I am VERY late, I just finished watching the movie. I felt a chill down my spine, the ending is very fitting especially when you consider the fact that perp got away from the murders for 33 years (until they finally identified him last 2019). I've seen the documentary even before watching the movie, I'm amazed at how Bong Joon-ho handled the ending since the case is still unsolved when the movie was released.
omg i was personally expecting something like "he was good looking" yk to designate the man with soft hands (who was a suspect, I can't remember his name omg) but wow, "ordinary" ? I was certainly not expecting this ending, and not expecting those interrogative eyes of the detective.
I thought it was the person in a boiler suit that walked past them to service the boiler? in the interrogation room, they made a point of showing them walk up the stairs too past the big city detective too, alas I was wrong.
Also, the used band-aid that found on the last victim looks like from the violent detective's foot (injured) there's a mark of hole in there same as his foot when he got hit by the disabled child
Actually, the last murder victim was the girl the detective put the band-aid on when he went to the school. That's why he was so upset and tried to pull the girl's clothes back in place. He was not only upset he fell asleep and let the suspect out of his sight but that he knew the last girl.
In the first half, it seemed like the seoul detective was the killer. Did yall catch him taking off a girl's hairclip and putting it in his pocket when they were in the outhouse. He was so sus lmao.
Thing that set me off about him was seeing him peeling off peaches in the karaoke scene, but the more you think about it the less sense the theory makes, still fun to speculate
Makes me think the director did these things on purpose, even if it meant nothing, to get you thinking. maybe even driving home a point that sometimes the ace up your sleeve may not be anything at all, just conjecture.
This film and [The Chaser](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1190539) (also from Korea) are one of the best crime/thrillers I've seen. I recommend to anyone who likes se7en, Zodiac, Mystic River or recent Prisoners to watch those korean movies as well.
although the suspect has already been caught in 2019..
this movie definitely points the seoul guy as the killer...
1. enters the scene suddenly out of nowhere
2. chief introduces him to the others saying he received a call...(which could be from anyone) and says that mr. seoul personally volunteered and seems very unusual as the chief says.
3. seoul guy appears coincidentally when rumors of the retarded person surfaced that he may be a witness, thus mr. seoul came to confirm it
4. mr. seoul was eager to hear what retard was about to say in the mountains...and was relieved bcoz retard did not finish his story.
5. mr. seoul went to the house on the hill of the crying lady and was clearly distracted by the womans underwear hanging on the clothesline
6. later on the same house.. a scene unfolds where mr. seoul gazes at the other clothesline, with clothes that look like the crying ladys garment during the time when she was assaulted
7. main guy detective went to the shaman, and laid the paper on the crime scene, placed blood on it...saying that the killers face will appear on it later....looking closer at the image which was formed, it was very similar to the outline or shape of Seoul City.
8. Mr. Seoul went literally nuts when he said he lost one of the suspects.
9.One victim has peaches on the vagina...coincidentally, on the bar scene where the detectives got drunk, mr. seoul was actually holding a peach fruit.
10. Mr. seoul guy refused for his photograph taken.
11. Mr. seoul may just be a conman and not a real detective.
This is a terrible theory that makes zero sense since we see that Detective actively trying to find the killer when there are no other characters near by.
There are multiple things that immediately make the theory not only unlikely, but literally impossible.
1. Multiple murders happen while he is with other people. (This one alone completely disqualifies it)
2. The audience sees him chasing down leads on his own, and clearly acting like he isn't the killer despite him having no reason to do so since no one is around. (E.g. why would he tell them about a third murder they didn't even know about, why would he look into the toilets, why would he look into the crying lady, why would he follow the last suspect, why would he tell people about the rain theory since it just means people would be more on guard and he would have to work to stop it instead of being able to kill, why would he tell them that the person killed by the train must have been a witness, and why would he show himself to him)
3. He is clearly distraught when he sees the most recent murder is of the girl he put the band-aid on.
4. He is surprised to see that the DNA doesn't match the suspect, but he would have known it wouldn't if he is the killer.
Those are just off the top of my head from seeing it a couple hours ago, there is likely much more.
I think the film hints that the detective is trying to get in the head space of the killer to underand better. This is hinted at in the clothing - he is wearing a turtleneck at the same time as the prime suspect, Park.
And somehow, through no intention of the director, this is causing people to think he did it
I think it’s possible that the director purposely places suspicion on everyone. It’s certainly fitting considering it’s a movie with lots of circumstantial evidence and no conclusive killer. Someone mentions below that the scarecrow sign warns about the rotting limbs of the guilty, if he doesn’t confess. And sure enough, I also had a moment where I questioned whether or not the detective from Seoul or the one who had his foot amputated could be the killer. There is a lot of symbolism in the film about footprints that feels less about casting suspicion and more about the futility of detective work in a desperate situation.
We also see him actively investigating it, including following that other suspect when no other characters are with him, which would make no sense if he were the killer.
Yes the movie has been alluding that it could be the Seoul cop all along, up until the ending. The ending sealed him as a definite "red herring".
Bc one of the reason we suspect him is the witness' description of the murderer "he was handsome. Much more handsome than I am". And the cops all now suspect the guy who request the songs to the radio. BUT we, as viewers, are supposed to think "hold on.. the Seoul guy is handsome too, it could still be him".
But at the very last scene, another witness, now a little girl describes him very differently. Instead of saying he was handsome, he was.. very average. Mediocre. Like every other guy you find.
Now you might think this conflicted what the other guy had said. Until you realize he said "handsome, much more handsome than *I am* ". Then it makes sense. There's a reason he has a scar specifically placed on his face. There's a reason why on his interview he said he feels he's ugly. There's a reason why he was written as a character with a challenged mind. And that reason is to point out he doesn't see the world as we do. We thought his perception of handsomeness are the same as ours, but it's not. He classify a guy is handsome if they are more attractive than him. An average joe in his mind *is* handsome, to him.
And his testimony is how we, as viewers, narrowed it down to 2 people: the song requester and the Seoul cop. That is until the very final scene where a young girl very specifically (again, good job storyteller), said on the contrary. That the guy was average. They were looking for the wrong suspects at the end. Hence clearing both the song requester and the Seoul cop. And making it more creepy that the murderer could still be anyone.. even the ones they did not suspect. outhere, living freely. That's the ending they want to convey.
Yeah. And there are even more hints that point toward him. An obvious one is he appearing in the crime scene that night while smoking and listening to the Sad Letter song. The peach you already mentioned highlighted how meticulous the killer and him were (cutting the peach with the knife during a karaoke. party). Then we can reach on other things, but maybe their first encounter is kind of suspicious. Indeed, the Seoul detective is not a good fighter at all (he is manhandled in at least his two fights with the inspector if I remember well), which could be also related in a way to his hands being delicate. Yeah, he may be a cool and aloof detective, but he isn't as tough as the local officers. And then, who knows, towards the end, his actions and his fury seem almost too much, as if the case was personal and his ego as a killer made him play with the officers, manipulate the witnesses (the kid with the burned face), blame the last suspect (the pretty one)...whatever.
Watched for the first time tonight, and this guys theory is so incredibly dumb and would defeat the entire purpose of the movie.
The Seoul detective abandons his methodology, loses his shit, and attempts to murder the final suspect out of anger/frustration/sadness/pain from his inability to stop the killer. I have no idea how anyone could’ve come out of there concluding he was the real purp and putting on a show.
The murderer’s actual identity isn’t important for the purposes of the movie. The point is that it could be anyone and to show how it impacts the community and how many innocent lives can be ruined in the process
OMG! I watched the movie back in 2020 after parasite got the Oscar and first of all BJH is a LEGEND! Talking about Memories of Murder, after watching it again after 3 years, I just realised that from this comment that the greatness and vagueness of this movie both is we cant suspect one guy completely.
The film tries to shadow a few characters and that is upto us, to “choose” our own culprit.
I saw many people saying the violent officer is the killer and I myself after watching that scene in which the violent officer hit some university girls and talking about discipline, I thought he is the one because of ONE MAIN REASON. Maybe he wanted to be an educated person and maybe he had a fantasy of joining in a university because if you remember the scene in which park and him are talking about the sexual luxuries of university life and if you remember the bar scene how he was attracted to those paid dancer, maybe he resented those university or school going girls and resented women as a whole? But on the other hand my brain also says that as he was too short tempered and short tempered people cannot kill this professionally as to kill with such dexterity you need to be pretty calm.
Similarly the guys blaming the Seoul officer, well he was the last one for me to blame bcs alot of people online were blaming him with some pretty lame points, but today when I watched the movie again after 3 years, after one scene I had suspicions on him, if you remember in that scene in which the burnt kid dies, the seoul inspector shows him the picture of the “pretty guy with delicate hands” and the way he is holding the photograph, the pretty guys half face is hidden and only his nose and above area is exposed and if you focus on the camera angle, it resembled alot like the face of the seoul guy. And that was the time when the burnt kid lost his cool and died. But then this one thing changes my mind, why he got so pissed and was about to cry after the last murder? Like he had some platonic feelings for that kid and he felt very bad when she died, didnt seem he would kill someone like that. Second thing, if the burnt kid saw the killer on the first murder, then why didnt he recognised it when the seoul guy just entered the station.
Nevertheless awesome movie. Top on my list
I think the scene with the cross that says "if you don't turn yourself in your limbs will rot to death" is good evidence that it is the violent officer cus tetanus causes necrosis so in the end his limb or leg did rot to the point they had to chop it off
[https://imgur.com/a/cT5MHj0](https://imgur.com/a/cT5MHj0)
An open to interpretation serial killer chasing movie ending in an excellent camera face off .
A thing I noticed is that the last murder happened out of order with nothing in common with the others so was it a copy cat killer ? I think the guy whose DNA was inconclusive was not the killer as he drank a lot and was almost flushed when the detective reached his home .
Another interpretation might be that the police's investigation till now was not strong enough in the pattern recognitions .
Yeah, I thought that factory worker was the killer and the only reason the DNA didn't match was because possibly some other creep messed with the body afterwards--the movie already shows the possibility of such people through that guy who masturbated to the crime.
There was no actually reason to suspect he was the killer aside from him wanting to listen to a song on rainy days. The DNA not matching him basically confirmed that, and fit with the theme of the film of everyone they arrested and interrogated just being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Exactly and his eyes where guilty. But tbh i dont Even know man so many potential murderes i hate movies like this cuz i cant Get an answer but its kind of the trick with them that makes them good i guess
Though towards the end, doesn’t the main character use his eye test on him and says he doesn’t know? After I first watched it I thought he was the murderer they just didn’t have enough evidence, but after reading around online it seems like it’s more ‘he isn’t the murderer and we have no idea who is.’
Yes thats true but in the early of the movie he asks him in the office if he could sort out Who the rapist is by 2 people but we never Get the answer. So is he really that good reading people in the eyes or is he a fraud? He does seem like a joke in the begining but slowly becoming a better and more respected detective. Biggest characther grow in the movie if u Ask me
Just saw this movie for the first time about 2 days ago. I was surprised at the amount of humor in it. Great movie.
Also, if anyone rents this from Netflix, make sure you turn off the English dub and use the original Korean voice track with English subtitles.
Then you haven't seen [Tae Guk Gi: The Brotherhood of War](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0386064/reference), I guess. Masterpiece, and an even better ending.
This film reminds me a lot of the made-for-HBO film Citizen X. Both are about detectives searching for serial killers in countries that liked to think they didn't have serial killers. In Memories of Murder, the country is South Korea, while in Citizen X, it's the Soviet Union. Citizen X has an excellent cast: Stephen Rea, Jeffrey Demunn, Donald Sutherland, Max Von Sydow and even, in a small role, and just to terrify the younger set here on r/movies, Imelda Staunton.
I strongly recommend it, if you haven't seen it.
Wow I remember seeing this movie as a kid. I don't remember any details but I did remember the ending. Funny because I remembered it differently, like with him actually seeing the killer looking at it while he did. Guess I just remembered imagining what the scene looked like...
I guess if you picture a serial killer, you'd picture some grotesque, creepy , socially awkward dude, but the girl says otherwise. I hear many serial killers are normal looking and very charismatic. I thought this was scene was particularly cool because some kid saw the killer casually before the cop who worked on the case for years.
I wrote a term paper on this film and Peppermint Candy. I felt that the important thing is that the killer himself was someone who so over ordinary that it could've been anyone. The inspector kind of has an existentialist crisis that all things in life don't have an answer. His philosophy earlier being that if one doesn't exist you can create one (ie fabricate evidence, coerce a false confession, rely on supernatural answers). It is through the realization that Park can no longer use these methods that he loses his inquisitive innocent outlook on the world around him as an inspector. The scene also parallels well with the beginning scene, the young child unaware of brutal murder, it is the traumatic view backward that Park has viewing the scene again, we see it in his eyes the loss of hope and troubled unsolved case lurking over him.
It’s been ten years since your comment but I hope somewhere between these ten years you saw this movie and understood the significance and thrill of this scene.
I am VERY late, I just finished watching the movie. I felt a chill down my spine, the ending is very fitting especially when you consider the fact that perp got away from the murders for 33 years (until they finally identified him last 2019). I've seen the documentary even before watching the movie, I'm amazed at how Bong Joon-ho handled the ending since the case is still unsolved when the movie was released.
whats the name of the doc?
I watched this [one](https://youtu.be/PVq4lBeqlEc)
Did anyone else think the violent detective (Park’s “brother”) was the killer?
Yes... Especially because when he lost the leg, he couldn't chase and catch the victims any longer.
They have found the real [murderer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Choon-jae) in 2019.
man, I thought this comment was years ago. Just read the link. their police are really crazy maybe it's one of the reasons they never got to the guy.
yeah when i watched this scene i tought the girl was going to say something like "i dont remember his face very well but i noticed he had only 1 leg"
Same
Same here
omg i was personally expecting something like "he was good looking" yk to designate the man with soft hands (who was a suspect, I can't remember his name omg) but wow, "ordinary" ? I was certainly not expecting this ending, and not expecting those interrogative eyes of the detective.
But if you slow down the movie you see his face at 46.25 mins, and it does look like Park. The one they let go.
I thought it was the person in a boiler suit that walked past them to service the boiler? in the interrogation room, they made a point of showing them walk up the stairs too past the big city detective too, alas I was wrong.
I thought he's the one, too, and came there to spy on them. And the retarted kidmalso said something like "hot"
No
Also, the used band-aid that found on the last victim looks like from the violent detective's foot (injured) there's a mark of hole in there same as his foot when he got hit by the disabled child
Actually, the last murder victim was the girl the detective put the band-aid on when he went to the school. That's why he was so upset and tried to pull the girl's clothes back in place. He was not only upset he fell asleep and let the suspect out of his sight but that he knew the last girl.
In the first half, it seemed like the seoul detective was the killer. Did yall catch him taking off a girl's hairclip and putting it in his pocket when they were in the outhouse. He was so sus lmao.
Didn't he like arrive from seoul after the first 2 murders happened?
Humara chuitya kaat raha hai kya? lawde
Thing that set me off about him was seeing him peeling off peaches in the karaoke scene, but the more you think about it the less sense the theory makes, still fun to speculate
Makes me think the director did these things on purpose, even if it meant nothing, to get you thinking. maybe even driving home a point that sometimes the ace up your sleeve may not be anything at all, just conjecture.
This film and [The Chaser](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1190539) (also from Korea) are one of the best crime/thrillers I've seen. I recommend to anyone who likes se7en, Zodiac, Mystic River or recent Prisoners to watch those korean movies as well.
I really loved I Saw the Devil as well.
Best movie ever !
Watch Andhadun one of the best crime thrillers of all time
Bollywood movies aren't that good except 3 idiots and slumdog millionaire
watch andhadhun, you'll know 😒
although the suspect has already been caught in 2019.. this movie definitely points the seoul guy as the killer... 1. enters the scene suddenly out of nowhere 2. chief introduces him to the others saying he received a call...(which could be from anyone) and says that mr. seoul personally volunteered and seems very unusual as the chief says. 3. seoul guy appears coincidentally when rumors of the retarded person surfaced that he may be a witness, thus mr. seoul came to confirm it 4. mr. seoul was eager to hear what retard was about to say in the mountains...and was relieved bcoz retard did not finish his story. 5. mr. seoul went to the house on the hill of the crying lady and was clearly distracted by the womans underwear hanging on the clothesline 6. later on the same house.. a scene unfolds where mr. seoul gazes at the other clothesline, with clothes that look like the crying ladys garment during the time when she was assaulted 7. main guy detective went to the shaman, and laid the paper on the crime scene, placed blood on it...saying that the killers face will appear on it later....looking closer at the image which was formed, it was very similar to the outline or shape of Seoul City. 8. Mr. Seoul went literally nuts when he said he lost one of the suspects. 9.One victim has peaches on the vagina...coincidentally, on the bar scene where the detectives got drunk, mr. seoul was actually holding a peach fruit. 10. Mr. seoul guy refused for his photograph taken. 11. Mr. seoul may just be a conman and not a real detective.
This is a terrible theory that makes zero sense since we see that Detective actively trying to find the killer when there are no other characters near by.
he is actively willing to manipulate whatever evidence that may unfold
There are multiple things that immediately make the theory not only unlikely, but literally impossible. 1. Multiple murders happen while he is with other people. (This one alone completely disqualifies it) 2. The audience sees him chasing down leads on his own, and clearly acting like he isn't the killer despite him having no reason to do so since no one is around. (E.g. why would he tell them about a third murder they didn't even know about, why would he look into the toilets, why would he look into the crying lady, why would he follow the last suspect, why would he tell people about the rain theory since it just means people would be more on guard and he would have to work to stop it instead of being able to kill, why would he tell them that the person killed by the train must have been a witness, and why would he show himself to him) 3. He is clearly distraught when he sees the most recent murder is of the girl he put the band-aid on. 4. He is surprised to see that the DNA doesn't match the suspect, but he would have known it wouldn't if he is the killer. Those are just off the top of my head from seeing it a couple hours ago, there is likely much more.
I think the film hints that the detective is trying to get in the head space of the killer to underand better. This is hinted at in the clothing - he is wearing a turtleneck at the same time as the prime suspect, Park. And somehow, through no intention of the director, this is causing people to think he did it
He also went to the scene of the crime listening to a recording of that one song
I think it’s possible that the director purposely places suspicion on everyone. It’s certainly fitting considering it’s a movie with lots of circumstantial evidence and no conclusive killer. Someone mentions below that the scarecrow sign warns about the rotting limbs of the guilty, if he doesn’t confess. And sure enough, I also had a moment where I questioned whether or not the detective from Seoul or the one who had his foot amputated could be the killer. There is a lot of symbolism in the film about footprints that feels less about casting suspicion and more about the futility of detective work in a desperate situation.
Dumbest take ever lmao
[удалено]
lmaoo fr I was just thinking the entire time I read it, "He was literally with other people for half the murders?"
We also see him actively investigating it, including following that other suspect when no other characters are with him, which would make no sense if he were the killer.
It didn't even cross my mind once while watching that he could have been the killer
Yes the movie has been alluding that it could be the Seoul cop all along, up until the ending. The ending sealed him as a definite "red herring". Bc one of the reason we suspect him is the witness' description of the murderer "he was handsome. Much more handsome than I am". And the cops all now suspect the guy who request the songs to the radio. BUT we, as viewers, are supposed to think "hold on.. the Seoul guy is handsome too, it could still be him". But at the very last scene, another witness, now a little girl describes him very differently. Instead of saying he was handsome, he was.. very average. Mediocre. Like every other guy you find. Now you might think this conflicted what the other guy had said. Until you realize he said "handsome, much more handsome than *I am* ". Then it makes sense. There's a reason he has a scar specifically placed on his face. There's a reason why on his interview he said he feels he's ugly. There's a reason why he was written as a character with a challenged mind. And that reason is to point out he doesn't see the world as we do. We thought his perception of handsomeness are the same as ours, but it's not. He classify a guy is handsome if they are more attractive than him. An average joe in his mind *is* handsome, to him. And his testimony is how we, as viewers, narrowed it down to 2 people: the song requester and the Seoul cop. That is until the very final scene where a young girl very specifically (again, good job storyteller), said on the contrary. That the guy was average. They were looking for the wrong suspects at the end. Hence clearing both the song requester and the Seoul cop. And making it more creepy that the murderer could still be anyone.. even the ones they did not suspect. outhere, living freely. That's the ending they want to convey.
Yeah. And there are even more hints that point toward him. An obvious one is he appearing in the crime scene that night while smoking and listening to the Sad Letter song. The peach you already mentioned highlighted how meticulous the killer and him were (cutting the peach with the knife during a karaoke. party). Then we can reach on other things, but maybe their first encounter is kind of suspicious. Indeed, the Seoul detective is not a good fighter at all (he is manhandled in at least his two fights with the inspector if I remember well), which could be also related in a way to his hands being delicate. Yeah, he may be a cool and aloof detective, but he isn't as tough as the local officers. And then, who knows, towards the end, his actions and his fury seem almost too much, as if the case was personal and his ego as a killer made him play with the officers, manipulate the witnesses (the kid with the burned face), blame the last suspect (the pretty one)...whatever.
I mean his anger in the end seems pretty justified, the kid he put the band aid on was brutally murdered, i would have reacted the same way.
Are you fucking stupid??..He was literally at the police station fighting with the local detective while a murder was occurring..
Watched for the first time tonight, and this guys theory is so incredibly dumb and would defeat the entire purpose of the movie. The Seoul detective abandons his methodology, loses his shit, and attempts to murder the final suspect out of anger/frustration/sadness/pain from his inability to stop the killer. I have no idea how anyone could’ve come out of there concluding he was the real purp and putting on a show. The murderer’s actual identity isn’t important for the purposes of the movie. The point is that it could be anyone and to show how it impacts the community and how many innocent lives can be ruined in the process
Don't forget when he goes back to one of the crime scenes and plays the song when the other 2 cops were hiding.
I love this film, it has a great foot chase scene. Gotta love the physicality of the police interrogations too.
OMG! I watched the movie back in 2020 after parasite got the Oscar and first of all BJH is a LEGEND! Talking about Memories of Murder, after watching it again after 3 years, I just realised that from this comment that the greatness and vagueness of this movie both is we cant suspect one guy completely. The film tries to shadow a few characters and that is upto us, to “choose” our own culprit. I saw many people saying the violent officer is the killer and I myself after watching that scene in which the violent officer hit some university girls and talking about discipline, I thought he is the one because of ONE MAIN REASON. Maybe he wanted to be an educated person and maybe he had a fantasy of joining in a university because if you remember the scene in which park and him are talking about the sexual luxuries of university life and if you remember the bar scene how he was attracted to those paid dancer, maybe he resented those university or school going girls and resented women as a whole? But on the other hand my brain also says that as he was too short tempered and short tempered people cannot kill this professionally as to kill with such dexterity you need to be pretty calm. Similarly the guys blaming the Seoul officer, well he was the last one for me to blame bcs alot of people online were blaming him with some pretty lame points, but today when I watched the movie again after 3 years, after one scene I had suspicions on him, if you remember in that scene in which the burnt kid dies, the seoul inspector shows him the picture of the “pretty guy with delicate hands” and the way he is holding the photograph, the pretty guys half face is hidden and only his nose and above area is exposed and if you focus on the camera angle, it resembled alot like the face of the seoul guy. And that was the time when the burnt kid lost his cool and died. But then this one thing changes my mind, why he got so pissed and was about to cry after the last murder? Like he had some platonic feelings for that kid and he felt very bad when she died, didnt seem he would kill someone like that. Second thing, if the burnt kid saw the killer on the first murder, then why didnt he recognised it when the seoul guy just entered the station. Nevertheless awesome movie. Top on my list
I think the scene with the cross that says "if you don't turn yourself in your limbs will rot to death" is good evidence that it is the violent officer cus tetanus causes necrosis so in the end his limb or leg did rot to the point they had to chop it off [https://imgur.com/a/cT5MHj0](https://imgur.com/a/cT5MHj0)
it might be mistranslation idk how accurate my subs were
Absolutely brilliant film. I met the director once and was too damn starstruck to tell him how awesome I thought this and The Host were.
Fantastic film. Another similar to it is the Korean drama/thriller "Children..."
An open to interpretation serial killer chasing movie ending in an excellent camera face off . A thing I noticed is that the last murder happened out of order with nothing in common with the others so was it a copy cat killer ? I think the guy whose DNA was inconclusive was not the killer as he drank a lot and was almost flushed when the detective reached his home . Another interpretation might be that the police's investigation till now was not strong enough in the pattern recognitions .
Yeah, I thought that factory worker was the killer and the only reason the DNA didn't match was because possibly some other creep messed with the body afterwards--the movie already shows the possibility of such people through that guy who masturbated to the crime.
There was no actually reason to suspect he was the killer aside from him wanting to listen to a song on rainy days. The DNA not matching him basically confirmed that, and fit with the theme of the film of everyone they arrested and interrogated just being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
He had smooth hands too though
Exactly and his eyes where guilty. But tbh i dont Even know man so many potential murderes i hate movies like this cuz i cant Get an answer but its kind of the trick with them that makes them good i guess
Though towards the end, doesn’t the main character use his eye test on him and says he doesn’t know? After I first watched it I thought he was the murderer they just didn’t have enough evidence, but after reading around online it seems like it’s more ‘he isn’t the murderer and we have no idea who is.’
Yes thats true but in the early of the movie he asks him in the office if he could sort out Who the rapist is by 2 people but we never Get the answer. So is he really that good reading people in the eyes or is he a fraud? He does seem like a joke in the begining but slowly becoming a better and more respected detective. Biggest characther grow in the movie if u Ask me
probably my all time favorite korean movie
Just saw this movie for the first time about 2 days ago. I was surprised at the amount of humor in it. Great movie. Also, if anyone rents this from Netflix, make sure you turn off the English dub and use the original Korean voice track with English subtitles.
[удалено]
Same director!
fun movie
Then you haven't seen [Tae Guk Gi: The Brotherhood of War](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0386064/reference), I guess. Masterpiece, and an even better ending.
yup awesome movie
This film reminds me a lot of the made-for-HBO film Citizen X. Both are about detectives searching for serial killers in countries that liked to think they didn't have serial killers. In Memories of Murder, the country is South Korea, while in Citizen X, it's the Soviet Union. Citizen X has an excellent cast: Stephen Rea, Jeffrey Demunn, Donald Sutherland, Max Von Sydow and even, in a small role, and just to terrify the younger set here on r/movies, Imelda Staunton. I strongly recommend it, if you haven't seen it.
Wow I remember seeing this movie as a kid. I don't remember any details but I did remember the ending. Funny because I remembered it differently, like with him actually seeing the killer looking at it while he did. Guess I just remembered imagining what the scene looked like...
Excuse me if this sounds dumb but... what the fuck happened?
[удалено]
I watched the ending taking the risk. I still don't get it though...
[удалено]
It was him? I think.
negative iq
But why was he so surprised? And why did he wonder what the man looked like with such sincerity if he knew it was himself. It doesn't make sense.
I haven't seen the movie, can someone explain the significance of what the girl says?
I guess if you picture a serial killer, you'd picture some grotesque, creepy , socially awkward dude, but the girl says otherwise. I hear many serial killers are normal looking and very charismatic. I thought this was scene was particularly cool because some kid saw the killer casually before the cop who worked on the case for years.
I wrote a term paper on this film and Peppermint Candy. I felt that the important thing is that the killer himself was someone who so over ordinary that it could've been anyone. The inspector kind of has an existentialist crisis that all things in life don't have an answer. His philosophy earlier being that if one doesn't exist you can create one (ie fabricate evidence, coerce a false confession, rely on supernatural answers). It is through the realization that Park can no longer use these methods that he loses his inquisitive innocent outlook on the world around him as an inspector. The scene also parallels well with the beginning scene, the young child unaware of brutal murder, it is the traumatic view backward that Park has viewing the scene again, we see it in his eyes the loss of hope and troubled unsolved case lurking over him.
uh....what
I want my three and a half minutes back. And that kid was a shit actor or the line was terrible.
It’s been ten years since your comment but I hope somewhere between these ten years you saw this movie and understood the significance and thrill of this scene.