What's the point?


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.

reply

I thought it was about trust. He created the mechanism which stops the ball eaving the tree, she stands infront of the golf ball to indicate that she trusts everything she does. He still moves it to show that he loves her and wouldn't want anything to happen to her however unlikely.

That's a Dead Dog.
Yes, it is.

reply

I got the impression that she wanted him to hit her with it. I think she felt a little guilty because of her husband. Maybe she felt that she didn't deserve her freedom, if you could call it that.

We are lusty, adventurous men.

reply

For me, I think she just sees what the guy doing with golf ball is childish and dangerous. With that wire around the ball, it is definitely not safe to shoot.

At that early stage of film, as I recall, the guy did play that game whenever he got bored or angry - and she was trying to tell him that what he was doing may be ok for himself, but indeed he should not continue, as it could have a wrong turn.

And she just proved that not for so long.

I think the theory director tries to say here is: when we do something to please ourselves and we think it is completely no harm; but think twice and be responsible with that. Once there is damage, it might never be fixed.

Because the girl had suffers in life, she understood about pain & hurt more than this young guy. And until he committed the crime from his game, that's when he grew up to other mature guy later in film.

reply

I believe the theory behind that is she wants to stop him playing the dangerous game. He is wildly swinging at the golf ball and if the ball hits someone that could result in grave danger to people out in the street. When she is with him for the first time she just simply watches him swinging at the ball in the streets and one of the walker gets terrified at his swing. The next time you see she does not want him to do the hitting as it might be a danger to other people. She knows he is a good guy and she doesn't want him to hurt someone just because his foolishness. So, its a warning to him which he heeds once and the second time the ball hits a car & someone dies.

----------------
http://sriram7612.blogspot.com

reply

Please see my thread below.In the same line of thought I think the golf ball episode symbolizes the possibility of non self devolving into nihilism.
Ill give a brief explanation.When a person starts on the journey of not self there is a danger that he gets obsessed with the idea of "I don't exist" in a quest to obliterate the idea of "I exist".This emphasis on "I don't exist" is not really "not self" because then you are still obsessed with the idea of "I";and "I don't exist" may lead one to infer that there are no moral implications associated with the actions of the person. This is when there is danger of nihilism setting in.
So you see random violent acts.

reply

I agree. It's true that standing in the imaginary path of Tae-suk's un-tethered golf ball turns out to prove that Sun-hwa can trust the young man, and it also makes them both realize that they're playing dangerous games, but neither prevents the two from continuing their risky behavior. And it all leads to more and more violence. But then, in psychological terms, people that have been abused often choose unconsciously to put themselves into abusive relationships time and again. In our leading lady's case, she may have simply expected to be pelted at some point. Her action could then have been a way to say "I'm used to this. Just get it over with."

But what rahul capri said fits better with the overall theory mentioned by 'novelle' in their answer posted to the question "White Label over man's eyes": Tae-suk is on a spiritual journey toward enlightenment. My impression is that Sun-hwa herself doesn't quite know why she is compelled to stand in front of the protagonist's swing, but rather that it's instinctual. She's as surprised as he is when the wire breaks and an innocent passerby is killed.

I don't know if this squares with Buddhist theory but it seems to me that her self-sacrificing action forces Tae-suk to change the path he has chosen and ultimately leads to him letting go of the material world. First he chooses to not put Sun-hwa in the line of his golf swing. But literally continuing to grip and wield the 3-iron (status? power? the physical realm?) still brings the suffering of other beings. So he apparently discards the club. Together they discover that their unity can exist in a peaceful setting, which foreshadows the end of the film.

Later, the lovers bury an empty human vessel with reverence, and possibly in a symbolic way, Tae-suk also begins to release himself from the physical realm. Next, he atones for his sins while in prison, which also provides the now more consciously aware young man with time to meditate and move beyond the laws of nature as we know them. However, he can't reach his form of nirvana - eternity with Sun-hwa - until he has worked vengeance out of his soul. Hence, the attack of the policeman.

From there, at each residence the couple had previously broken into, the actions of our hero become less and less malicious. Notice that by the end of his journey Tae-suk has no need to harm Sun-hwa's husband. The first words we hear from either of the two is when she expresses love, and I'm sure the scene was purposely cut to leave us wondering if the now content woman is saying that to her husband or to the spirit that has come to live with them. I believe it is meant for everyone, all the souls throughout the universe. It is at that point that they - and we - can all can exist in harmony.

In any case, it's a fantastic film. Yet another in a growing list coming from wildly imaginative South Korean directors. Bravo!

reply

Please see this thread
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0423866/board/thread/116560577
It would elaborate my point further.

reply