I was definitely disappointed that Bong went this direction. Parasite is endlessly rewatchable due to its depth. This, on the other hand, is remarkably shallow
You couldn't be more wrong. Bong Joon-Ho managed to make an entertaining blockbuster movie that touched on different depths, upon depth, upon depth, upon depth of "social/political commentary" -- and this may be one of his best works! He employed humor, absurdity (by default) and some muuuch needed relief and laughs regarding Ho's focus (him, us, the world, history repeating itself & then some)
I am assuming you're a westerner yourself, shame on you! How condescending of you to set yourself apart from the so called "dumber western audience." (AND IM LOOKING BACK AT WHAT IVE WRITTEN AND HAVE NOTICED THIS IS ON A SUBSTACK CALLED "100 Catholic Movies..." SHAME, SHAME, SHAME! Who are you to decide who the dumb westerners are -- when you yourself seem to fall into this category with such an incredibly reductive analysis on Bong Joon-Ho's, Mickey 17. To say that this is "unintelligent storytelling" concerns me, in case you have an impressionable following.
I am not even going to get into what you perceive as "sloppy storytelling" and your interpretation, "...Mickey is treated as an object throughout the film, despite very much being a person." (I'm glad you've come as far as understanding that part.) & I am concerned with what you took away from Parasite, if this is one your main takeaways.
Also, like, what is this preoccupation with Parasite? Yes, Parasite was great... that was almost 6 years ago. What gave you and others the impression that he was going to be working within the parameters of the same genre? You know he works across genres! You must know! You're sharing your review confidently, but also insulting us plebs, Mr. Charles Scott. But I digressed, Ho impresses us again!!!!!!!! He continues to show that he can work across genres A+!!!!!!!
+++++++ The perils & advantages of technology enter Bong Joon-Ho's dialogue. I think I've been thinking of Mickey 17 since I saw it a few days ago, and every day something new occurs to my dumb western brain! Like, it occurred to me... maybe this is obvious to others, but what is the purpose of transferring all of Mickey's memories, the nostalgic ones, where the smell of one of the characters hair evokes familiarity and emotion; the traumatic experiences... which trauma can literally cause changes to the brain, nervous system & more... what is the purpose? He is expendable after all. Which calls in more questions regarding ethics/morals. Anyway, we eventually see how Bong Joon-Ho feels about the matter ;~)
I see some of the "subplots" and "symbols" throughout Mickey 17, mentioned on different forums. People have questions on reddit, critics seem confused or theyre skimming, SOME REVIEWS ARE PAYWALLED, SO..... IM NOT SURE WHATS GOING ON THERE, BUT: People are confused or unsatisfied, "What was the point of the movie?" "So what happened with that part of the story?" "What did that symbol mean?" "There wasn't enough time allowed for this character." "Why was there no conclusion to this part, I want to know..." "They must have run out of time." (WITH THAT BUDGET?)
Embrace it baby!
I don't think I'm reaching for the stars here, but Bong Joon-Ho intentionally gave us the pleasure of... challenging us "dumb westerners!" He leaves us open ends, not because of lack of time or budget, but so that we are left to have our own interpretations and questions regarding *REAL LIFE PROBLEMS* that have perpetuated throughout history, lessons never learned, no real revolutions. Through the power of entertainment and in the least pretentious way, we're gifted something special... conversation, pertaining to real life problems that don't yet really have a universally "true" answer as to how to solve them.
And Bong Joon-Ho is honest in that, you're not going to find the answers in cinema; but cinema etc. may spark conductive questions that... (I'm trying to be optimistic) may bring us closer to a solution we can work on attaining.
I was definitely disappointed that Bong went this direction. Parasite is endlessly rewatchable due to its depth. This, on the other hand, is remarkably shallow
*Snowpiercer* was the first film of his I saw, and the complete moral blindness of the ending was enough to ensure that it would also be the last.
You couldn't be more wrong. Bong Joon-Ho managed to make an entertaining blockbuster movie that touched on different depths, upon depth, upon depth, upon depth of "social/political commentary" -- and this may be one of his best works! He employed humor, absurdity (by default) and some muuuch needed relief and laughs regarding Ho's focus (him, us, the world, history repeating itself & then some)
I am assuming you're a westerner yourself, shame on you! How condescending of you to set yourself apart from the so called "dumber western audience." (AND IM LOOKING BACK AT WHAT IVE WRITTEN AND HAVE NOTICED THIS IS ON A SUBSTACK CALLED "100 Catholic Movies..." SHAME, SHAME, SHAME! Who are you to decide who the dumb westerners are -- when you yourself seem to fall into this category with such an incredibly reductive analysis on Bong Joon-Ho's, Mickey 17. To say that this is "unintelligent storytelling" concerns me, in case you have an impressionable following.
I am not even going to get into what you perceive as "sloppy storytelling" and your interpretation, "...Mickey is treated as an object throughout the film, despite very much being a person." (I'm glad you've come as far as understanding that part.) & I am concerned with what you took away from Parasite, if this is one your main takeaways.
Also, like, what is this preoccupation with Parasite? Yes, Parasite was great... that was almost 6 years ago. What gave you and others the impression that he was going to be working within the parameters of the same genre? You know he works across genres! You must know! You're sharing your review confidently, but also insulting us plebs, Mr. Charles Scott. But I digressed, Ho impresses us again!!!!!!!! He continues to show that he can work across genres A+!!!!!!!
+++++++ The perils & advantages of technology enter Bong Joon-Ho's dialogue. I think I've been thinking of Mickey 17 since I saw it a few days ago, and every day something new occurs to my dumb western brain! Like, it occurred to me... maybe this is obvious to others, but what is the purpose of transferring all of Mickey's memories, the nostalgic ones, where the smell of one of the characters hair evokes familiarity and emotion; the traumatic experiences... which trauma can literally cause changes to the brain, nervous system & more... what is the purpose? He is expendable after all. Which calls in more questions regarding ethics/morals. Anyway, we eventually see how Bong Joon-Ho feels about the matter ;~)
I see some of the "subplots" and "symbols" throughout Mickey 17, mentioned on different forums. People have questions on reddit, critics seem confused or theyre skimming, SOME REVIEWS ARE PAYWALLED, SO..... IM NOT SURE WHATS GOING ON THERE, BUT: People are confused or unsatisfied, "What was the point of the movie?" "So what happened with that part of the story?" "What did that symbol mean?" "There wasn't enough time allowed for this character." "Why was there no conclusion to this part, I want to know..." "They must have run out of time." (WITH THAT BUDGET?)
Embrace it baby!
I don't think I'm reaching for the stars here, but Bong Joon-Ho intentionally gave us the pleasure of... challenging us "dumb westerners!" He leaves us open ends, not because of lack of time or budget, but so that we are left to have our own interpretations and questions regarding *REAL LIFE PROBLEMS* that have perpetuated throughout history, lessons never learned, no real revolutions. Through the power of entertainment and in the least pretentious way, we're gifted something special... conversation, pertaining to real life problems that don't yet really have a universally "true" answer as to how to solve them.
And Bong Joon-Ho is honest in that, you're not going to find the answers in cinema; but cinema etc. may spark conductive questions that... (I'm trying to be optimistic) may bring us closer to a solution we can work on attaining.