Tale of Cinema (2005) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
A delicate introspectiveness
Chris Knipp17 November 2005
Hong Sang-soo: Tale of Cinema/keuk jang jeon (South Korea/France/MK2 2005). 90 minutes. No US distributer. Shown at the New York Film Festival, Lincoln Center, October 1 and 2, 2005.

Hong was back for the third time at the New York Film Festival with this appealing self-reflexive look at ineffectual young men who happen to be filmmakers. The first segment is a film about such a man (Lee Kiwoo), who is tall and handsome but directionless. He meets an old girlfriend (Uhm Jiwon) and eventually talks her into committing suicide with him, though the attempt ends comically.

Ten years later, the star, who was also the director, is now famous and ill. His co-star, the girl, is a successful actress. She encounters a classmate of the filmmaker, also handsome, now down on his luck, who claims his story was appropriated in the film, and it seems like it is going to repeat itself as he gloms onto her and they spend a drunken night together.

What's interesting is the way Hong slides from glamorous ennui to comical mediocrity in his meandering New Wave-ish sequences in a brightly lit but tacky urban Korea. Is Seoul really anything like Paris? Perhaps not. But Hong's sweetly melancholy film with its gentle convolutions lingers pleasantly in the mind -- despite the slightly too-easy irony of its finale with the once "suicidal" director now whimpering that he doesn't want to die.

Hong was born in Korea but got a BFA at California College of Arts and Crafts in Oakland and an MFA at the Art Institute of Chicago.
17 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Beautifully attuned to art/life paradoxes
philosopherjack13 October 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Entirely by coincidence, I watched Hong Sang-soo's Tale of Cinema the day after the "Joan is Afraid" episode of Black Mirror, a juxtaposition which made Hong's film seem, if not prophetic, then at least beautifully attuned to art/life paradoxes which take on a new edge in an era of CGI, AI, quantum computers, 24-hour connectivity, and whatever else you want to blame. Of course, Hong's film contains nothing which obviously constitutes "special effects" (the English title at least evokes Eric Rohmer, which doesn't seem too out of place tonally speaking), but halfway through it provides a purely cinematic thrill, when one realizes that everything we've watched up to that point represents a film that has just been viewed by Dongsoo, the protagonist of the film's second half, and which he later claims was largely based on his own experiences. He spots the actress from the film in the street, and follows her as she revisits one of the locations; later on they go drinking together, and things develop somewhat as they did in the movie in which she starred, although eventually art and life inevitably diverge. It's beautifully ambiguous whether Dongsoo's claim about the past is entirely or partially true, and in turn whether he's trying to ape what he saw in the film, or reliving a past experience, or finding something unlocked in himself, or some combination of all three; as such the film elegantly expresses the complexity of our interaction with movies. It wouldn't have been a great surprise if Hong had rebooted a second time; the final note though warns against the allure of such rabbit holes, emphasizing the importance of thinking, of rationality, of applied intent. And indeed, it's the kind of film that in its unpreachily graceful but detailed way makes you want to reexamine yourself and your coordinates, and to change them for the better.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Boring.
imdb-195481 September 2008
I can't believe this film has got such high marks from other reviewers.

This is similar to the worst low budget French films, it is so desperate to the meaningful and obtuse that it simply bores you.

The characters are believable and well acted but that is the only positive.

The film moves very slowly from non-event to non-event with the few real events being overwhelmed by the plodding pace.

The characters aren't interesting or likable, you don't care what happens to them and never and the dialogue is dull.

Watching this was an enormous waste of time.
14 out of 62 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A tale of woe, peppered with Marlboros and Hite beer
lrpulini3 October 2005
I got the opportunity to see this at the NYFF-the director was both mysterious and shy in the Q&A so he did not shed much light on this seemingly simple film in concept which becomes complex in the execution(no pun intended). A better name for this film should have been "Sex and Death" as that are its two central subjects. I can't say I "got it" while watching it, but it had a resonance that sneaked up on me later. There is so much smoking and drinking in this film that my chest and head hurt by the end-I felt like I could smell the smoke and the beer. I was not familiar with the director's other films, but I might seek them out at this point, as this film did perplex and fascinate me, exactly what world cinema should do. Seoul looks like a beautiful and ugly place, all at the same time, and the meandering shots added greatly to the film's New Wave-like look.
7 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
?? say again ??
bboyemty8 January 2021
Warning: Spoilers
At the end of the film Young-shil says something like "you didn't understand the meaning of the film" to Dong-soo, like yeah we get it Sang-soo Hong we don't get your amazingly thought provoking motion picture, or maybe I am just stupid. Either way this film kinda sucked homie.
3 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed