Why does she repeatedly stand in front of the golf ball when he's playing?
The first time he just stopped. The second time, he moves it and the golf ball goes through a car window and ends up killing or severely injuring the guys girlfriend.
I think that's just her indicating to him that she wants him to stop, because it is selfish to just stand and golf balls while she can do nothing but stand idly by.
share[deleted]
Because her husband hits golf balls at his house and i'm assuming maybe used it to scare her she doesn't like when he does it because it scares her and it reminds her of her husband so she tries to give him a hint that she doesn't like it and she wants it to stop. and finally when he hits the guy's girlfriend he learns his lesson.
shareI thought she was self-destructive.
shareBecause the golf ball represents his rage, and even though he tries to control it (by tying it to the tree), she knows it will get the better of him if he keeps dwelling on it. Thus, it does as the ball comes loose and it hits an innocent passenger in a car.
Later, the balls take the form of the husband's rage as he pelts them over and over at our protagonist while he's on the ground.
But once he's in prison, he gains full control of his anger to the point that he doesn't even need a real golf ball. He can convey his feelings perfectly without needing a real golf ball.
I thought the golfballs could symbolise the husband of Sun-hwa. When he plays golf it reminds her of her husband and she doesn't want to remember him. And while it is only one thing of her husband, it is doing bad things to him. (The golf ball that injures the guy's girlfriend.) So I guess it's the rage-thing you mentioned and the relation between the golfballs and her husband.
shareThat doesn't quite work. She didn't try to take away the balls and club while he was practicing, she simply didn't want him to use them (that is, brood and express his internal aggression). If the objects themselves repulsed her, she would have had a different reaction. Putting herself in front of his swing doesn't have any particular meaning when applied to your theory.
shareI can agree with this point, but your last paragraph I'm not so sure since he still goes and hits more golf balls at the cop after he's out of jail.
shareBut they weren't real golf balls. ^^
shareWhoops, I meant . . .
The golf balls were "real" so much as the cop could see, feel and comprehend that our hero was avenging himself (the golf balls reminding him of when he was dropped off under the bridge to be hit by golf balls). At this point in the movie, though, the club is what isn't "real".
And his anger is definitely under control at this point. He is an angel, but not merciful so much as just. With only three or four shots (bouncing perfectly off the wall when the cop wasn't in view) he demonstrates his power and omniscience. Do you think the cop will mistreat anymore prisoners from this point on?
mfa215,
I don't know if your interpretation (golf ball representing rage) is right or wrong but I like it. I think Kim Ki Duk is the kind of director who likes the audience to make their own interpretation.
"mfa215,
I don't know if your interpretation (golf ball representing rage) is right or wrong but I like it. I think Kim Ki Duk is the kind of director who likes the audience to make their own interpretation."
Thanks!
Yeah, that's what I really love about his movies: you don't just sit there and digest what he gives you. He forced you to constantly think and interpret what's happening on screen and what it further symbolizes. The only other director off the top of my head who excelled at this approach was Kubrick (although Kubrick's stories were vastly different).
The first time I think she just wants to know him better. In fact we learn a lot from his personality from his reaction.
The fact that he won't swing the club in her direction shows that he respects her and will never hurt her. He moves out of the way and gives up although it's unclear why she puts herself on the way. It's a testimony of his love, or at least respect, for her.
Whether it reminds her of her husband or whether she asks him to control his anger, or is being self-destructive (that's the first i thought actually) is not the point I think.
The second time she knows he would stop so this time she's saying "stop it, you wouldn't hurt me but you could hurt someone else". He refuses to listen and, by respect, she decides not to insist and ... bang...
[deleted]
I thought this was portraying her will to trust him.
During the whole film she just followed and imitated him, and she knows he wont hurt her.
He, however, didn't want to risk it.
I love how there's so much room for interpretation in this movie.
I think she kept stopping him because she recognized it as the driving force that changed him into the man her husband had become. But this is because I think the young guy is actually who the husband used to be.
share