Homesex movieNabbeun namja (2001) Movie Sex & Nudity

Nabbeun namja (2001) Movie Sex & Nudity

Most of the scenes are in and around a brothel with scantily clad women luring in men for sex for money. There are multiple scenes of forced sex, voyeurism and promiscuous nudity


Film review:Translated by XX www.rabudo-ru.com


First of all, the following words may have nothing to do with that film. Even though this is a taboo of film review, there is no way. I really don’t understand.

I’ve heard of Kim Kidd’s name for a long time, and his films have been engraved a lot, but I don’t know if I’m really busy because of fear. I haven’t seen it all the time. This afternoon, I had planned to watch dog Town, but there was something wrong with the document. I saw that there was a bad boy on the plate. I think it’s fate, so I fell in love with it.

After reading it, I was confused and didn’t know what I wanted to say. It’s not that he made a bad, very exquisite film. It’s the same as what I heard, and the minimalist lines are also in line with my appreciation style. Even if there are occasional violent and pornographic scenes, I don’t think it’s anything after the baptism of “I want revenge” and a bunch of cut films. But the whole film has made me extremely uncomfortable. Maybe I understand the director’s intention, but I can’t and don’t want to express it in words. When I want to see this film, I’m like a Jew watching the victory of the will. My instinctive or hypocritical feminist consciousness, like the national scars in the Jewish heart, hinders me from understanding the film itself, It is almost impossible to observe calmly, and every possible entry into the play is shattered by the director’s ruthlessness.

I really can’t stand that he used that tone to describe a woman who was so mutilated, with an attitude of contempt and taking it for granted. Although the woman herself was wrong, she shouldn’t have been guilty of being greedy for small things. As for the previous contempt, could it be a crime? When a strange man suddenly kisses himself in the street, she beats him angrily and spits at him. Is this a sin? Even if the director thinks this is a way to show the hero’s love, who gives him the right to do so? Who recognizes him as a judge? The whole logic of the film is based on the recognition that the man’s behavior is the expression of love. In the name of love, it seems that everything can be fooled. It is in this logic that the final outcome of women looks strange, but it is not surprising. Sorry, my liberal position makes me really unable to agree with this way. The definition of freedom is based on the premise that it does not affect the freedom of others, and this is nothing more than interference and naked control over others. I won’t feel uncomfortable watching SM movies, because it’s only a voluntary way of sex, but this movie is not. It’s a variation after the suppression of male power and the extreme of inferiority complex. It’s not only the behavior of the hero, but also the whole plot of the movie is centered on this, even the action trend of the plot. Otherwise, the heroine will not be so vulnerable to obedience. Of course, the situation in the film is not impossible, but I don’t think it’s love. I call it “Stockholm syndrome”. Interested friends can check it.

Wait, let’s imagine that if Kim Kidd’s consideration is fundamentally outside the film, just like the cunning Zhang Guangtian uses the paranoid cheguevara to stimulate the audience, let me get rid of the above condemnation and look back at myself. Yes, I am against violence against women, but as a deep-rooted man, a man with countless promiscuity in the eyes of many people, even if I can be very gentle, who can say that some of my actions are not violence against women? Violence does not necessarily have to act on the body. Sometimes, mental violence is more harmful than physical violence. Has Kim expected this? When angering the audience, he watched me shoot at him with high-profile and angry words, but when he reached the end, he found that these were actually his own mirrors, like the one-way glass in the film. Kim Kidd stood behind and smiled at the hypocrisy and cowardice of the angry audience. He can shout: you too, not as direct as me. A learned man who advertises women’s rights is actually just liberating women after liberation to their own bed. Feminism is just a tool. Kim is certainly not a feminist. He just uses his own way to vent and laugh at the hypocrisy of some feminists – such as me. Thinking of this, I was in a cold sweat again.

In fact, if a film can do such a thing – send my cold sweat, it is enough. Although what he originally wanted to express has become more and more blurred in the sweat and heart in front of him, why should I show my shyness in front of such a ruffian and why should I doubt myself? Determination is the right of hooligans. They will never doubt their motivation. You should doubt yourself. Of course, you are not as tough as them, but once you don’t doubt, you are hard, but you are no different from them. This paradox lies before us.

“Pa”, a punch breaks the thinking of this film. I don’t care what you think. It’s your freedom, but I can’t accept your expression. You can laugh at my shallowness. I can’t suppress my disgust and hold my head up. Sorry, I really don’t understand.

RELATED ARTICLES

Catherine Zeta-Jones

Sunshine (1999)

Simple Men (1992)

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

- Advertisment -
Google search engine

Most Popular

Recent Comments