The people who are going to like this movie the most are the privileged rich.
They will use it as a kind of expiation.
Poor people watching this? Not so much joy.
What did you see in the film that makes you think this way?
My takeaway is that the film doesn't make either family look good or bad. It's a comedic farce with a wealthy family on one side, and a poor family on the other. Both make poor decisions, which add to the comedy, and there is a tragic ending that isn't directly the fault of either family.
I don't see anything in the film that paints either the wealthy or the poor in a good or bad way, and I think the reason the film has been so highly regarded is that even though its humor is derived from income inequality it never takes a side or offers an opinion. It simply uses the facts of modern Korean society as a basis for a dark comedy.
*Spoilers*
I do wonder, though, if Bong perhaps comes down too hard on the Kims. After all, they largely bring their fate upon themselves through their deceit and imprudence. What's the worst we can say about the Parks? That they're complacent, condescending, and naive? Yet nothing they do really equals the immorality of the Kims. The wealthy family even gets kind of let off the hook after the second-act reveal, when the struggle becomes one between the Kims and the other working-class characters. I know many admire how Bong doesn't really take sides, but I think it would have been more impactful if his target was clearer, and was more than just "the system" that has created these conditions (and I don't think he really gives us a nuanced sense of how this system actually operates for that critique to totally land).
Neither family is really to blame for any of what happens to them, and that seems to be the message of the film. Society is rigged against the poor, and nothing they do matters. They aren't inherently good or bad, they're just part of the system, wishing for the day when they can be rich. I think that is the parasite of the title: that desire/belief/hope to one day become rich that keeps them struggling and clawing for a reward they can never have.
I don't think the original poster understood the film if he thinks the film is made for the privileged rich, or offers them any sort of explanation or pass, and if anyone is going to watch the film and appreciate what it has to say about their class it would be the poor.
>Neither family is really to blame for any of what happens to them
I disagree. The Kims have lied, cheated and forged their way into every position, destroying at least two other careers in the process which as far as we know were also working poor who actually earned their position. the Kims are definitelly the bad guys here and their fault is not being poor but being evil.
I dont think the film is made for the rich (especially knowing the directors personal views), but it can certainly very easily be interpreted as "poor people are cheaters and liars and will squabble among eachother"
It would've been better if Mr. Park killed Mr. Kim for stinking and got off on self-defense. Mr. Kim's son and wife are forced to hide in cellar to escape Mrs. Kim going to prison. The poor are practically always punished more severely than the rich. The Kims end up having to hire a whole new staff who aren't as good as the Kims, but are now scarred by the smell of their staff and have to live with it.
shareBoth make poor decisions
Hiring all four members of the con artist family and allowing them into their home without properly vetting any of them are the obvious ones that comes to mind.
shareThey gave these poor people a chance based on a recomendation (trusting your employees). Naivety is apperently as bad as murder now.
shareI can see why you might think that, there was definitely an uneasiness I had imagining someone with wealth watching the film and taking the word "parasite" as face value.
Being low income myself, I loved the film. I saw the feud between the Kim's and the housekeeper as a very stark, chilling reminder of how in unequal societies, the lower class will sooner hurt each other than the systems keeping them in place.
That's interesting. I'm glad you liked it. I didn't like it much at all - it seemed like an upper-class guilt trip. But obviously enough people liked it, I just wasn't one of them.
shareExcept the upper class in this film wasnt really guilty of anything seriuos (naivety is the worst crime they did)
shareI thought it was decent, if only because it had a fairly interesting script.
The surprises in this film kept coming -
The ending made me think that the poor young man was now on the path of becoming rich, like the dude who got killed - which hints at an irony. Even if it meant marrying into a rich family (I keep thinking that the businessman was wealthy in part because he was married to a woman whose family was rich and had deep connections to the elites, which is why he was never able to say that he loved her - his biggest reason for being with her was her family ties (if you marry the daughter of Samsung founder, you'll be made into the top manager of samsung in one day, regardless of your skills - cheobals there run their business like Trump runs the government).
"The ending made me think that the poor young man was now on the path of becoming rich"
The follow up final scene of him sitting in the basement looking at the letter to his father though made _me_ woinder if in fact he would just be the embodiment of wehat his father whispered to him in the gym after the floods. That is if you have a plan, it is doomed to fail. ie he will not get rich, he will not buy the house, he will not be reunited with his father.
I am rich.
This movie was limited, elementary, heavy handed and blunt.
I'm by no means anywhere being privileged rich.
I beyond liked the film.
Go figure.
βThe people who are going to like this movie the most are the privileged rich.β
Is that because they can afford better seats at the cinema?