Parasite

This is a well written and well perfomed original film. With a lot of repetitive cinema these day i felt this was something new. I felt connected and engaged with the character throughout the film. There are several well directed tense moments throughout the film. A popular topic of class struggled well portrayed. Its always nice to see foreign language films having worldwide success.

This cinematographic gem has been recently rewarded by the prestigious Palme d'Or at the Cannes Festival. If I have one and only one advice to give you: go savor this fabulous movie with a strict minimum of information! Indeed, this film might schematically be split in two parts, the second one being quite surprising and unpredictable. The script is excellent and the casting is globally sumptuous, especially the gorgeous Cho Yeo-jeong for whom I may confess I have a crush.

As a postscript, an anecdote certainly insignificant but literally astonishing when you're French: in the middle of the film, the proletarian family gives itself up to an orgy, the coffee table being covered with manifold dishes including two French cheeses as industrial as cheap: « Le rustique » and « Bresse bleu ». Unbelievable!

This is a movie about a class struggle in South Korea, like what movie "Us" attempts to do but done properly. It is a stark reminder of what true living standards for most South Koreans look like, and its realism is very painful. Few are aware of the fact that up to the 1980s, South Korea was in fact more impoverished than North Korea, and it was only late that the situation reversed with famines of the 90s etc, but many people still live miserable lives, and situation is very similar to that in China, where a few got gloriously rich but the urban masses still live in bug infested cheap dwellings.

Some crafty members of this underclass manage to con contemptuous rich man into employing them as his servants. For many Asians smell is a way to express utter contempt, and this is often directed against the white people, who, being able to process milk, smell "like butter" and are seen in rac ist light as unclean, but the same rac ist contempt is directed towards the poor. The poor accept these valuations and fight for the crumbles, like roaches in the dark, but in life and death situations, resentment might boil up and the contempt might cost the rich their empty heads.

The movie paints a sad picture of modern East Asian societies, with many subtle points, criticizes their culture and emulation of the America, with a few cruel but precise strokes. The sheer talent of the Korean filmmaker, but also the fact that West likes movies from foreign countries that are self bashing, allowing the worst condescension rooted in colonialism that failed miserably in East Asia to thrive, one more reason to cheer this slightly overrated movie.

What an amazing film! Clearly an essay on the class divide. Writing lovable but nasty people is tough, but perfectly executed here.

They quite clearly cross the line, and when I mean "they" I mean bother the working class and the upper class. You could easily argue that "parasite" refers to one family trying to suck another family dry. Or that the upper class is draining the labour of the lower class, and expecting them to be grateful about it too! There is also something about the American Indian theme, a metaphor for dying cultural traditions which are being replaced by modernity? Nature is dog eat dog? Or is it a homage to an "idyllic" past where Native American culture was relatively classless?

Either way a must watch if you can handle subtitles!

A poor family see an opportunity whenever their son starts tutoring English for a wealthy family - if they can engineer it, they can each get one of the jobs within the household. This is the basis for a film that starts out as a sort of con story, seeing the rich family as the 'marks'. As it plays out though, it keeps this assumption in the background, eating at the viewer as an idea, before then making it very relevant in the closing aspects of the plot. Between the start and then, the focus is on the various twists and turns of the drama itself. In this the film engages, and I found it easy to engage with it on the basis of what was happening.

The later develops do work better though when viewed in the context of the social aspect. There are lots of clever critics that can talk to you about the meaning and hidden depths of commentary from the film; for me the key one was the falseness of the 'con' itself. Although the family mock the gullibility of the rich family, it is not like they are stealing money from them, or somehow dislodging them from their position in life - no, they are just providing labour to them in exchange of comparatively low wages. They are doing this at the expense of other working people just trying to keep a job, and the rich family could probably not care less about the 'truth' as long as their needs continue to be met. This aspect is important for the direction of the later stages of the film, and adds sense to what happens and why, but it is interesting in and of itself. Technically the film looks great, and the director builds mood and tone well. Performances are strong across all the cast, but the turn from Song Kang Ho probably was my favourite as he was the most subtle and had the most space to shift across the running time.

There is a lot of talk for Oscar recognition, but it is a handsome, clever film and the timing in the year is right - I don't see it being the first foreign language film to win best picture, but this is more to do with the system than with the film. Regardless of awards or not, it is an engaging drama, with unusual developments, and built on top of an intelligent social aspect which links well to the direction of the narrative.