Comedy / Crime / Drama / Thriller

Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 99%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 90%
IMDb Rating 8.6 10 417469


Uploaded By: FREEMAN
March 19, 2020 at 04:51 PM



Kang-ho Song as Kim Ki-taek
720p.BLU 1080p.BLU 2160p.BLU
1.15 GB
Korean 2.0
24 fps
2 hr 12 min
P/S 176 / 2,540
2.07 GB
Korean 2.0
24 fps
2 hr 12 min
P/S 510 / 3,353
6.05 GB
Korean 7.1
0 fps
2 hr 11 min
P/S 59 / 247

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by jtindahouse 8 / 10

You name a genre, this movie covers it

I can't remember the last time I saw a movie that contained as many genres as 'Parasite'. The movie starts out almost like an 'Ocean's Eleven' heist film and then expands into a comedy, mystery, thriller, drama, romance, crime and even horror film. It really did have everything and it was strikingly good at all of them too.

I love a film that respects its audience. There are so many details in this movie that are crucially important and yet the film trusts its audience to notice them and acknowledge them without ramming them down our throats. There are a lot of layers to this film and I suspect for this reason its rewatch-ability factor will be very high.

The film was incredibly entertaining too. I can't think of a boring scene in this movie and yet on the surface for large parts of the film you would say not a lot is happening, at least in terms of action. Fascinating characters and brilliant dialogue are what create this. I had a great time with 'Parasite' and I think most that give it a chance will too.

Reviewed by mysticfall 10 / 10

For those who didn't like the movie because of its second half

It's not really a review but my attempt to explain how I interpreted the movie to those who complain that the film is overrated, especially if the reason is that they didn't like the second half of it.

It's much easier to understand the message of a movie when the 'good guys' win or the 'bad guys' get punished in the end. I'm not saying that all Hollywood films are so naive in their portrayal of moral values. But still, I believe that Parasite is much more subtle than most other movies that people are accustomed to watching in which there's a character with a clearer 'moral center' whom audiences can easily relate to. So, I think it's no surprise if the message of this film had failed to register for some of the audiences.

Some complained that they don't understand Ki-Taek's motive for killing Mr. Park. But to fully appreciate this, you need to understand the meaning of a recurring expression in the dialogue which is, "crossing the line".

It's a deliberately ambiguous phrase that can either read as one should respect other people's privacy or as one should mind one's own (social) position instead of meddling with the affairs of those in a different position. If interpreted as the latter meaning, it can serve as another image that emphasizes the subject matter of the narrative, along with more easy to notice the metaphor of the two families' respective dwellings.

It would probably have satisfied such audiences who expected more lighthearted drama if the movie focused on an underprivileged, but more likable family exploiting a cold hearted snobbish family in a comical manner. But the movie would have lost all its genuine charms if Bong Joon-Ho chose such a path, and he is too good a director not to see such a danger.

Instead, he chose to make Mr. Park a reasonable enough character, despite his occasional hints that reveal his true nature. He seems to treat Ki-Taek fairly enough at first, but he also warns the latter not to 'cross the line' if Ki-Taek attempts to pry into his private life.

At first, it seems that it's quite easy for Ki-Taek and other members of his family to sneak into Mr. Park's house in various roles and mingle with them. Ki-Taek even compliments how nice Mr. Park's family is, but his premature admiration soon gets challenged when he overheard, when he was hiding under the table, what Mr. Park really thinks of him - almost a different species of the human being who doesn't even smell like him.

Ki-Taek's final disillusionment came when Mr. Park cringes from the smell of the dead basement dweller and shows much more concern for his son's shock while virtually ignoring Ki-Taek's daughter's status who's dying on the ground, spurting blood from the stab wound.

That moment, Ki-Taek realizes how Mr. Park sees him and his whole family as not an equal human being, but something much more insignificant.

And he also realizes the 'line' that separates the two families is not just that of courtesy or proper social behaviour. Instead, it is a line that can even determine the life of those 'lesser' human beings to be less important than the passing unpleasant feelings or mental shock of those 'proper' human beings.

However easy it was for Ki-Taek's family to sneak into Mr. Park's house, or however they try to socialize and mingle with Mr. Park's family, their existence is no better than that of a 'parasite', which is also visualized so effectively by the presence of the hidden basement room inside the house.

With such disillusionment and anger, Ki-Taek chose to kill Mr. Park, as a parasite could to its host, and like a parasite, he keeps hiding deep inside the dead host's body until he could claim the whole of the carcass and use it as nourishment for his offsprings.

The tragedy was not something caused by any exceptional defect or vice of either Mr. Park's or Ki-Taek's personalities. Instead, it's a 'line' drawn by an invisible hand, separating those classes according to their respective social conditions, which can be so brutal as to be able to deprive the two families of their humanity in contrasting manners. And that is what I believe to be the message this film is trying to convey.

Of course, not every movie must make a commentary on society rather than providing a care-free pastime that everyone can understand.

But without if the movie didn't change its gear in the second half to shed light on a serious inherent problem of our society, it would be just another heist gone wrong type comedy, instead of a deserving candidate to be called the best film of the year.

Reviewed by arib127 10 / 10

This review is directed toward some of the common criticisms I've found

I made an account specifically to address some of the critiques I've read. For context, I went into the movie blindly, knowing nothing about it. I came out of the movie thinking it was the best I've seen in a while, and saw it again the next day. Naturally, I took to the internet to see how it'd been reviewed and I was surprised to see some critiques, but I was curious as to what other people caught that I didn't, so I read through them. I kept seeing the same ones over and over, and that led me to writing this review directed toward them.

1. Portrayal of the rich family and poor family: I've read critiques about how the movie didn't do a good job making the audience sympathize with the poor family, leading the viewers to view them as criminals/con-artists. I've also read critiques on how the movie didn't do a good job villainizing the rich family and ~SPOILER~ weren't convinced by Mr. Kim killing Mr. Park at the end, feeling like it wasn't deserved. To me, that was the point. That is what escalated the movie to another level. Any movie can portray the poor as innocent/down on their luck and the rich being corrupt and cruel. It makes it easy for the viewer to pick and root for the hero. I think those negative reviews is just a matter of having to sit with that discomfort of not having a clear-cut protagonist.

What you have instead, is something more multi-dimensional;you feel sympathy, but not too much for the poor family as you also see the villainous side; how they got their jobs and pushing others out of a job to do so, refusing to help the old housekeeper's husband in the basement, etc. At the same time, you don't feel like the rich family is overly cruel. They are ignorant and they are naive, but they are certainly not villains; Mr. Park holding saying it's not a test but testing Mr. Kim, his phrase about "not crossing the line", and the mom talking about the rain in a positive way, ignorant to others who have suffered because of that same storm. These subtleties were executed excellently. For me, it was a commentary on the system as a whole that creates these economic divides, and the people in these systems may not be necessarily perfectly good or completely evil. If they had done it in the latter way (good v. evil), it would read like any other plot of any book or movie.

2. The murder of Mr. Park: In the same line, this critique came from a common thread of people not being convinced that he either deserved to die or that Mr. Kim would do this. I was completely convinced. Mr. Kim had been dealing with the "not crossing the line", and the smell of the poor thing that Mr. Park did just before Mr. Kim killed him. Mr. Kim had also just lost his entire place of living and still went to work the next day for a family who was completely ignorant to that. Right before the scene, Park reminded Kim not to cross the line, and Kim listened to the wife talk about the blessing that was this rain, while he stayed up all night in a shelter. In the moment that Mr. Kim murdered him, he saw a man going after his wife, he saw what looked like his dead son, and he saw his daughter dying before his eyes. He also saw a man prioritizing his own son (which we get) and turn up his nose in disgust at the dead man that smelled like Mr. Kim in front of him.

3. The ability of the poor family to con the rich family: Many seemed to feel unconvinced at this. I actually felt that it was an indicator of how being smart/cunning doesn't lead to wealth and prosperity. Being poor in their environment means they need to be strategic about certain things, just different things than a rich family would, and that would require skill. If anything, skills essential for survival. To me, this spoke to the lack of opportunity and when an opportunity presented itself, they excelled at accomplishing what they needed to. Based on some of the dialogue in the movie (cake business going under), it shows how sometimes luck is needed, and ability is not enough to become wealthy.

4. The idea that this was a movie against the rich: I didn't get that at all. The opposite, really (goes back to my first point). And with that, I want to end with the idea that not every movie needs to have a clear winner/loser, bad guy/good guy. This one doesn't; it has many layers, and it leaves the viewer thinking about it for time to come.

Everything else I loved about it (cinematography especially) has already been covered in many reviews.

Read more IMDb reviews


Be the first to leave a comment