A Traveler's Needs

This has to be the worst film I've seen in a long time. Story line looks and sounds like day one improvisation at a high school drama club. A long zoom into a dog has to be the Director mocking anyone who has been foolish enough to have spent their hard cash and time on this film. The actors must have wondered what the hell was going on, whilst making this awful drama. The colour and contrast was flat, don't know if this was a deliberate attempt to make this film even more boring. How this was ever financed I don't know. I would be embarrassed to put my name to this farce. Don't waste your time.

Unfortunately, the film loses its purpose. The story turns out to be much longer than necessary, losing itself along the way. The cinematography and editing seem to have lacked proper attention, and we experience a sense of awkwardness in certain scenes, with framing that feels worse than home videos. The most interesting aspect of the film is when Iris describes her idea of teaching and how she believes that emotionally connecting with a language can help us express ourselves in it. However, this idea is not well developed.

At first, it seems intriguing that she let her students to do as they please and explore those moments on their own (such as playing instruments), but as the film progresses, it becomes clear that she doesn't care as much as her dialogue initially suggests, making it shallow. It could have been amusing to compare the experiences of the two students and how emotions are so universal, but the text - identical down to every comma - comes across as sheer laziness in writing something different.

When we compare both students to Iris, we see that the latter breaks the "rule" by playing the flute in the park without any talent and without caring. However, I don't think we can say she feels happy doing so; her emotions are not well explored (except for the scene where she talks to her friend in the apartment). I believe the film tried to explore the concept of a life of simple pleasures, as seen in "Perfect Days", but it ended up falling into monotony and a lack of meaning.

In his film, it's often two or three people having quiet conversations. Such scenes are rare in today's world, where social media dominates. I believe this is one of the charms of Hong Sang-soo's work. He uses simple equipment and straightforward filming techniques to capture the small, immersive moments of daily life and the sincere, delicate communication between people.

In his films, there's rarely a sense of time rushing by. The time in the film flows like a rivulet, and sometimes it even feels slow or awkward. The dialogue in the film doesn't seem to demand perfection, but rather preserves a sense of naturalness and truth. The characters blend with the actors themselves, making it hard to tell whether it's the script or an inherent part of the actors' personalities. The storyline is sometimes clear, sometimes veiled in mist, but it is always quiet and unhurried.

As he mentioned in an interview:"I don't aim to create grand narratives or films filled with dramatic conflict. I hope my films are as natural as life itself, without the need to deliberately create drama. Because life, in itself, is full of ups and downs and changes."

He doesn't aim to shoot perfect big-budget films; he simply captures life, filming the scenes and images he likes. As a result, his films often fluctuate along a level line named "Hong Sang-soo". Sometimes, his work is praised and even awarded; other times, the audience might not quite understand it. It's much like everyday life-sometimes filled with sparkling moments, sometimes with sad ones, but most of the time, life rises and falls along the line of "self".

This film takes an hour to slowly depict Huppert's day in Korea. In the morning, she talks with her student (the film captures the pauses in thought, awkward silences, and the clumsy dialogue), guiding the student to express her feelings, write them on index cards, and record them on a tape. Afterward, there's casual conversation and farewells. At noon, she quietly eats lunch alone, then goes to the next house to teach French, chatting, playing the guitar, taking a walk in the park, and receiving her teaching fee for the day. In the evening, she returns to her friend's house, gives the fee to her friend, and thanks him for taking her in.

In Hong Sang-soo's films, ordinary spaces and objects in daily life are no longer lifeless. Instead, they are given life and meaning through the delicate and sincere dialogues captured by his lens, becoming vivid and meaningful.

In the last half hour of the film , the boy talks with his mother, whom he hasn't seen in a long time. During the conversation, the sense of flow created by Huppert gradually disappears in the space. The mother is very protective of her child, but this overprotectiveness, while seemingly caring, is superficial. It is a care that remains on the surface, failing to delve into the child's inner world. The mother fails to see the child's inner thoughts or feelings; she is blind to his true needs.

As the dialogue unfolds, the space becomes small, narrow, and suffocating. This because excessive protection stifles different thoughts, and leaves no room for the child's own feelings or inner world to be acknowledged. If a person is treated this way from a young age, they may lose their vitality and become dull. Vitality and sensitivity, like tender sprouts, need careful nurturing to grow.

From another perspective, the size of space doesn't imprison people; rather, it's whether people confine themselves inwardly. If one restricts their sensitivity, they can only measure the world in square meters. But if sensitivity is allowed to stretch and vitality is allowed to grow freely, it will bring forth a magnificent, free, and vast inner landscape-like a wide grassland, a starry sky, and an ocean.

A dull movie with flat characters in which nothing relevant happens. A wasted opportunity to showcase the relationship between a foreigner and Korean culture. The script seems to have been virtually non existent during filming (if there was any script at all).

There was no way of connecting with the story or any of the characters, as they were all incredibly lifeless. An awkward nonsense.

In short, dialogue is nonsensical, camerawork is amateur at best, actors don't bother making any effort whatsoever. Don't waste your time watching this crap because it's over an hour of your life that you won't get back.

Super typical Hong Sang-soo storyline. But this time, Director Hong turned the means into ends, and returned to the alienation and closeness between people. There are many factors, and language became a more core means to process and apply.

Huppert's appearance adds a layer of depiction of strangers to the film in addition to the discussion of people themselves, acting as a cultural intruder. Whether communication problems caused by language barriers can effectively reveal people's identity. Repetition and variation are Hong Sang-soo's tricks, but they are also our lives.

From this development, Director Hong still likes to express his feelings directly. Discuss this inevitable struggle for subjectivity. Director Hong's little humor still works, just take a look and watch it.