Unbowed (2011) User Reviews

Interesting Korean movie about justice and the corrupted system

[tenshi_ippikiookami · 6/10 · 14 November 2015]

Kim Kyung-ho is fired unjustly from his job at the university and as he searches for justice discovers that is not so easy to get it. He then decides to make a visit to the judge that dismissed his case... with a crossbow. The judge is shot, Kim Kyung-ho is detained and he decides to hire a new lawyer, a drunkard, quite the cynic, to help him in his new trial.

Based on real facts, Unbowed is quite interesting, but it just follows the legal thriller formula, which hurts the movie, as it makes a compelling case seem a TV movie of the week. The direction is good enough, and the actors (specially Kim Kyung-ho's Sung-kee Ahn, who you will hate while respecting his search for justice and following the rules) do a good job. But the pace suffers from a lack of focus and only in the last part seems to find its footing. Here is where it shows how the movie could have been, and really makes Kim Kyung-ho's search worthwhile.

An Inspiring and Interesting True Story!

[akash_sebastian · 6/10 · 20 July 2013]

The movie is an inspiring story of a law-abiding conservative man's courageous fight against the tyranny of the judicial system of his country (South Korea). Some may see it as an idealization of a man's vice, but revolution always comes when such people stand against oppression.

The movie's tagline, "Law Abiding Accused vs Law Abusing Judges", is quite apt. In a country where judges are not elected, and are appointed based on the results of a common law exam (regardless of formal education), there's no participation of the public at all, even as a jury. Such a state makes it vulnerable to corruption and mistrust.

The movie's lead character, Kim Kyung-Ho (actual, Myung-Ho), is defined quite well, and is portrayed brilliantly by Sung-kee Ahn. The remaining characters are interesting as well, and keep the story going.

There isn't a single dull moment. Both the initial and the main cases are quite intriguing.

Not good

[JurijFedorov · 6/10 · 26 June 2023]

A movie about a professor who notices a mistake in a math exam. The bosses want to cover it up and he refuses to agree to it so they fire him. He returns to South Korean when a new law allows unfairly fired professors to get their job back yet in the trials the judges simply refute him unfairly. So he threatens a judge with a crossbow and this judge is either shot or stabbed himself afterwards. It never becomes clear what really happened as this is a trial with 2 stories.

It's about 5 to 6 stars depending on how critical you are. The movie is about a true story so there is some magic to it just because of this yet it doesn't quite make the most of it. Frankly the worst thing is when he complains to the judge and when he returns to prison they guards put him in a cell with 2 prisoners. One is a very overweight gay guy who is put there to punish the professor. I assume this and many other scenes are fully invented for the movie which is a damn shame. Much of the film becomes melodramatic and overblown and it's hard to believe about half of the events. A lot of scenes are just melodrama like the whole fake affair thing between the lawyer and a journalist. You never quite get what is happening between them and it feels kinda pointless. Similarly many other characters just kinda appear for some scenes and their storylines are ignored fully.

We also never really get into the trial. There are 2 point of views, but the defense mostly uses the media to get their case across and largely just shout in court or threaten the judge to get their way. The prosecutors are very seldom seen at all unless they respond to a critical question to make themselves look silly. The whole thing does feel unfair, but on the other hand I doubt any judge would stab himself in the stomach after getting shot with a crossbow. This is a regular judge who supposedly experienced the attack, then went up to his apartment, and according to the defense stabbed himself or had his family, doctors, and cops just lie about having a wound. In both stories he had his family plant the blood on his shirt. It would make sense if this was a criminal of someone who sued the professor for money. But in this case he has basically zero to gain from this lie. Attacking your judge with a crossbow is a big crime in itself even if there is no injury whatsoever. And a regular person wouldn't think up such an insane plan in minutes for no good reason. Plus there are supposedly tens of people who lied too to make it all seem real. I'm not sure the defense have a case here at all. Rather it seems like the crossbow fired, but didn't go full speed and so his wound was not that deep. But we never really get anywhere because it's a shouting match about smaller laws and about what the judge can and can't do. Obviously the judge will try to defend another judge which makes the case unfair. Yet I'm not fully convinced a ton of professional people covered for the judge and hid evidence just to ... I'm not even sure why they would do it. If it was found out they would get fired and likely go to prison for quite a long time as one of the claims is that the cops threw away the arrow because it went against their case. This would not only get them fired this would basically get the whole police department disbanded. It's extremely illegal.

Yeah, the prosecutors do look silly here. But on the other hand I do feel their case is pretty simple and clear. A judge was shot, that's it. They don't really need to do more to make a case. The defense meanwhile needs to present evidence for us to believe their extreme and unlikely story and the only thing they had was a video they made themselves about the crossbow. I'm not really sure what the movie even tries to tell here.

WTF?!

[yahiaaqil · 1/10 · 5 August 2021]

For general audience in general and lawyers in specific, this is a comedy show for you! Not a single accurate legal terminology, event, accusation, or evidence in this movie. The judge doesn't know what he is saying, like a baby in the woods. The defendant can't even defend himself in front if his mother. The accused lives in a sick fantasy, even with justice in this world, still so dramatic and over exaggerated! Besides, actors are all unfitting. Long story short, give it a straight (1) or as my dearest wise friend said, "what shall you do when they don't have a (0)?"