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.
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.