A bit late to this party but I do agree with you wholeheartedly. It took far too long to tell the quite minimalist story. We had a few clues here and there but nothing definitive. We ultimately learned nothing about Ben. Hae-Mi was ultimately painted as a pathological liar but the last clues kept us doubting ourselves. If that's all the writer wanted us to do, it was certainly achieved but after all that time invested in watching it, I felt cheated.

@larz9 said:

A bit late to this party but I do agree with you wholeheartedly. It took far too long to tell the quite minimalist story. We had a few clues here and there but nothing definitive. We ultimately learned nothing about Ben. Hae-Mi was ultimately painted as a pathological liar but the last clues kept us doubting ourselves. If that's all the writer wanted us to do, it was certainly achieved but after all that time invested in watching it, I felt cheated.

Yeah we need some closure. Not a fan of those films where they leave basically everything open for the audience to interpret. Check out Believer (2018) a much better Korean film IMO. Only down side is that it is very predictable.

Given that there are so many films that are so stylistically similar, especially in Korea, it's hard to see why this was the one that was such a crossover critical hit. Perhaps having Steven Yuen in it raised it's profile.

who cares really what happened to Hae-mi - movie was trash. it's not even a slow burn … just some smoke at the most. Best thing to ever come out of korea was oldboy and parasite was decent.

@mechajutaro said:

@1q3er5 said:

who cares really what happened to Hae-mi - movie was trash. it's not even a slow burn … just some smoke at the most. Best thing to ever come out of korea was oldboy and parasite was decent.

The Handmaiden is reputed to be fun also

Oh ok - I'll give it a shot.

@OddRob said:

WTF happened at the end?

I was totally waiting for Jong-Su to get a phone call from Hae-Mi as he was driving away from the scene of the crime. However, I lean toward Ben being a serial killer. He claimed to burn down a greenhouse every 2 months and that he even burned one down right by Jong-Su's house. However, that never happened as Jong-Su kept a close watch on nearby greenhouses. Either he made that story up or he refers to his victims as greenhouses. The only real flaw in the theory that Hae-Mi was murdered is that Ben agreed to meet with Jong-Su and Hae-Mi even though he knew the latter was dead. Now, of course, he wouldn't admit to knowing that but he had to at least be a little suspicious of Jong-Su at that point and he didn't seem to make any attempt to protect himself.

@Norsk said:

@OddRob said:

WTF happened at the end?

I was totally waiting for Jong-Su to get a phone call from Hae-Mi as he was driving away from the scene of the crime. However, I lean toward Ben being a serial killer. He claimed to burn down a greenhouse every 2 months and that he even burned one down right by Jong-Su's house. However, that never happened as Jong-Su kept a close watch on nearby greenhouses. Either he made that story up or he refers to his victims as greenhouses. The only real flaw in the theory that Hae-Mi was murdered is that Ben agreed to meet with Jong-Su and Hae-Mi even though he knew the latter was dead. Now, of course, he wouldn't admit to knowing that but he had to at least be a little suspicious of Jong-Su at that point and he didn't seem to make any attempt to protect himself.

I think he thought Jong didnt have it in him to do anything to him. Ben def had that high and mighty/narcissistic rich kid attitude. If he was the killer actually. I still dont know if he actually was or if Hae just bailed randomly, something she seemed prone on doing.

i have two theories

1) whole movie is novel he writes in his small apartment, that final shot imply this to me

2) in theory if it was real it could be assisted suicide, do you remember hae mi mentioning she wanted to disappear as if she never existed and she seemed suicidal

https://www.thisisbarry.com/film/burning-movie-explained-directors-views-korean-film/

@bratface said:

https://www.thisisbarry.com/film/burning-movie-explained-directors-views-korean-film/

So basically everything everyone has said on here. Good to know.

@OddRob said:

So basically everything everyone has said on here. Good to know.

Basically everything everyone has said is from that article 😂

@bratface said:

https://www.thisisbarry.com/film/burning-movie-explained-directors-views-korean-film/

It just comes across as being too clever for it's own good. The last paragraph in that article appears to state everything after the three characters stayed overnight at the farm is pure fiction and everything leading up to that was true. So that means Ben kept women's trinkets in his bathroom, genuinely burned greenhouses (and/or killing women if we take that as a metaphor) and just wanted to spend time with Jong-su for no fathomable reason known to man. Recruiting him to repeatedly play gooseberry?

Plus I simply don't get the relevance of the scenes with the mother and father. I mean, the mother suggests there was a well, but that in no way validates the tale of a girl trapped in a well.

It had a good atmosphere, but as with the majority of Korean films I file it under 'all style, no substance'.

6/10

@Fergoose said:

@bratface said:

https://www.thisisbarry.com/film/burning-movie-explained-directors-views-korean-film/

It just comes across as being too clever for it's own good. The last paragraph in that article appears to state everything after the three characters stayed overnight at the farm is pure fiction and everything leading up to that was true. So that means Ben kept women's trinkets in his bathroom, genuinely burned greenhouses (and/or killing women if we take that as a metaphor) and just wanted to spend time with Jong-su for no fathomable reason known to man. Recruiting him to repeatedly play gooseberry?

The scene where Ben invites Jong-su to his house again and Jong-su seeing the cat and the finding the women's trinkets... were all after the farm stay. Meaning, these happen in the novel and not in real. So the reason for Ben spending time is because Johng-su is giving his fictional character more attention because in real life he didn't get much.

I think the whole well thing was to show that Hae-mi was an unreliable narrator. She's the kind that could up and leave and not tell anyone... possibly what she did too.

@artlawless said:

@Fergoose said:

@bratface said:

https://www.thisisbarry.com/film/burning-movie-explained-directors-views-korean-film/

It just comes across as being too clever for it's own good. The last paragraph in that article appears to state everything after the three characters stayed overnight at the farm is pure fiction and everything leading up to that was true. So that means Ben kept women's trinkets in his bathroom, genuinely burned greenhouses (and/or killing women if we take that as a metaphor) and just wanted to spend time with Jong-su for no fathomable reason known to man. Recruiting him to repeatedly play gooseberry?

The scene where Ben invites Jong-su to his house again and Jong-su seeing the cat and the finding the women's trinkets... were all after the farm stay. Meaning, these happen in the novel and not in real. So the reason for Ben spending time is because Johng-su is giving his fictional character more attention because in real life he didn't get much.

I think the whole well thing was to show that Hae-mi was an unreliable narrator. She's the kind that could up and leave and not tell anyone... possibly what she did too.

Yeah, but Jong-su finds the trinkets before the cut off before the book kicks in. Ben also suggests a meal with Jong-su, invites him to meet all his friends at a restaurant (possibly via the woman admittedly) and drives to his farmhouse before the cut-off. If real Ben didn't have murderous motives then I'd still suggest it is very unusual conduct for a rich, older, jet-setting guy with a bunch of normal friends to want to spend time with a shy, younger guy who seems unable to utter a sentence and is the ex-boyfriend of the woman you are dating. It goes well beyond the realms of beleivability. Personally I've never met anyone who is dying to repeatedly spend time with their current partner's ex.

I could watch this a million times and not have a clue what the directors intentions were without reading his thoughts on the film. Maybe that says more about me than the film, but I don't think so.

I do like the notion of having an unreliable witness and even of having a murder mystery where some of the scenes are potentially incidental red herrings, but I don't see how this film pulled that off successfully.

In the end it kind of came across as if it truly was an incoherent story written by an unpublished nobody. Kind of like a lower quality version of Araptation. But I don't think that was the intention either.