very similar to Joon-ho’s movies). If you liked Parasite (which I can only assume you did) I can guarantee that you’ll enjoy this black and white masterpiece:
The Housemaid.January 2021
BROTHERHOOD BEYOND POLITICS
Trust me this film is better then it sounds and looks from the crappy poster. What appears to be a low budget, high octane, South Korean military action movie is a masterpiece in disguise, and a hidden gem at that!Park Chan-wook has produced many masterpieces from Oldboy to The Handmaiden. Darker modern classic like Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance and Sympathy for Lady Vengeance have still managed to amaze and disturb audiences today, and the hypnotically stylistic horror movies like Thirst and Stoker that have shocked fans for years. However, there's one of his features that is criminally overlooked. Joint Security Area may sound like some budget action flick, but it's so much more. One of Park Chan-wook's most political features, this film addresses the divide of North and South Korea after the Korean war showing the stupidity of separating people of the same blood. The film has a defined three act very episodic structure that jumps in time ingeniously making a good story great. Although I don't want to spoil anything, I could give you a rough tease of what it's about.Picking up at the Joint Security Area, a Korean by blood officer (Sgt. Jean) who has never visited Korea before, comes to investigate a strange and still unsolved case that happened at the border. Throughout the film, as it commonly references the Korean War, we don’t know whether Sgt. Jean is North or South Korean - we don’t know what side her ancestors took. This makes her neutral ground when it comes to confrontation, as she is without bias unlike the patriotic others around her. The case is that after military soldiers where alerted that North Koreans soldiers where massing from the border at the DMZ (where most of this will take place), two North Koreans where found shot dead with South Korean soldier Sgt. Lee escaping and North Korean Sgt. Oh played by Song Kang-ho (Parasite, The Host, Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance) having survived. It is under the JSA's awareness that Sgt. Lee was kidnapped and shot his way out but Sgt. Jean spots many anomalies in the questionable accusation. Quickly gathering evidence she notices that there is a missing bullet in crime scene that asks questions about the liability of Sgt. Lee's confession. We, as the audience, are also confused, so don't be confused when your confused, your meant to be. As time progresses in the runtime, time reverses to show us how we lead up to the incident, in many spine chilling scenes of tension in the highest form. A scene could ameliorate to a casual scene of upmost comfort, pierced like a balloon with just one frame to shift the narrative on it's head. It's all about discovering the brutal truth of such an open ended case. And the truth takes form in an unpredictable tale of brotherhood and bold political commentary.You can tell Park Chan-wook really pushed the boundaries with the ideas he explores about the difference between communism and capitalism not effecting the bond of man. Much like All Quiet on the Western Front, it boldly talks about how sides don't matter when it comes to basic human nature, and how communism is a facade for North Koreans. At times it's heart warming, at times it's utterly heart breaking, but the key thing there is that it has heart, and a beautiful message that unifies all Koreans in an extremely interesting and bold story that could easily become true. It often references the Korean war to enhance it's stance of the idea of division, perfectly exampled with the different perspectives that we eventually see play out in an epic scene of explanation, that acts almost as a conclusion despite being set in the middle of the narratives time span, ingeniously differentiating continuity from structure. A unique structure that gives us everyone's verdict and the definitive truth. Not the mention the incredible ending where a photo that seemed irrelevant helps conclude the movie perfectly as the camera zooms through the frame and shows the definite link between the main characters. One of the most surprisingly visceral moments as it lets the film breathe for a second before ending.As well as talking about the stupidity of political division explored through an unlikely tale of brotherhood, it also dives into and exposes the flaws when it comes to Korean military. The stupid rules you must follow that are immoral yet legal. Anything deemed illegal being a crime with no human emotions allowed to enter the equation. It shows the confidentiality and precise nature of Sgt. Jeans handling of the case, making her the flawless protagonist from the outset, then shifting to a new character focus in the narrative - a complete tonal and chronological shift that enforces something Park Chan-wook is so good at. This is something I referenced earlier when talking about any plot confusion when watching. Much like Sympathy for Lady Vengeance this film will take you to a different time in story, or a different location or character completely without any context and complete lack of cut continuity... and you will be confused. As time progresses you'll come to realize where you are as this situation has been talked about and leads to something in the future but it's something so briefly talked about that you are unsure of whats gonna happen and more importantly, you don't know why the film has taken you here. But by the time the credits roll it will all piece together like a jigsaw and what seemed like an incoherent mess, will be a cultivated story, with cement of continuity to fill the cracks of utter confusion. Just trust that everything there is for a reason and don't expect a recap. You figure the film out by paying attention much like an officer gavering information from a case and figuring out the definitive thesis. That same thesis: is this movies pay off. It's one of those films when you can only exhale when it's all over.Structure and plot aside, what about this film's visuality. As Park Chan-Wooks first major film it had a low budget, and at times it shows. We know from his other work that he is an extremely visual and a style depended director, so how limiting was the factor of money? Well, it still managed to be the highest grossing Korean film in film history at the time. Why? Because it didn't let budget restraint it's cinematography. It was shot like it had all the money in the world. Not only high quality camera but style was substance when it came to filming. The shot composition was either perfectly symmetrical or pleasingly asymmetrical - they managed to find great shots in even the most mundane situations making me spoilt for choice when picking images for this article. Just look at the scene in the mine field, one of the best moments of the film, not to mention one of the scariest. That was shot with such confidence like it was some big blockbuster and really worked for that attitude, making that scene petrifying in it's own right. The cut's in time where seamless, the archive footage scenes showing real clips from the Korean war where done in a very stylistic way, it's a unique movie to say the least and the cinematography captures that same audacious story they tell well. As we see Park Chan-wook further in his career we see his style only getting better, now being able to afford his full vision!It's a great, unique and very visceral movie and that's not nearly talked about enough. I'd highly recommend you give it a go especially if your familiar with the director and recognize his approach to film-making. It's a roller coaster of a film as well as sorta educational on the political system of North and South Korea. An important film for Korea and a fascinating one for us. Don't put it off because it looks crap from the cover, I almost did.February 2021
DEATH, DESIRE AND DUALITY