Bom yeoreum gaeul gyeoul geurigo bom / Spring, Summer, Autumn, Winter… and Spring (2003, Kim-Ki Duk)
We are approaching the end of the 2000s, many important cinematic events took place during this ten-year period, we are experiencing the last moments of the ten-year process, for better or worse. In my opinion, the fact that Kubrick will never be able to make a film again is one of the most dire situations of this process.
The rise of South Korean cinema is one of the beautiful events of this process. Alas, although delusions such as 'this country's cinema is on the rise' or 'this country's cinema is on the decline' are sometimes expressed, I think it is the South Korean cinema that has been able to continue these steps on the basis of the country's cinema. If we were to set a milestone, it might be 2003. Park-Chan Wook's Oldboy, Joon-Ho Bong's Salinui Chueok/Murder Chronicles, Ji-Woon Kim's Dalkomhan insaeng/A Bittersweet Life and the following works, each dealing with interesting topics... Of course It is necessary to examine the factors behind the production of these cinematic works and those behind the scenes. Kim-Ki Duk's Spring, Summer, Autumn, Winter and Spring is also a 2003 film. At the same time, in my opinion, it has gained the aura of a 'masterpiece' that bears all the characteristics of its own cinema... Actually, I'm not sure what kind of meaning can be attributed to the genre of the film. While browsing a website the other day, I read an article by Ed Buscombe about how the mise-en-scène in a film can be classified according to its characteristics (location, acting, costume) and the genre of the film can be decided according to this design.
When we look at this article, it turns out that the movie is a kind of 'religious drama', which we can consider partially true. However, when we dig into the elements and consider the role of the director in the film (the Buddha priest in the final stage), this can also turn into a kind of biographical film. Therefore, in my opinion, it becomes impossible to set a clear limit. Kim-Ki Duk is one of the directors who devoted himself to this work without going to film school. It is obvious that the director, who is originally interested in the art of photography, makes films that reveal the visual structure in his films. While his handling of social problems in his early films made him famous throughout the country, his raising the bar and placing his problems in the 'spiritual' center would make him famous around the world.
The director who finds his own cinema language does so by creating constant repetitions, gets too caught up in the subjectivity of his cinema, and repeats himself rather than renewing himself, which causes boredom after a while. The director must have realized this because he has not been making films for a long time.
(I think that the populist culture's frequent statements of Kim-Ki Duk's 11th film, its 14th film, its 14th film, almost its quantity rather than its quality in the structure of the films have a great impact on this.) In fact, it is possible to see the repetitions in the director's cinema in this film as well; This film, which we can perhaps attribute to a biographical meaning as mentioned above, appears as an allegory of the director's cinema. Geri bildirim gönder Yan paneller Geçmiş Kaydedilenler Katkıda bulunun
