This movie is a generational manifesto. A boy that loves a girl; the girl loves a richer boy; the richer boy has no moral values. In this chain, the plot unfolds and the characters' personalities develop to became extremely complex. That's why this is a manifesto for 90-00's generation: they live of contraddictions between their first-world issues (to be in the forgotten middle-low class, to be too rich, to have a father in prison, and so on...) and their desire to dance, to sing, to love, to be free. Some can get past these contraddictions, but others tend to became sociopaths, like Jong-su. Chang-dong Lee creates contrasts with these complexities, playing with beautiful scenarios (the frame with the three characters sitting together and staring at the twilight, seen from their backs, is wonderful) and political references (we see and hear Trump talking about the (in)famous "wall", and Jong-su's house is near the North Korean border, from which we can hear messages of propaganda).
This movie shines a light on young people, their mind and their feeling of inadequacy, and it does that majestically.
8.5/10
Wasn't crazy about this. Once again I've been burned by the promise of a "crazy ending." Never believe what you read. Good movie. Gland I saw it. But won't watch again.
An entire film where the actors read between the lines a story made only of things left unsaid. Majestic.
Not sure what all the fuss was about for this.
Way too long and not particularly interesting.
Somewhat tedious in fact.
Literally nothing happens.
3/10
A slow-burning mystery about economics, class, and sexual jealousy. And cats.
In his first film in eight years, writer/director Lee Chang-dong (Oasis; Secret Sunshine; Poetry) begins this protean narrative as an almost John Hughes-esque teen romance, before shifting gears into a story of sexual and economic jealousy, then morphing into the tale of a pseudo-film noir amateur sleuth, before finally allowing itself to visit the thriller territory that has lurked just outside the frame since the opening few scenes. Essentially, it's a psychological drama about three people. Although, it's possible that only one of those people is real. There are also two cats. Or maybe only one cat. It's a long journey (148 minutes), and, for some, the payoff will not be worth the length of time taken to get there. Others, more used to concrete black-and-white yes-and-no narratives, will be unimpressed with how steadfastly the film refuses to yield its secrets. For myself, it's a two-and-a-half-hour movie with only three characters of which to speak (real or not) that is intimately tied to a milieu I'm completely unfamiliar with, yet it managed to hold my attention for almost the entire time. It has an undeniable ability to burrow under your skin very early on, so even though in the first two hours, there are literally only two major plot points, I was fully invested. And, man alive, is it tense. Lee's mastery of tone is quite something, keeping the viewer off-balance from the get-go, bestowing portentous significance upon the most inanimate and innocent of objects, only to later reveal that whilst we were trying to figure out the importance of item a, we missed the significance of item b. And although in the last half-hour, I did start to fidget a little, I thought the ending was wonderfully ambiguous (albeit, just a tad predictable).
For my complete review, please visit: https://boxd.it/DoHpn
“Burning” is a simple and inconclusive film that still manages to linger in your mind for days. The realistic approach instantly ties your perception of the events with the protagonist’s subjectivity, but everything is left so ambiguous that you will start wondering what the film is getting at. It might be or not be a romantic drama, a disappearance mystery, or a social commentary. For sure, it’s an interesting character study.
Lee Chang-Dong’s unsettling yet poetic narrative approach conflicts with the common trends in cinema where you always need to look for shocking twists or find your way through plot lines that are as intricate as they are prefabricated.
This is a movie for people who want to get inside of a movie and roll around inside of it. For days. The movie itself is a slow burn (sorry for the pun) and the ending won't be for everyone. If you enjoy a movie that makes you think and research for days in order to appreciate all that you saw (and didn't see) this movie is for you.
follow me at https://IHATEBadMovies.com or facebook IHateBadMovies
A bit of a slow burn this one. The plot is frustratingly oblique at times, and the lackadaisacal pace rarely picks up. However, it is well shot and acted, and the answers to the film's mysteries are there if you look and listen hard enough.
2 / 2 directing & technical aspect
1 / 1 story
1 / 1 act I
1 / 1 act II
.5 / 1 act III
1 / 1 acting
1 / 1 writing
0 / 1 originality
0 / 1 stays with you
0 / 1 misc
7.5 out of 10
So close to being a great movie. Driving, driving, driving... but holy beautiful cinematography.
Just watched it, can't stop thinking about it.
I don't know, I think I loved this movie.
OMG! i really really starting to question humanity here, are people lost their minds ? I mean you give a 8 and 9 why ? Because you think that this is art ? Because you believe that ok i didn't understand anything, there was no point therfore this must be a masterpiece, so ridicules approach of when something is so bad you must say this is art and you are the stupid that didn't understand.
What BS of "a masterpiece of diversity in the society, of a boy loves a girl, of rich and poor so well presented". MY GOD !
The movie is so boring, so nothing, so pretentious, so flat so do not see it is 2 hours and 33 minutes of absolutely nothing to give.
I have also read that it had a great twist at the end, clearly people do not know the meaning of twist.
Please avoid it, please make aware of public about this movie not to be seen or rented ever.
At first I didn't know what the heck this movie was trying to do, but the deeper into it I got, the more I saw and experienced the vision and the purpose. It seems like such a simple story, but all the smallest details reveal layers of subtext. I have a feeling this is a film I'm going to rate higher upon rewatch. Also, I find Steven Yeun to be an incredibly attractive man, but I wasn't the slightest bit attracted to him here, and that's what I call effective acting.
Burning is a meticulous thesis on the inevitable subjectivity of human experience and an insatiable 'great hunger'. Our need for answers so powerful that we might not pretend there is an answer but, forget that there isn't one.
Insane subject matter and story filled with social commentary and metaphorical meaning, told through gorgeous cinematography. Unfortunately though, i found it unbearably slow and dragged out. Had this been about 30 minutes shorter it would have been a massive favourite.
I can not with the passage side of the protagonist. It was evident that Ben not only burned greenhouses
Shout by MickeBlockedParent2018-12-10T17:59:16Z
Go in with no expectations, except that it is a slow-paced simple story, told in an epic fashion with wonderful cinematography and understated acting.
It got under my skin like few movies do, a story about class, jealousy, ego, desire, dreams, etc. Best movie of the year, possibly.