I am a seasoned moviegoer. I own nearly 3000, see about 150 in theaters a year, and watch just as many at home. Duration, subject matter, depravity. They may keep some away, but not me. However, then I saw I Saw the Devil. My feelings are still complicated. I find it equal part exploitation and genius. Yet I'm not comfortable to define it as both.
South Korea is producing some of the most unique, invigorating, and.... disturbing films in recent memory. There seems to be a penchant for revenge. Oldboy / Park Chan-wook's Vengeance trilogy, Memories of Murder, and Mother all honor and subvert the revenge genre. They are also beautiful films, both in message and aesthetic.. Their film eye is sharp, vibrant, and always unique. Thus my expectation of I Saw the Devil. Certainly intriguing visually, I still battle with the potential message. I struggle because I am not even sure there is one. I think I'm latching on to it but quickly wonder if I'm just imposing an idea on it to explain the horror I am seeing.
The film is blunt, another trait of these Korean films. There is no subtlety. Why beat around the bush when you can explain it concisely? I appreciate that as an audience member. All too often punches are pulled or things are explained in such detail that it feels like director or writer assumed we were too dumb to get it. This film though is beyond blunt and more into blunt force trauma. Kids gloves are off and you see some much physical violence that, unbelievably, you never numb to.
For me, however, after thirty minutes of this, I began to search for a "why?" For another half hour I found no answers and became frustrated. The only point I could find being that the filmmaker simply want to challenge the audience and see how much they could take. Then I felt it. It crept up on me. Is this a....satire? The sheer number of psychotic characters seemed absurd, like Korea was some serial killer haven. Still unable to pin it down. Are they saying that as crazy as one person may seem there is definitely someone worse? Are they saying that vigilante justice by violent means is no different that the act that created it? It may be all or none of these. I still do not know!
I continue to watch, both baffled and amazed. Choi Min-sik (Oldboy himself) is doing his best impression of Robert Deniro in Scorsese's remake of Cape Fear. Another man feats on human flesh. Our "hero" unravels and I repel in horror while some audience member's laugh in affirmation of his disgusting acts. A theme develops. The protagonist, Lee Byun-hun, seems to fall in love with the hunt. He seeks his prey, enacts some vengeance, patches him up a bit, and sets him loose again.
One monster has created another. The violence has become a given, so I begin looking for some nuance in the performances and fleeting moments of the script. Hyung-chul, Choi Min-sik's antagonist, is mentioned to have abandoned his family quite suddenly and when asked why his parents and his son avoid the question. So I wonder.... if the trauma befallen Kim Soo-hyeon (protagonist) can turn him into this vendetta psycho full of rage and blood lust, perhaps something similar or equally as horrific happened to Hyung-chul.
So let's track this. I went from appalled by the violence, to finding justification for the bloodshed because it is a means of conveying a message, to fucking empathizing with serial killers. Yes, it was that complex for me.
Ultimately, one character "wins" this war, which I think dilutes any of the potential messages. He outsmarts the other, gruesome in method and manner of course, and completes his vendetta. We have no hero, but we certainly have resolution, which seems to undermine the ideas behind I Saw the Devil.
Complex, dark, disturbing, and a real challenge. See it at your own peril.
No comments:
Post a Comment