The Handmaiden is a film that unfolds with a classic film stylist (in particular I felt like Chanwook Park was in a kind of Brian De Palma mode as far as making an erotic dramatic-thriller with a camera that luxuriates in long shots, elaborate camera movements, and cinematic grammar that emphasizes operatic intentions, though it's maybe not the first time he's done this anyway), and is LOADED with story. What appears to be the story of a handmaiden who is put in as part of a long con by a man who wants to steal this wealthy woman's money is actually a story about storytelling, about weaving a pack of lies and an entire personality and, in reality, how that can start to crack apart when it comes to seeing humanity in another person and their vulnerabilities.
There's a lot going on in this movie, and there is a lot that is... sordid and over the top in its sexuality. That's intentional, I'm sure, and Park never coddles his audience with what he's showing as far as sexuality; the two main women of the film, the handmaiden and her master/mistress or what have you, end up having an emotional connection and this leads to a sexual one. This has the most graphic lesbian sexuality on screen since Blue is the Warmest Color, but here the rawness is matched by the elegance of Park's direction, and while you get to see much of it, only some of it (but there *is* some) that is gratuitous. Otherwise, this is a story of backstabbing and betrayal, but all of it leading up to being in the larger sense about how people fit in to the circumstances they are in, how they have to not simply play but BECOME the characters they're playing - and how these images flip based on perceptions and how we see the scenes.
Here's where I may become less articulate in my criticism: the film is in three parts, and I forgot about there being 'parts' as I was so into the film during its first part. There is a major betrayal, but then the movie goes into a 'Part 2', and it turns into a different story... a VERY different kind of story, and it is one that left me confused at first, left adrift, and only Park's direction kept me afloat. As Part 2 went on I got into the movie more, though you have to be prepared for scenes from part 1 being repeated - and whether this becomes tedious will vary depending on the viewer. Nothing is ever not gorgeous to look at, and Park is inspired by paintings and art in the real world, and it's completely sumptuous (I'd be rooting for this to win all the costume/production design awards come February), but there comes a point where the filmmakers are showing the 'here's what happened this scene' moments a little too much. I won't reveal why this is done except to say that the characters take on other roles we didn't expect, and their decisions and how they hide parts of their personalities makes for fascinating viewing. Some times.
And then it gets to part 3, and the movie goes into being sordid melodrama and not much more. By this time, the filmmakers have to wrap the story up, and show what this man who has been trying to machinate everything for his own ends is met with a nasty fate. Overall there's so much about The Handmaiden to admire, from the performances by Min-hee Kim as Lady Hideko (appearing in part 1 as varieties of cold and distant and then close and warm and terrified in the other parts), Tae-ri Kim (Sookie, who has much to learn about the art of performance, I mean her character not the actress, she's great), and Jung-woo Ha as the 'Count' who has to remain in control for the whole runtime, but gives in to his passions too. And yet I also wonder if a first viewing trying to explain everything how I felt doesn't do the film justice: it moves slower and more languidly than other Park films, so it took longer to get in to, and the themes of conning and performance may be done stronger in any given Quentin Tarantino film (though here done with more taste and intense sexuality - i.e. the scene with the thimball on the tooth).
Another viewing may give more, or less. I can tell you now it's worth seeing if you love pure CINEMA, the likes of which get made by directors with a passion for the form and expressing stories of early 20th century sexual excess and emotional f***ed-up ness (it is early 20th century Korea with a major Japanese influence - in that way it'd make a solid double feature with Kim Jee-Woon's Age of Shadows). As for whether it's a great film, I'm not so sure.
There's a lot going on in this movie, and there is a lot that is... sordid and over the top in its sexuality. That's intentional, I'm sure, and Park never coddles his audience with what he's showing as far as sexuality; the two main women of the film, the handmaiden and her master/mistress or what have you, end up having an emotional connection and this leads to a sexual one. This has the most graphic lesbian sexuality on screen since Blue is the Warmest Color, but here the rawness is matched by the elegance of Park's direction, and while you get to see much of it, only some of it (but there *is* some) that is gratuitous. Otherwise, this is a story of backstabbing and betrayal, but all of it leading up to being in the larger sense about how people fit in to the circumstances they are in, how they have to not simply play but BECOME the characters they're playing - and how these images flip based on perceptions and how we see the scenes.
Here's where I may become less articulate in my criticism: the film is in three parts, and I forgot about there being 'parts' as I was so into the film during its first part. There is a major betrayal, but then the movie goes into a 'Part 2', and it turns into a different story... a VERY different kind of story, and it is one that left me confused at first, left adrift, and only Park's direction kept me afloat. As Part 2 went on I got into the movie more, though you have to be prepared for scenes from part 1 being repeated - and whether this becomes tedious will vary depending on the viewer. Nothing is ever not gorgeous to look at, and Park is inspired by paintings and art in the real world, and it's completely sumptuous (I'd be rooting for this to win all the costume/production design awards come February), but there comes a point where the filmmakers are showing the 'here's what happened this scene' moments a little too much. I won't reveal why this is done except to say that the characters take on other roles we didn't expect, and their decisions and how they hide parts of their personalities makes for fascinating viewing. Some times.
And then it gets to part 3, and the movie goes into being sordid melodrama and not much more. By this time, the filmmakers have to wrap the story up, and show what this man who has been trying to machinate everything for his own ends is met with a nasty fate. Overall there's so much about The Handmaiden to admire, from the performances by Min-hee Kim as Lady Hideko (appearing in part 1 as varieties of cold and distant and then close and warm and terrified in the other parts), Tae-ri Kim (Sookie, who has much to learn about the art of performance, I mean her character not the actress, she's great), and Jung-woo Ha as the 'Count' who has to remain in control for the whole runtime, but gives in to his passions too. And yet I also wonder if a first viewing trying to explain everything how I felt doesn't do the film justice: it moves slower and more languidly than other Park films, so it took longer to get in to, and the themes of conning and performance may be done stronger in any given Quentin Tarantino film (though here done with more taste and intense sexuality - i.e. the scene with the thimball on the tooth).
Another viewing may give more, or less. I can tell you now it's worth seeing if you love pure CINEMA, the likes of which get made by directors with a passion for the form and expressing stories of early 20th century sexual excess and emotional f***ed-up ness (it is early 20th century Korea with a major Japanese influence - in that way it'd make a solid double feature with Kim Jee-Woon's Age of Shadows). As for whether it's a great film, I'm not so sure.