frankenbenz Having recently discovered Park Chan-wook's body of work I decided it was time to explore the work of another South Korean writer/director garnering similar acclaim. Kim Ki-duk has been hailed a maverick, labeled the "bad guy" of Korean cinema and his body of work has been described as brutal, graphic and unforgettable. As a result of the hype, my expectations were pretty high when I dipped my toes in Ki-duk's waters, first with 2004's 3- Iron and a few days later with 2006's Time. But, as it often is with high expectations, there's little space to soar and a long way to fall.While both films were technically astute and showcased flashes of poetic brilliance, my overall impression of Ki-duk is that he is a filmmaker who heavily relies on contrived plot lines, overt romanticism, melodrama, shock and surprise. Considering that Ki-duk has criticized his Korean contemporaries for being "too intellectual" it comes as no surprise his films owe more to Hollywood than the New Wave. Not surprising, the major problem with both 3-Iron and Time is that they aren't intellectual, are hollow and desperate to impress audiences.3-Iron is a film with little dialogue -- virtually none spoken by the two principals -- an unconventional approach to storytelling, one many of my favorite films adhere to. But sitting through 3-Iron I couldn't escape the feeling I was watching a self-conscious student film, one that isn't nearly as poignant as it wants to be. 3-Iron desperately wants to be interpreted as a serious work of cinema, exemplified by Ki-duk's deliberate efforts to manufacture curiosity by shrouding his main characters in ambiguous and mysterious behavior, all of which is framed in strictly composed wide shots and long takes. Unfortunately, this behavior is hard to connect with since it almost always feels unnatural, insincere and contrived; it feels like the voice of the writer is speaking to us, not the inhabitants within the story. In contrast, Chan-wook opts to challenge his audience with unorthodox editing and purposefully unconventional methods of storytelling, Ki-duk tells his story in very straight forward and conventional manner. The net result is that Ki-duk's characters always feel trapped within the realm of conventional storytelling and the eccentricities that animate their actions always feel manufactured by an authorial voice. As is often the case when movies try to capture the essence of "Love," they try too hard to be profound and naturalism ends up taking a back seat to something less desirable.A lot of people love 3-Iron because they see it as an unconventional love story. There's no question the subject matter owes more to Christopher Nolan's Following then it does to Anthony Minghella's The English Patient, so in that regard I suppose one has to concede 3-Iron isn't a typical romance film. But despite 3- Iron being determined to be different, the only thing it actually does any different from run- of-the-mill romance yarns is to portray unrealistic, eccentric and (ultimately) contrived behavior from the two lovers involved. Aside from this abnormal behavior, very few cinematic elements within 3-Iron can be considered unconventional. Despite the shortcomings of both 3-Iron and Time, I still think these are films worthy of modest amount of attention. At the very least, they are mindlessly engaging and at their best they are subtly indifferent to the formula that makes so many romantic films unbearable.

Carrie I enjoyed this film. I think that reviewers who claim it had nothing more to say than "plastic surgery is bad" are really refusing to dig critically into the themes of the film. It is about identity; it is about jealousy and fear; it is about vanity. These aren't exactly "easy" themes, and while I do think that the insanity of the heroine do make it difficult to relate to at times, the film had a lot to say that is applicable to all of us.. not just jealous nuts. That being said, I definitely viewed the film as a fable (especially because of the last scene). In some ways it reminded me of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind with this weird sense of starting with a clean slate.The idea of not being able to recognize a past lover is extremely disturbing to me personally, and so I might have allowed myself to get taken in by this film more than some people would. Even so, I think that the film was executed very well and deserves high marks.

abdiulusoy In my opinion Shi-gan is a very challenging name for such a movie. It is focusing mostly personal (two people's) affair. So it doesn't go beyond giving some information about Korean life and geography (they're serving water before ordering. Symbolism of film was not related with the story stream. Short scenes of actions(kicking the big tree) are not for strengthening the expression but for revealing the side of director. Sculpture park is the most interesting part of the movie and worth to see. But even the atmosphere of place and integration of story to the sculptures do not save the film. So movie must have a name like " Anatomy of a Relationship" which describe better and don't create great expectations for the audience

mxrcxdxs There is something startlingly relevant to this film. The ever increasing lack of identity in the modern world, and the rise of all sorts of abstract selves, from Internet IDs to Social Security numbers, has left our age with nothing but ever changing faces and dubious selves. The most corporeal and brutal example of this is cosmetic surgery. And, Kim Ki-Duk's haunting masterpiece speaks to both the obsession with a physical ideal, as well as the very ambiguous ideology of identity.As a cynical and often apathetic moviegoer, this film entranced, bewildered and truly disconcerted me. Kim Ki-Duk is developing into an incredible filmmaker. The cinematography is delicately crisp, in a way that is very new and only really found in a handful of Asian movies from about the last 5 years. The dramatic elements are utterly profound, and the plot functions on many levels, (though not specifically allegorical) invoking and evoking issues ranging from history, the failure and ultimate relativism of communication, the absurd necessity for beauty, as well as a plethora of other parallels.Anyhow, I find myself being verbose, but I just watched this movie and am terribly excited about it. Instead, the film itself is anything but convoluted, and though not exceedingly complex, is incredibly deep. Be patient, because it starts a little slowly, but erupts into something so strange and meaningful that I would recommend this film to anyone that enjoys Asian cinema or that likes to think.