Speaker 1: On the Doll Cast, the questions asked if movies have
Speaker 1: women and um are all their discussions just boyfriends and
Speaker 1: husbands or do they have individualism the patriarchy? Zef In
Speaker 1: best start changing it with the Bell Cast. Hey, Jamie Caitlin,
Speaker 1: I just wanted to say thank you so much for
Speaker 1: giving me a job as your handmaiden. Oh, your welcome,
Speaker 1: And I just want to let you know I'm definitely
Speaker 1: not trying to trick you and steal your fortune or
Speaker 1: anything like that. Okay, well, I guess while we're on
Speaker 1: the topic, I wanted to let you know that I'm
Speaker 1: definitely not three steps ahead of you what with the trick,
Speaker 1: and I'm tricking you based on your trick, and your
Speaker 1: trick is actually a whole distraction. And it doesn't matter
Speaker 1: because we're going to fall in love at the end.
Speaker 1: At the end, all the tricks cancel each other out
Speaker 1: and it's uh, and we're gonna go on a boat.
Speaker 1: I love that for us, Good for us. Yeah, I'm
Speaker 1: gonna seem I'm gonna seem like I've never been outside.
Speaker 1: But here's a twist. I have been outside a couple
Speaker 1: of times. Okay, at least all right, well, I love
Speaker 1: that we're learning so much about each other. We're in love.
Speaker 1: What can you do? Hello, and welcome to the Bechtel Cast.
Speaker 1: Perfect intro as usual, amazing, we nailed it. My name
Speaker 1: is Caitlin Darante, my name is Jamie Loftus. And this
Speaker 1: is our podcast where we look at your favorite movies,
Speaker 1: your least favorite movies, movies that you don't know how
Speaker 1: to feel about, using an intersectional feminist lens. And we
Speaker 1: use the Bechtel test simply as a jumping off point
Speaker 1: to initiate a larger conversation. And the Bechtel test is
Speaker 1: a media metric created by queer cartoonist Alison Bechtel, sometimes
Speaker 1: called the Bechtel Wallace Test, and it has many versions,
Speaker 1: and the one that we are using these days, and
Speaker 1: let's and and and we also have been finessing this formula.
Speaker 1: We've been finessing our little, our little twist on it
Speaker 1: for half a decade. At this point, it's true. The
Speaker 1: metric that we are using. The caveats, if you will,
Speaker 1: are that a movie has to have two characters of
Speaker 1: any marginalized gender who have names. They must speak to
Speaker 1: each other about something other than a man. And ideally
Speaker 1: their conversation is meaningful, plot relevant, not just a throwaway
Speaker 1: exchange of dialogue or maybe it's in the case of
Speaker 1: this movie, a deceitful exchange. I love a good deceitful exchange.
Speaker 1: You know what it's allowed. And then something that we
Speaker 1: should bring up more often. Um, but it's especially relevant
Speaker 1: for a movie like this is that the test originally
Speaker 1: appearing in Alison Becktel's Decks to Watch out For. In
Speaker 1: the context for that was that Alison Becktel's characters, who
Speaker 1: are queer women, would watch movies and pay attention to
Speaker 1: if the female characters in the movies they're watching speak
Speaker 1: to each other, and if so, do they talk about
Speaker 1: things besides a man? Because if so, then Alison Bechtel's
Speaker 1: characters could ship them together and pretend that they were
Speaker 1: lesbians in the movie that they're watching. So that is
Speaker 1: the origins of the Bechtel test, speaking to the piss
Speaker 1: poor representation of any queer people in movies at the
Speaker 1: time the comic was published back in A five right,
Speaker 1: and then for a movie like this, no shipping required
Speaker 1: because the care actors do that for you. It's cannon. Yes,
Speaker 1: So the movie that we're talking about today is The Handmaiden,
Speaker 1: and we have a guest joining us. She's a pal
Speaker 1: of ours. She's a cyber security engineer. It's so young
Speaker 1: chan Hi. Hello, welcome, Thank you for having me, thanks
Speaker 1: for being here, for being here. So we're interested in
Speaker 1: what is your relationship, your history, your general impression of
Speaker 1: The Handmaiden. Um. Yeah, I thought it was pretty wild
Speaker 1: from start to finish. Um. These types of movies don't
Speaker 1: don't really come out that much from South Korea because
Speaker 1: Korea is a pretty conservative country still, so this was
Speaker 1: a big shock when it came out featuring two lesbian
Speaker 1: women and that that never that never happens. But I
Speaker 1: thought it was overall really really good, really new and
Speaker 1: groundbreaking for Korea. So that's what I thought. It was
Speaker 1: pretty cool. Yeah. Oh, I can't wait to talk about
Speaker 1: it more. Jamie, what about you. I hadn't seen this
Speaker 1: movie yet, and it rocked my world. I really like
Speaker 1: movies that really keep you on your toes like this
Speaker 1: where I guess if you haven't seen this movie, I
Speaker 1: would recommend honestly watching it because listening to us, like
Speaker 1: some movies, I feel fine spoiling for our listeners, but
Speaker 1: this movie. I'm so glad I didn't know any of
Speaker 1: the twists going in, because sometimes I'll go into a
Speaker 1: movie being like I've seen I've seen it all, and
Speaker 1: then it turns out, guess what. I like half of
Speaker 1: my notes from the first half of the movie, I
Speaker 1: had to like highlight being like just kidding, I am,
Speaker 1: I am the fool, Like they got my ass. It's
Speaker 1: so tightly written, and I just, yeah, this was my
Speaker 1: my first time. I've seen it twice. I feel like
Speaker 1: this is a movie that really delivers on a rewatch
Speaker 1: and I just really enjoyed it. Holy holy shit. I
Speaker 1: am just not as smart as this movie. I'm not
Speaker 1: operating on this level. And it was a pleasure to
Speaker 1: be in a world where I was like, oh, yeah,
Speaker 1: I would have Um, I don't know what would have
Speaker 1: happened to be if I existed in this world. I
Speaker 1: would have I would have just died because everyone is
Speaker 1: operating like everyone's playing four D h S the entire movie.
Speaker 1: It's wonderful. Yeah, Caitlyn, what's your history of this movie? O?
Speaker 1: G whiz. I saw it not right when it came out,
Speaker 1: but I remember there being buzz around it because it
Speaker 1: was released in the US sometime I think in the
Speaker 1: back half of and then it won the Oscar for
Speaker 1: Best Movie not in the English language. Yeah, for like
Speaker 1: the Oscars. So I was like, oh, all right, got
Speaker 1: to see it. Exciting. So I was still getting Netflix
Speaker 1: devids at the time, so I took it upon myself
Speaker 1: to borrow rent or whatever have Netflix send me a DVD.
Speaker 1: And I don't normally do this, but I watched the
Speaker 1: movie and then as soon as it was over, I
Speaker 1: immediately watched it again because I was like, WHOA, holy shit.
Speaker 1: I don't even want to process that. I just want
Speaker 1: to like rewatch it and just have a better understanding
Speaker 1: of what happened, because, like you said, there's so many twists,
Speaker 1: there's so many layers there's and so I've seen the
Speaker 1: movie I think like six or seven times now, and
Speaker 1: every time I watch it, I discover something new or
Speaker 1: like notice like a new little clue, or like a
Speaker 1: bit of foreshadowing or some like plant and payoff, or
Speaker 1: just like some detail that I had overlooked before. So yeah,
Speaker 1: it definitely holds up on a rewatch. The twists are
Speaker 1: so intricate that or like some of the reveals are
Speaker 1: just like I won't remember what happened, so like, every
Speaker 1: time rewatch it, it's like I'm seeing it for the
Speaker 1: first time. So I'm just like, whoa, And it's it's
Speaker 1: beautiful to look at. It's mesmerizing. Yeah, the story is
Speaker 1: so tightly written. I love this movie so and the
Speaker 1: history behind the movie is also really interesting. I didn't
Speaker 1: know about like all the adaptation stuff going on in
Speaker 1: this movie, so I'm very excited to talk about it. Yeah.
Speaker 1: I also, in preparation for this episode, watched the BBC
Speaker 1: like two episode mini series Fingersmith. She's okay, yes, well,
Speaker 1: then I was also like, Sally Hawkins is in this.
Speaker 1: Paddington's mom is in this. Obviously I have to watch it.
Speaker 1: See I always think of Sally Hawkins. I'm about to
Speaker 1: sound like I hate women. I'm like, she's the lady
Speaker 1: who had sex with the fish in the movie. I
Speaker 1: know that lady, but that was reductive and I apologize,
Speaker 1: but she did have sex with a fish. I mean,
Speaker 1: you're not wrong, I'm not, but I should remember the
Speaker 1: character's name. I just know it was Sally Hawkins. Well,
Speaker 1: she's definitely Mrs Brown in the Paddington franchise, so I
Speaker 1: did watch Fingersmith, and um, do you like it? I
Speaker 1: did it, So just some context for anyone who's um
Speaker 1: not aware. This movie is based on a novel called
Speaker 1: Fingersmith by Sarah Waters that was published in two two
Speaker 1: I think so obviously we did not read the book
Speaker 1: because we famously on this podcast do not read books.
Speaker 1: It probably won't to stop people from getting mad at
Speaker 1: us for not reading a book, but listen, the show
Speaker 1: is free. I don't know what to tell you, but
Speaker 1: I did watch this adaptation and probably like the second
Speaker 1: half of Fingersmith is pretty wildly different from the second
Speaker 1: half of The Handmaiden, where I like the ending of
Speaker 1: the hand Made In way better. And I don't know
Speaker 1: if that's just because like I saw it first and
Speaker 1: my brain just works that way, where I'm like, well,
Speaker 1: the first thing I saw is the thing that I
Speaker 1: like better because it happens all the time with me.
Speaker 1: But uh, I don't know. I feel that it gives
Speaker 1: the characters more agency. Yeah, I I like the handmade
Speaker 1: in better. I like the narrative choices that were made there.
Speaker 1: So yeah, it's a It's the rare movie where I
Speaker 1: feel like we're constantly complaining about how movies are. Movies
Speaker 1: are long, but this movie is two and a half
Speaker 1: hours long, and it does not feel two and a
Speaker 1: half hours long, which is incredible a miracle. Yeah, should
Speaker 1: I get into the recap? Yeah, yeah, let's let's do it.
Speaker 1: And so I feel free to jump in at any time.
Speaker 1: It's a free for all. Absolutely, thank you. Okay. So
Speaker 1: the story takes place in Japanese occupied Korea, so both
Speaker 1: Korean and Japan These are spoken by almost every major
Speaker 1: character throughout the movie. I believe we are in the thirties,
Speaker 1: although the decade wasn't super clear, but I read in
Speaker 1: interviews that, yeah, it's supposed to be the thirties. Okay. Cool.
Speaker 1: The story is divided into three parts. Part one, we
Speaker 1: meet Suki, a pickpocket, a forger. She's like a common thief.
Speaker 1: We also meet a Korean man from a low class
Speaker 1: who is masquerading as a Japanese nobleman. He's going by
Speaker 1: the name Count Fujiwara. I kept calling him Count all
Speaker 1: off in my head because anytime someone introduces themselves as account,
Speaker 1: I was like, okay, all counts are con men. This
Speaker 1: is a trend in media. All accounts are lying about
Speaker 1: being a count and they're where they're always wearing a
Speaker 1: hat and um lying, that's my knowledge accounts and I
Speaker 1: think that's canon. Yeah, this Ivan does this count challenge
Speaker 1: that he does not, it's true. So he helps Suki
Speaker 1: get a job as a handmaiden to Lady Hitigo, and
Speaker 1: he does this because he intends to seduce Lady Hitiko,
Speaker 1: marry her, put her in like quote, a madhouse so
Speaker 1: that he can steal her fortune, and he needs Suki's
Speaker 1: help to do all this. So Suki, using a fake name,
Speaker 1: meets Lady Hideko and starts tending to her. She spends
Speaker 1: most of her days helping her uncle Kazuki with his
Speaker 1: rare books, which he collects and sells, and then he
Speaker 1: also hosts private events where Hitiko does readings from the
Speaker 1: books for rich Japanese gentleman rights. And the meaning of
Speaker 1: rare books is really stretched and challenged later in Yes,
Speaker 1: her uncle is It becomes apparent pretty early on, and
Speaker 1: then even more apparent later on that he is extremely
Speaker 1: creepy and he's also trying to marry how to go
Speaker 1: to get access to her fortune also something that count
Speaker 1: all offs trying to do all the time, just a
Speaker 1: lot of count connections here? Oh my god? Right, counts
Speaker 1: are always trying to marry people under false pretenses to
Speaker 1: get access to a fortune. I need to write a
Speaker 1: think piece about this. Doesn't count all off pretend to
Speaker 1: be those children's uncle too, or some family member. He
Speaker 1: pretends to be a distant relative in order to adopt them.
Speaker 1: I mean, I didn't, I didn't even put that together.
Speaker 1: If anyone ever introduces them as a count, walk away,
Speaker 1: they're lying. What's the story of the count of Money
Speaker 1: Monte Crystal? Oh? I know I saw that movie, but
Speaker 1: no idea. I feel like there's some deception involved there
Speaker 1: as well. Is okay, this is not the Count of
Speaker 1: Monte Cristo. Is that related to the sandwich? Or is
Speaker 1: the sandwich a separate thing? Monte Cristo sandwich? Is Monte
Speaker 1: Cristo a place? Um? I think they're also. I was
Speaker 1: just born this morning. I think they're all extremely not
Speaker 1: only connected, but identical. What is even in a Monte
Speaker 1: Cristo sandwich? You know what I'm that's one where they
Speaker 1: like there's ham and there's cheese, and you're like panini
Speaker 1: it and then there's like powdered sugar on top. There's
Speaker 1: always such a scam. When someone makes a very simple
Speaker 1: sandwich sounds extremely fancy and they're like, it's it's like
Speaker 1: Monte Cristo at seventeen dollars, and then you get it.
Speaker 1: You're like, this is ham and cheese. How dare you anyway?
Speaker 1: Speaking of the Count, yes, he gets to work on
Speaker 1: seducing Lady Hideko under the guise of giving her painting lessons. Meanwhile,
Speaker 1: Suki and Heideko are getting closer and they are clearly
Speaker 1: attracted to each other. And the further into the scam
Speaker 1: Suki gets of like helping the fake Count Mary hidego,
Speaker 1: the more Suki wants to back out, especially after one
Speaker 1: night when Lady Hideko wants Suki to teach her how
Speaker 1: to kiss so that she will be ready to kiss
Speaker 1: the Count, and then they end up having very steamy sex.
Speaker 1: Suki has no choice but to keep going along with
Speaker 1: the scam, and the two of them run away. They
Speaker 1: travel with the Count to Japan, the Count Mary's Hideko,
Speaker 1: and then he and Suki take Hideko to be institutionalized.
Speaker 1: But wait a minute, turns out it the Count and
Speaker 1: Hiteko had been the ones who were tricking Suki and
Speaker 1: they send Suki to the institution. I gasped right when
Speaker 1: edeko uh. At first, I was like, what is going on?
Speaker 1: Because she hugs Suki and then she walks backward really quickly,
Speaker 1: and I was like, what is happening? And then it
Speaker 1: was the twist. But wait, there's more. There's more. There's
Speaker 1: two more parts. So this is the beginning of part two.
Speaker 1: We learned what the real situation is with Lady Hiteko.
Speaker 1: She's not this like virginal, naive lady that we all
Speaker 1: thought she was. The books of her uncle's that she
Speaker 1: does readings for our very pornographic something that he's been
Speaker 1: training her to do ever since she was a child,
Speaker 1: which is what disgusting. Yeah, and this is like, this
Speaker 1: is something he's done with like other members of the family,
Speaker 1: to like with her aunt as well. Yeah, it's a
Speaker 1: whole thing. Yes, So when the Count first meets her,
Speaker 1: he realizes that he would never be able to seduce her,
Speaker 1: so then he forms a different plan, which is to
Speaker 1: collaborate with her, take her away from this place and
Speaker 1: set her free, and then they will split her fortune.
Speaker 1: And then it's her idea to find a handmaiden and
Speaker 1: send her to the institution under her name. So then
Speaker 1: a lot of the same story beats play out that
Speaker 1: we've seen before, but this time through hiokos point of view,
Speaker 1: with like Suki arriving and tending to her and convincing
Speaker 1: her that she's in love with the count. But then eventually,
Speaker 1: because Hitiko and Suki are falling in love, Hiteko also
Speaker 1: wants to back out of the plan right and then
Speaker 1: finally the two of them reveal to each other that
Speaker 1: they have been tricking each other. So seen is so
Speaker 1: good but scary but good. Where Lady hit the I
Speaker 1: goes about to take her own life. She's about to
Speaker 1: hang herself, and then Suki catches her, and everyone watching
Speaker 1: the scene has an anxiety attack of like, I hope
Speaker 1: that she has strong arms, uh, and this whole scene
Speaker 1: have it's It's really good. These two actors together are
Speaker 1: incredible for sure. So now their new plan is to
Speaker 1: team up with each other against Count Fujiwara, and then
Speaker 1: right before they're about to run away, they also destroy
Speaker 1: the Uncle's treasured book collection as basically a like fuck
Speaker 1: you dude gesture, and then we realize that when Suki
Speaker 1: is taken to the institution. It's all part of the plan.
Speaker 1: So then part three is Suki escapes from the institution
Speaker 1: by lighting it on fire. I was slightly confused about
Speaker 1: the logistics, but by that point in the movie I
Speaker 1: was like, Yeah, sure, she liked it on fire. I
Speaker 1: believe it. Meanwhile, Hitiko drugs the Count, escapes and meets
Speaker 1: up with Suki. They flee and get on a ferry
Speaker 1: to Shanghai. And then the Count has been captured and
Speaker 1: brought back to the uncle's estate where the uncle tortures him.
Speaker 1: And then the Count smokes a couple of cigarettes laced
Speaker 1: with mercury, which poisons the air and kills both the men,
Speaker 1: and then we cut back to the ferry where Suki
Speaker 1: and Hitiko have more steamy sex. And that's how the
Speaker 1: movie ends. So let's take a quick break and then
Speaker 1: we will come back to discuss. And we're back, where
Speaker 1: do we Caitlin, I'm genuinely curious just to start, what
Speaker 1: is different about the ending of the BBC adaptation, because
Speaker 1: I know that the largest adaptation change is obviously changing
Speaker 1: the setting and the I think the time period was
Speaker 1: shifted as well. I think it's a Victorian England to
Speaker 1: nineteen thirties Japan and Korea. But what what is different
Speaker 1: about like the plot points of the ending. So yeah,
Speaker 1: the first half plays out basically the same, but in
Speaker 1: Fingersmith the two women never collaborate. They never say, oh,
Speaker 1: you're tricking me, I was tricking you. Wow, Let's team
Speaker 1: up together and take down these male oppressors. That does
Speaker 1: not happen. Instead, the handmade in character ends up in
Speaker 1: the institution and then stays there for a while, does
Speaker 1: still escape. Meanwhile, the lady character like is taken to
Speaker 1: London after this marriage, and she keeps trying to escape
Speaker 1: and they're like, no, we still have to get your
Speaker 1: fortune from you. Uh. So she eventually is able to
Speaker 1: run away and goes to one of like the book
Speaker 1: collectors that her uncle knows, but then he turns her away,
Speaker 1: so she has to go back to the home base
Speaker 1: of all the like the Thief House, basically in London, which,
Speaker 1: by the way, the sort of like matron character is
Speaker 1: played by Amelda Staunton, who is of course Aunt Lucy
Speaker 1: from Paddington's Okay I'm with Yes, So there's a lot
Speaker 1: of Paddington connections in Fingersmith. So and then that like
Speaker 1: matriarch character is like, hey, royal lady person, by the way,
Speaker 1: you were switched at birth with this handmaiden lady, and
Speaker 1: so she's the actual lady, and you're I think maybe
Speaker 1: I'm getting that totally wrong because things got also very
Speaker 1: confusing at that part. The handmaiden is better. Yeah what
Speaker 1: I'm hearing right, Yeah, So there's some like switched at
Speaker 1: birth scandal can't introduce switched at birth at the end
Speaker 1: this fourth grade. And then so the count guy who
Speaker 1: they call whose name is like the gentleman in Fingersmith,
Speaker 1: comes around at some point and gets murdered by unclear
Speaker 1: which person it was. It was either like the lady
Speaker 1: or the Amelda Stanton character, but Amelti Stans character takes
Speaker 1: the blame for it, and then she is hanged. So
Speaker 1: that sort of now that all these people are dead,
Speaker 1: she goes back to her like estate with all the books,
Speaker 1: and then Sally Hawk like the handmaid and character comes
Speaker 1: back and they sort of like reconcile. So the huge
Speaker 1: difference is that there's never a team up. There's never
Speaker 1: like a co conspirator like let's take the men down
Speaker 1: kind of thing. They just sort of like have to
Speaker 1: forgive each other, and then there's some like class stuff
Speaker 1: of like you're not who you think you are, and
Speaker 1: it's also kind of confusing. So that's Fingersmith. It sounds interesting,
Speaker 1: but long I like this better. Yeah, okay, well, thank you,
Speaker 1: thank you for thank you for sharing that. I I
Speaker 1: wasn't aware how how much the source material deviated from
Speaker 1: this adaptation. Yeah, it's pretty significant. Or I mean again,
Speaker 1: because we haven't read the book. Who who knows what
Speaker 1: happens there? Who knows how much that BBC adapt adaptation
Speaker 1: deviated from the original source material. But The Handmaiden is
Speaker 1: pretty drastically different in the second half of it from
Speaker 1: Fingersmith the BBC series, UM got it? Yeah, so yeah.
Speaker 1: And because of that, one of the things I like
Speaker 1: about this movie so much is that it's a story
Speaker 1: about men trying to exploit women and pit women against
Speaker 1: each other, which doesn't work because the women talk to
Speaker 1: each other and then they're like, wait a minute, these
Speaker 1: men are trying to suck us over, so they instead
Speaker 1: team up and punish. They're like again the male oppressors,
Speaker 1: and then they get together and they live happily ever after. God,
Speaker 1: I hope so or at least happily on the ferry,
Speaker 1: they at least have an amazing cruise. So as you
Speaker 1: started to talk about So Young in terms of like
Speaker 1: this being a pretty groundbreaking film for South Korean cinema,
Speaker 1: in terms of it's like queer representation, Yeah, just curious
Speaker 1: if you have any other thoughts on that or yeah,
Speaker 1: because you know, queer representation, it's just it's not there's
Speaker 1: not a lot in Korean media and stuff like that,
Speaker 1: even in you know, songs and stuff, and while it's
Speaker 1: still while it's changing and people are becoming a lot
Speaker 1: more open to it, it's still not on the forefront
Speaker 1: like it is in America or you know, other countries.
Speaker 1: So this was a you know, this was a pretty
Speaker 1: big deal for not even it's not even like two
Speaker 1: gay men, because that would have been still more something
Speaker 1: that you would see, but to two women that that
Speaker 1: is unheard of. So this was, Yeah, this was pretty
Speaker 1: groundbreaking in that way, and I appreciate it. I saw,
Speaker 1: like I guess, mixed reception of of the sex scenes
Speaker 1: and how they were filmed and framed, and I'm interested
Speaker 1: to talk about that as well. But I did appreciate that, like,
Speaker 1: this movie is not shy at all about what it's
Speaker 1: about and about this like intense sexual connection that these
Speaker 1: two women have, because I feel like we I mean,
Speaker 1: even in covering other movies on this podcast, you know,
Speaker 1: very often when there is a relationship between two women,
Speaker 1: you get a fade to black situation or you you
Speaker 1: don't get the sex scene that appears in many PG
Speaker 1: thirteen movies between a man and a woman. And so
Speaker 1: I was, yeah, pleasantly surprised to see. I was like, oh,
Speaker 1: we're we're getting sex scenes. That's exciting. I'm very pro sex,
Speaker 1: especially like and this would have been more common in
Speaker 1: at least like older American movies. But I just remember
Speaker 1: that episode that we did on Fried Green Tomatoes where
Speaker 1: the source material like more explicitly makes it clear that
Speaker 1: the characters are queer. But then the movie, because it's
Speaker 1: like a movie from the nineties, not even suggests it.
Speaker 1: It's just like they're friends. They're friends who don't kiss
Speaker 1: each other like they're friends, and they lived together for
Speaker 1: such a long time, which based on how you described,
Speaker 1: like the history of queer representation in South Korean cinema
Speaker 1: so young, you might expect there to be more of
Speaker 1: a like coding of like that relationship. Even if like
Speaker 1: the two characters like do team up and like screw
Speaker 1: over the men, that the precedent was set, it sounds
Speaker 1: like to not get very explicit about the nature of
Speaker 1: their relationship. So the fact that we do it is
Speaker 1: very explicit, and we do see steamy sex scenes, which
Speaker 1: again we'll talk about. But yeah, I was like, I
Speaker 1: thought that was I thought that was really cool because
Speaker 1: I did a little bit of just kind of I'm
Speaker 1: by no means an expert in Korean media and certainly
Speaker 1: not in like queer representation of it. But there is
Speaker 1: a very helpful Wikipedia, our favorite scholarly journal page specifically
Speaker 1: about queer representation in Korean media and that how according
Speaker 1: to two scholars pill Ho Kim and see Colin Singer,
Speaker 1: there are three pretty distinct waves of queer representation in
Speaker 1: Korean cinema. Where there's like an invisible age from nine
Speaker 1: seven where there was like minimal, very minimal l g
Speaker 1: B t Q plus representation in film. But those films
Speaker 1: were like relegated to the sidelines, like they didn't get publicity,
Speaker 1: they were not mainstream. Most people didn't see them. They
Speaker 1: like flew under the radar, and then there was the
Speaker 1: Camouflage age from two thousand four, where representation grew during
Speaker 1: that period, but queer characters and themes were still sidelined
Speaker 1: and overshadowed by more heteronormative characters and themes. And then
Speaker 1: finally the blockbuster age from two five to the present,
Speaker 1: where cultural acceptance of queer people in queer communities in
Speaker 1: South Korea as well as queer representation in media has
Speaker 1: just kind of like been on the rise and been
Speaker 1: more tolerated and accepted. So which like doesn't sound that
Speaker 1: unlike the trend of queer representation and American Hollywood cinema
Speaker 1: to be honest. Yeah, it's just a little slower, a
Speaker 1: little more behind, right. Another trip that I really liked
Speaker 1: that this movie because we've we've been covering a number
Speaker 1: of query movies recently, and I think it was in
Speaker 1: our Portrait of a Lady on Fire episode where we
Speaker 1: discussed the trope that it's also a very white trope ordinarily,
Speaker 1: but when there is a period piece with a lesbian
Speaker 1: couple that it's all very doomed, it's all very like it.
Speaker 1: It never ends well for the couple. The couple never
Speaker 1: is able to survive the adversity, which is in some
Speaker 1: ways at odds with many historical examples, but that is
Speaker 1: the trend that movies have taken. And so when I
Speaker 1: when I learned this was a period piece, I was like, Oh, no,
Speaker 1: are we going to get another you know, doomed queer
Speaker 1: couple that and and we don't they win? Like they win,
Speaker 1: and I mean it was I guess it does kind
Speaker 1: of demonstrate how going for scraps we still have to
Speaker 1: be at times. But I was like, they their their
Speaker 1: love survives, they overcome the adversity. It's not like, you know,
Speaker 1: an ending where they're just like, I wonder what could
Speaker 1: have been, Like they're on the damn boat having sex.
Speaker 1: I was thrilled that that they ended up together at
Speaker 1: the end, And because it's yeah, and in period pieces especially,
Speaker 1: I feel like that is kind of rare. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think it legit shocked me given the historical context of
Speaker 1: the of the movie, because you know, during that time,
Speaker 1: it was like a lot of people died, so it
Speaker 1: wouldn't it wouldn't have been strange to kind of see
Speaker 1: that ending with the fact that it was a happy ending.
Speaker 1: I mean, that was that was amazing. I was like, absolutely,
Speaker 1: I'm here for it. Yeah. In the Catharsis of like
Speaker 1: the two men dying, cut to two women just like
Speaker 1: putting jingle bells in there for joying and having a ball.
Speaker 1: I guess that's one literally no pun intended having a ball,
Speaker 1: and oh god, the that. There were moments where I like,
Speaker 1: this movie is just straight up smarter than me in
Speaker 1: certain ways where I was like, oh, yeah, like I
Speaker 1: know that the bell. I was like, the bell is
Speaker 1: a metaphorical object. I can pick up on that much.
Speaker 1: And so when they're fucking each other with the bells,
Speaker 1: I'm like, this means something. I don't know what, but
Speaker 1: definitely something. It's a metaphorical thing. And I and and sure,
Speaker 1: and I totally understand. Yeah, I don't know what the
Speaker 1: bells are a metaphor for, but I feel like I
Speaker 1: don't need to know. I don't know. I every time
Speaker 1: I'm just like, it's a metaphor for dot dot patriarchy.
Speaker 1: I don't actually really know. Uh. I think the bells
Speaker 1: they were in um one of the books that the
Speaker 1: lady she read. I think they're just kind of like, oh,
Speaker 1: I'm going to reclaim it. You know, it's not part
Speaker 1: of this weird, creepy whatever thing that I'm doing from
Speaker 1: my uncle. It's like our love things. That's what I thought.
Speaker 1: I don't know, because it's like uses their uses a
Speaker 1: weapon at one point, and okay, maybe I do understand. Oh,
Speaker 1: but those are a different set of metal balls that
Speaker 1: are used, like Okay, then I'm lost again. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think that was stove, that was right. The bells Okay, no,
Speaker 1: they look similar, but no, but you're right, so young
Speaker 1: where she was, because it's this difference of she's being
Speaker 1: forced against her will to read these stories solely for
Speaker 1: the sake of the pleasure of all of these men,
Speaker 1: and then when we actually see her use those toys, materials,
Speaker 1: the items, the bells, the bells, now, it's like they're
Speaker 1: on her terms and she's not doing it for these
Speaker 1: creepy men. She's doing it for herself. So it's like
Speaker 1: a nice, just symbolic thing. I also noticed in that
Speaker 1: scene when she's reading about because that's the only scene
Speaker 1: I think where she's doing a reading from one of
Speaker 1: those books that does involve two women, and we see
Speaker 1: her like pat her little handkerchief, like pat down her
Speaker 1: like perspiration, as if to say, Wow, that actually got
Speaker 1: me excited because of all the other the other scenes
Speaker 1: where she's doing readings about like a penis going into
Speaker 1: a vagina, She's just like not interested, do not care,
Speaker 1: and a penis going into a vagina in a pretty
Speaker 1: a pretty mean way most of the time, like that
Speaker 1: they're they're not they're very unpleasant stories that all these
Speaker 1: guys are getting extremely aroused by. It's all like, I mean,
Speaker 1: I guess that that is like so much of what
Speaker 1: comes up in the movie is like the the men
Speaker 1: of this story policing and controlling the women in their
Speaker 1: lives and controlling their bodies sexually, controlling their bodies in
Speaker 1: terms of like Lady Hideko is literally like trapped in
Speaker 1: this castle kind of Princess Peach style, and it's it's
Speaker 1: like about the extreme control of women's bodies and and
Speaker 1: an attempt to control their minds which doesn't succeed. But yeah,
Speaker 1: I don't know, I mean, it's it's so And and
Speaker 1: then also in the case of the uncle, this really
Speaker 1: volatile nature of like repeated intimidation of his wife who
Speaker 1: eventually takes her own life, and and his niece. No
Speaker 1: he it's implied that he kills her, but but it's
Speaker 1: played off as though she killed herself. But in any case,
Speaker 1: like it repeatedly like instilling them with fear and threats,
Speaker 1: and then when they respond to that, they're framed as
Speaker 1: hysterical in this very I mean, I guess you're like, well,
Speaker 1: it's theties, of course that is happening. But um, it
Speaker 1: was interesting seeing it framed the way it was, where
Speaker 1: it was like even with that deception that they're like, oh,
Speaker 1: she she took her own life, you know, because she
Speaker 1: you know, she was suffering from something that we don't
Speaker 1: really know what was going on, when it's like so
Speaker 1: clear what is going on in this house where women
Speaker 1: are just brutalized and if I don't know, I mean
Speaker 1: it's it's it's really brutal in some um in some
Speaker 1: sections of this movie, to the point where you know,
Speaker 1: when the when the count and the uncle kind of
Speaker 1: get their come up into at the end, you're like,
Speaker 1: thank god, Uh yeah, especially with the reveal that the
Speaker 1: uncle has been basically grooming her since childhood to read
Speaker 1: this like erotic literature, that's straight up child sex abuse.
Speaker 1: And so when he keels over and dies, I was like,
Speaker 1: it's about damned time. Um, let's take another quick break
Speaker 1: and then we will be right back, and we're back.
Speaker 1: We we've referenced this already. But so Fingersmith was the
Speaker 1: inspiration for this story. It sounds like it deviates kind
Speaker 1: of significantly in the back half. But um, I was,
Speaker 1: you know, pleasantly surprised, knowing nothing about the background of
Speaker 1: this movie, to find that it had been adapted by
Speaker 1: a text by a queer woman, by a Welsh author
Speaker 1: named Sarah Waters, who wrote this in two thousand two.
Speaker 1: And I thought that just I don't know all the
Speaker 1: information on adapting this movie and adapting that story to
Speaker 1: Japan and Korea in this time period. I I learned
Speaker 1: a lot, having h having gotten you know, a piss
Speaker 1: poor American education that this same this period of history
Speaker 1: in Korea and Japan. I was not well versed in.
Speaker 1: I knew kind of the main bullet points, but learning
Speaker 1: more about the annexation of Korea and just the complete culture,
Speaker 1: erasure and colonialism that was going on at this time
Speaker 1: was not something that I was very well versed in.
Speaker 1: And it doesn't sound like it was something that Sarah Waters,
Speaker 1: a Welsh author, was very well first in as well,
Speaker 1: and so there will link this in the description. But
Speaker 1: it's just a very interesting adaptation story. Where Sarah Waters
Speaker 1: was at first, um not sure whether Park Chun Wook,
Speaker 1: who is the director of this movie and many other movies.
Speaker 1: He's kind of has a reputation for being a hyper
Speaker 1: masculine director, like he directs pretty like he directed Old Boy.
Speaker 1: He directed all these like really male driven movies, and
Speaker 1: so at first she was like, I don't does this
Speaker 1: make sense. Once they like discussed collaborating and hester and
Speaker 1: and he also wrote this script with female co writer
Speaker 1: Chung I hope that I'm getting right Chung cho kieong um,
Speaker 1: who he's worked with a number of times over the years.
Speaker 1: So he had he had a female co writer and
Speaker 1: they proposed this time shift, and that was what got
Speaker 1: Sarah Waters on board. So I just I don't know,
Speaker 1: it's it's it's a really cool story of and I
Speaker 1: feel like this time period in the setting like fit
Speaker 1: the stories so effortlessly and also kind of I mean,
Speaker 1: based on what you're saying about the BBC adaptation, Caitlin,
Speaker 1: sounds like it sort of expands the scope of what
Speaker 1: the story is able to explore because it's you know,
Speaker 1: not only is it examining class in a lot of ways,
Speaker 1: and it's like examining queerness and it's examining patriarchy, but
Speaker 1: it's also touching on this you know, extreme period of
Speaker 1: colonialism and really aggressive cultural erasure in a way. It
Speaker 1: sounds like the source material didn't because of where, where
Speaker 1: and when it was set. So um, yeah, yeah, it's
Speaker 1: just a really interesting story. Yeah. Like I was like,
Speaker 1: turns out I know nothing about this period of history.
Speaker 1: Let me read the Wikipedia page. And it's just like
Speaker 1: in the US, we're just like not taught about this
Speaker 1: period of time at all. Yeah, so, uh, this movie
Speaker 1: inspired me to like learn about it. So I did
Speaker 1: read the first several paragraphs of the Wikipedia page about it. Well,
Speaker 1: we'll link to some resources in uh in the description
Speaker 1: as well, if you like us got a very limited
Speaker 1: shitty education the United States. Yeah, I just wanted to add, like,
Speaker 1: I think one of the interesting things is, like, so
Speaker 1: the brutality of the men, right, the men were pretty
Speaker 1: terrible and they did pretty terrible things. But during this time,
Speaker 1: you know, there was a lot of anti Japanese sentiment
Speaker 1: obviously because of what was happening and I thought it
Speaker 1: was really interesting because these two men are very pro Japanese, right,
Speaker 1: they want, you know, doing all these things, but they're Korean,
Speaker 1: and so it kind of showed the whole, you know,
Speaker 1: in my personal opinion, it showed a whole like all
Speaker 1: the Koreans who kind of portrayed, you know, our country
Speaker 1: in a sense, we're worse than the Japanese people who
Speaker 1: invaded our country. So I did find that that's a
Speaker 1: very interesting framing of that from pac John because you know,
Speaker 1: during this time it was such a you know, was
Speaker 1: obviously about time, but kind of that shine through the
Speaker 1: very you know, don't be this type of person during
Speaker 1: this horrible time in which you know, this thing's happened.
Speaker 1: So yeah, yeah, totally. Yeah. There there's like that whole
Speaker 1: conversation they have where it's like a reveal later in
Speaker 1: the movie that the uncle has done the same thing
Speaker 1: that the Count is in the middle of doing, which
Speaker 1: is yeah, you know, saying their their Japanese when they
Speaker 1: are not and being generally villainous. And but there's like
Speaker 1: that whole conversation they have where the uncle is talking
Speaker 1: about how he that Korea is ugly and Japan is beautiful,
Speaker 1: and the Count says, oh, you know, that's interesting. I've
Speaker 1: heard people say the exact opposite, and it's like the
Speaker 1: I don't know, I mean, and again I'm I'm not
Speaker 1: extremely educated in this period of history at all, but
Speaker 1: just even opening this story to make room for discussion
Speaker 1: about that, and it does seem like Park chinook Is
Speaker 1: is making kind of a value judgment of of these
Speaker 1: characters through their behavior outside of of the colonial history.
Speaker 1: It's it's it's it's you know, I never want to
Speaker 1: see someone's fingers chopped off by like a paper cutter. Uh.
Speaker 1: I guess that's the end of the sentence. But you know,
Speaker 1: it's like if it had to happen to someone, I'm like,
Speaker 1: the Count is terrible, and and as the as the
Speaker 1: story goes on, you just realize more more angles from
Speaker 1: which he is terrible, and so when they take his
Speaker 1: fingers off with a paper cutter, it's like, you know, yeah, okay, fine, fine,
Speaker 1: I'll allow it. Yeah no, Uh, both the Count and
Speaker 1: the uncle got what they deserved as far as I'm concerned,
Speaker 1: because you know, they're both abusers, their manipulators. I mean,
Speaker 1: we see a scene where the Count tries to sexually
Speaker 1: assault Hittigo. These are awful, awful men, and so I
Speaker 1: appreciate that we see toxic male behavior being punished because
Speaker 1: they end up dying because the women were very clever
Speaker 1: in their like orchestration of this scheme to get back
Speaker 1: at them. And I thought that was really cool to see.
Speaker 1: You often don't see toxic male behavior punished in movies.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I just appreciated that a lot. And it
Speaker 1: does seem like they really I mean, both of those
Speaker 1: characters are leve viridging the most dominant advantage they have,
Speaker 1: which is the fact that they're men. And it is
Speaker 1: I feel like any you know, any empathy you could
Speaker 1: generate for these characters, who are to an extent in
Speaker 1: a really difficult situation as Korean men at this time
Speaker 1: of intense colonialism, is completely undercut by the fact that
Speaker 1: they're taking it out on the women around them, the
Speaker 1: people who have less power than them, and elevating themselves
Speaker 1: at the expense of the people who have less power.
Speaker 1: And there's there were some like interesting moments I found
Speaker 1: interesting with account where he says these things that sound
Speaker 1: so cutting and cruel, but you can sort of understand
Speaker 1: why he's saying them, even if you don't agree with it.
Speaker 1: Where he's saying, you know, where I come from, it's
Speaker 1: illegal to be naive, and sort of referencing the fact
Speaker 1: that he's from the underclass and he's from he's Korean,
Speaker 1: he's from a really oppressed group of people at this time,
Speaker 1: and so you can understand why he would say that.
Speaker 1: But what he's talking about is deceiving a Korean woman
Speaker 1: and throwing her in jail essentially, and it's yeah, yeah,
Speaker 1: it's almost like blaming her and it's like you shouldn't
Speaker 1: have trusted anybody. Yeah, ever, right, Yeah, it's it's all
Speaker 1: very fascinating and the yeah, the way that these really
Speaker 1: terrible men in the movie are punished for their like
Speaker 1: upholding of the patriarchy is very exciting to watch in
Speaker 1: a way that doesn't really I mean, it kind of
Speaker 1: happens in Fingersmiths, but like, again, the major change that
Speaker 1: I really appreciate is the two women like realizing that
Speaker 1: they're in love with the other. That kind of prompts
Speaker 1: them to admit what's going on. Then they're like, yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm upset that you tricked me, but also I was
Speaker 1: tricking you, so I can't be that upset. But now
Speaker 1: that we know what the real situation is, let's team up.
Speaker 1: And now there's a third trickery happening against the count.
Speaker 1: So I love a movie with tricks. It's exciting. Um,
Speaker 1: should we talk a little bit more about the sex
Speaker 1: scenes slash the mail Gaze. Yeah, let's get into where So,
Speaker 1: like we mentioned, there have been mixed reviews about this
Speaker 1: where some of the discussion around this film was how
Speaker 1: the movie deconstructs or transcends the mail gaze. I think
Speaker 1: more based on the events of the story and how
Speaker 1: like these women team up and collaborate and take down
Speaker 1: the men, rather than the sex scenes themselves. Because other
Speaker 1: critics have been like, um, well, it is a movie
Speaker 1: about lesbians with some graphic sex scenes that were shot
Speaker 1: by a director and cinematographer who are both men, and
Speaker 1: the sex scenes are really long and and quite graphic,
Speaker 1: and you know, there's still male gaze involved because of
Speaker 1: the people who are capturing this imagery and delivering it
Speaker 1: to an audience. And then other people were like, but
Speaker 1: what about the part of the movie where there's like
Speaker 1: a shot from the point of view of Heidako's volva,
Speaker 1: where like we just see Suki like leaning in with
Speaker 1: her tongue out about she had a goal pro on
Speaker 1: her LA is essentially the shot, and so it's like, well,
Speaker 1: how could that be the male gaze when it's literally
Speaker 1: from the point of view of a vagina. And then
Speaker 1: so there's you know, there's a lot of sides to
Speaker 1: this argument. I'm curious how the both of you feel
Speaker 1: about this. I think, Okay, look, I think the sex
Speaker 1: scenes were over the top. That's just my personal opinion.
Speaker 1: I think it was a lot and very graphic and
Speaker 1: almost like unnecessarily graphic, honestly, And I do agree. It's
Speaker 1: a male director, it's a male cinematographer, so there is
Speaker 1: a male gaze there especially. I don't know the director obviously,
Speaker 1: but just kind of like how much do they really
Speaker 1: know about how the sex scene should go, you know,
Speaker 1: and like in other lgbt Q movies. So I'll say, yeah,
Speaker 1: that's like my main criticism it is it's a lot.
Speaker 1: It's definitely almost too much. And I think if you
Speaker 1: didn't have it that graphic or whatever, it wouldn't have
Speaker 1: taken away from the story whatsoever. So I think, yeah,
Speaker 1: I think it was a little too much. I wasn't sure.
Speaker 1: I mean I was interested to read through all the
Speaker 1: different takes, and it's like, you know, if if you
Speaker 1: loved the sex scene, that's great. I didn't. I mean,
Speaker 1: I liked that there was a sex scene there. I
Speaker 1: didn't have any issue with that because I feel like,
Speaker 1: you know, very often, like we're talking about earlier, when
Speaker 1: there's a lesbian relationship, it's all very like Wink wink
Speaker 1: fade to black in mainstream movies, but the scenes are
Speaker 1: very long. They're extremely long. The go pro shot through me. Uh,
Speaker 1: he also get the same sex scene twice from like
Speaker 1: two different points of view. I guess yeah. I mean,
Speaker 1: knowing that it was directed and filmed by men, I
Speaker 1: feel like kind of tells you what you need to know.
Speaker 1: And I was also interested in This came from a
Speaker 1: Guardian profile of Sarah Waters, who wrote Fingersmith at the
Speaker 1: time The Handmaiden came out and kind of like clarified.
Speaker 1: I was like, what is so essentially what it says
Speaker 1: is in in the book, which we're not going to read,
Speaker 1: but in in the book, I guess, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: Sarah Waters very often writes lesbian romances in her work,
Speaker 1: but a lot of what she's known for is just
Speaker 1: talking about women's bodies very frankly, in a way that
Speaker 1: like incorporates things like sweat and like pubic hair and
Speaker 1: just things that are kind of a glossed over and
Speaker 1: a lot of big movie sex scenes and present this
Speaker 1: very idealized version of what lesbian sex looks like. And
Speaker 1: I and that is like made clear in the story too,
Speaker 1: where you know, like when Lady high Deco is reading this,
Speaker 1: you know, pornographic literature, they're referencing the vagina repeatedly as
Speaker 1: like hairless, smooth, like this mythic thing that those who
Speaker 1: have vaginas are, Like, okay, sure, like it's somehow like
Speaker 1: pearly white, made of jade, the jade gates, you know,
Speaker 1: and they're like folds of like gore. You're like, okay,
Speaker 1: but sparkles and shimmers and but there's also other stuff
Speaker 1: going on. Um. And it seems like her work was
Speaker 1: kind of known for just like talking about bodies in
Speaker 1: that way that was like very sexual, but also about
Speaker 1: actual bodies and not this like mythic view of what
Speaker 1: bodies are. And I felt like the sex scenes in
Speaker 1: this movie didn't really meet that where it's still felt
Speaker 1: even though the other side of that came across clearly
Speaker 1: that it's like listening to her half to talk about
Speaker 1: this really unrealistic view of what a vagina looks like
Speaker 1: day after day is clearly wearing on her and is
Speaker 1: ridiculous and male gazy. The sex scenms, I feel like,
Speaker 1: didn't really challenge that enough. I don't know, I don't know.
Speaker 1: My personal opinion is that they were they were long. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I'm like of two minds about it, where I think
Speaker 1: it's cool that we do get more of a foray
Speaker 1: into lesbian sex than you tend to see in mainstream movies,
Speaker 1: just because of like our heteronormative society and so much
Speaker 1: phobia around queer sex. There's just been a tendency to
Speaker 1: shy away from it, or skirt around it, or just
Speaker 1: not feature it, especially because when it's lesbian sex there
Speaker 1: is double the focus on female pleasure, which is something
Speaker 1: that even in hetero sex scenes and just again culture
Speaker 1: at large, the idea of female pleasure is terrifying to
Speaker 1: a large chunk of the population. So further to be,
Speaker 1: this emphasis on female pleasure in the sex scenes is
Speaker 1: cool and exciting, but the sex scenes linger on for
Speaker 1: longer than we need, and ultimately they are by the
Speaker 1: very nature of who is making this film shot through
Speaker 1: the male gaze and interpreted through the male gaze, and
Speaker 1: even sort of the way in which the like the
Speaker 1: blocking of the sex scenes feels it's a lot. It's
Speaker 1: it's just knowing there is a man on the other
Speaker 1: side of the go pro it feels it's like, it
Speaker 1: feels fetishy, the way some straight men are like, oh yeah,
Speaker 1: getting it on, that's so hot. I agree, And I
Speaker 1: feel like that is like another thing that it seems like,
Speaker 1: I mean, just based on doing basic research on this
Speaker 1: production team that Park Chinook very often collaborates with the
Speaker 1: same group of people, and this is a cinematographer he
Speaker 1: works with a lot. But it's like if again, it's
Speaker 1: like when we talk about this with male directors all
Speaker 1: the time, of like, if you are dead set on
Speaker 1: adapting this story, then you need to be flexible in
Speaker 1: who you're working with, and you need to like really
Speaker 1: make sure you have people in the room who will
Speaker 1: just be able to speak to the experience, because otherwise
Speaker 1: there's going to be stuff that feels dissonant. I did
Speaker 1: read an interview with the director in which he addresses
Speaker 1: these sex scenes, and it seems like his general intention
Speaker 1: was that he understood how like delicate of a thing
Speaker 1: this would be to shoot, and he wanted to be
Speaker 1: as considerate and respectful to the actors as possible, because
Speaker 1: that's always something we're like, Okay, these actors have to
Speaker 1: be naked in front of a bunch of people, they
Speaker 1: have to be physically close with another actor simulating sex,
Speaker 1: and depending on different factors, this has the potential to
Speaker 1: be very uncomfortable for actors. So I found this interview
Speaker 1: in which he it seems like, you know, he he
Speaker 1: did his very best, although some of the answers are
Speaker 1: funny where he's like, that day, we hired a woman
Speaker 1: to be the boom operator for that day on set,
Speaker 1: and it's like, well, is that the only circumstances where
Speaker 1: you would hire a woman to be or boom operate?
Speaker 1: But it seems like he was like fully aware of
Speaker 1: the situation. He wanted to make everyone as comfortable as possible.
Speaker 1: So there was like very minimal crew on set for
Speaker 1: those scenes. The DP and the camera operator were not
Speaker 1: on set that they were using like a remote controlled camera.
Speaker 1: I hope there's like an intimacy coordinator or something of
Speaker 1: that nature. Yeah, I'm glad you brought that up, because
Speaker 1: so if any listeners are not aware, if a movie
Speaker 1: or TV production has a sex scene, ideally they will
Speaker 1: hire what's called an intimacy coordinator, who is there to
Speaker 1: advocate for the well being and safety of the actors
Speaker 1: who participate in sex scenes or just like kind of
Speaker 1: any other physically intimate scenes. Again, ideally a set will
Speaker 1: of this person, but that's not always the case. And
Speaker 1: as far as whether or not an intimacy coordinator was
Speaker 1: present on this set, that did not get spoken of,
Speaker 1: So I I am not sure. I really hope. So,
Speaker 1: oh my god, if you're that naked, please have a
Speaker 1: person who is your advocate there, that is I hope
Speaker 1: he he just forgot to mention that person. Yeah, that
Speaker 1: did not come up in the interview, but at least
Speaker 1: it sounds like he made an effort. I didn't find
Speaker 1: anything on how the actors felt about those scenes, about
Speaker 1: you know, whether they were comfortable. I hope so. But yeah,
Speaker 1: it's also sort of like, okay, if you have to
Speaker 1: take so many leaps and bounds to make the shooting
Speaker 1: of this safe for the actors. It's also a question
Speaker 1: of like, Okay, do I like, does this absolutely you
Speaker 1: need to happen this way? Or I feel like they're
Speaker 1: I mean, in the erotic thriller genre in general, I
Speaker 1: feel like sometimes it's like, I don't know, I'm generally
Speaker 1: showing up for the thriller elements, and then if people
Speaker 1: are fucking amazing, that's great, but that's not like what
Speaker 1: what I'm like, what the bulk of the movie is. Um,
Speaker 1: But yeah, I feel like that those seeds were like, Okay,
Speaker 1: this is an erotic thriller, get it, especially because like,
Speaker 1: I'm also interested on your both of your thoughts on
Speaker 1: this as well. But to me, there's far more of
Speaker 1: an emphasis in the movie on their sexual connection and
Speaker 1: like their physical attraction than there is on like an
Speaker 1: actual like what do they have in common? Why do
Speaker 1: they like each other? I didn't get a big sense
Speaker 1: of that. But also maybe I'm forgetting some stuff. I
Speaker 1: do think. Yeah, I think there's more emphasis on the
Speaker 1: sexual parts. I think with the emotional like aspect of it.
Speaker 1: The part that sticks out to me is like the
Speaker 1: time when they're when Suki is destroying all the books
Speaker 1: and the paintings and whatnot, and she's like so angry
Speaker 1: because she understands, you know, what has been happening. She
Speaker 1: destroys everything, and the Lady Jadeko is just you know,
Speaker 1: standing there, just like not fully sure on what to do.
Speaker 1: She's just like, what is happening? I don't know. I
Speaker 1: feel like that, Like on an emotional level, was like
Speaker 1: I don't know. I felt that. I was like, oh,
Speaker 1: that's really sweet because you know, they're kind of their
Speaker 1: worlds are colliding in this moment where it's like she
Speaker 1: kind of like is thinking, oh, I thought you were
Speaker 1: this rich girl who doesn't really understand anything, but it's like, no,
Speaker 1: you're you're victimized the way I'm victimized, just in different aspects,
Speaker 1: you know. So I feel like that's kind of how
Speaker 1: the world is collided in that sense. That's what That's
Speaker 1: what I saw. That's the scene I remember. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: felt a similar way where it's you know, I guess
Speaker 1: that you learn more about their emotional connection in the
Speaker 1: back half, where like part one definitely doesn't give you
Speaker 1: everything you need, but also part one gives you a
Speaker 1: completely false impression of who Lady Hideko is. Like I
Speaker 1: feel like if we were just like all my notes
Speaker 1: from part one was like, oh my gosh, like Lady
Speaker 1: Hideko is on this like born sexy Yesterday thing going on,
Speaker 1: and she's just like, I don't what is sex. I've
Speaker 1: never heard of that, and you know, and and in
Speaker 1: a way that I thought like the movie had fun
Speaker 1: with later where they kind of poke fun at Suki
Speaker 1: for being like, wow, this must just you must have
Speaker 1: incredible instincts for being like, yeah, you're natural. That made
Speaker 1: me laugh. Uh, But I I thought that, I mean,
Speaker 1: I don't know, I felt like any relationship where they
Speaker 1: just surprised each other and like, I don't know, I'm
Speaker 1: I'm always like kind of a sucker for relationships like that,
Speaker 1: and it is like, you know, kind of like definitely
Speaker 1: a class story we've seen before. Let's say Titan Titan perhaps,
Speaker 1: but where where you know, it's it's like they have
Speaker 1: very rigid ideas of who this person is going to
Speaker 1: be and they end up getting surprised by that person
Speaker 1: having a lot more to them than they expected. So
Speaker 1: I was on board for the love story. I I
Speaker 1: got why they were drawn to each other as people,
Speaker 1: and I think, you know, we definitely could have spent
Speaker 1: more time with it um and with with them as
Speaker 1: that relationship was building, but especially those like longer scenes
Speaker 1: in part one when you reflect on them and you're like, oh,
Speaker 1: like lady Hideko is playing four D chess and she
Speaker 1: knows exactly what's going on, and even still she's like
Speaker 1: falling for Suki. I don't know. I was on board
Speaker 1: for the romance. I thought it was I thought it
Speaker 1: was like a classic you know, star cross levers across
Speaker 1: classes kind of thing. Sure, you just contrived in itself,
Speaker 1: but like, I think we could have shortened those sex
Speaker 1: scenes and given us like one or two more signifiers
Speaker 1: of just like, oh, yeah, here's what they bond over,
Speaker 1: here's the thing that they both like, or here's a
Speaker 1: little thing that they have in common, because I don't
Speaker 1: really I still don't have the strongest sense of that.
Speaker 1: And it's one thing, you know, if a movie wants
Speaker 1: to present this connection just as a sexual connection, like
Speaker 1: obviously not every connection between people needs to be this deep, intimate,
Speaker 1: long lasting love, but I feel like the movie frames
Speaker 1: their connection as deep love. So I don't know, But
Speaker 1: now I'm just picturing Titanic. If Titanic were like Billy
Speaker 1: Zane and Rose collaborating to trick Jack Dawson into something.
Speaker 1: But it turns out wait a minute, Rose and Jack
Speaker 1: are collaborating to trick Billy Zane and get his fortune.
Speaker 1: Everything remaps onto Titanic. It's just nature. Um, it's unavoidable.
Speaker 1: And that's something that I also like, It's a trope
Speaker 1: we talked about a jillion times, but relationships that are
Speaker 1: founded on lies, you know, that was like I was
Speaker 1: aware of very early in the movie. But again, I
Speaker 1: feel like this movie kind of like finds its way
Speaker 1: out of the trappings of that where the lies are
Speaker 1: found out and they simply admit it and apologize to
Speaker 1: each other and then like take action in a positive
Speaker 1: direction where I feel like, you know, we've covered five
Speaker 1: trillion movies at this point. That is like there's a
Speaker 1: dare that involves a lie and it makes sense but
Speaker 1: not really. And then at the end, the you know,
Speaker 1: the person lying usually in this heterosexual relationship is like
Speaker 1: Freddy Prince Jr. And he's like, I don't know, I
Speaker 1: told a lie and I'm not even sorry and I apologize.
Speaker 1: This movie, you know, like skirts, all of those things
Speaker 1: where it is just everything is a lie at the beginning.
Speaker 1: But then there's that great scene where uh Suki catches
Speaker 1: Lady Hideco and they have this this just very emotionally
Speaker 1: raw conversation. They're both crying, they're both being honest, and
Speaker 1: then and then they singlehandedly destroyed the patriarchy at the end.
Speaker 1: So there. Yeah, Also, I mean they're both victims of
Speaker 1: this patriarchal structure. They're both they have a lot of
Speaker 1: trauma that they have been subjected to. So yeah, I
Speaker 1: mean it makes sense that they bond again. I just
Speaker 1: I wish there was just to smidge more. There's also
Speaker 1: that moment that I don't know in the different it
Speaker 1: makes me want to like watch it back again because
Speaker 1: I feel like this, like this movie does like give
Speaker 1: you a lot back once you know what's going to
Speaker 1: happen in the middle. But even the ways that like
Speaker 1: their patriarchal structure influences their assumptions of each other. Where
Speaker 1: at the beginning, like Suki, we hear her talking in
Speaker 1: voiceover a lot, and she's talking about Lady Hideko as
Speaker 1: if she's an object at the beginning, and she's like,
Speaker 1: you know, ladies are handmaidens, dolls, and like she is
Speaker 1: you know, being encouraged to think of her in this
Speaker 1: very particular way and being encouraged to think of her as,
Speaker 1: you know, someone who is not as smart as her.
Speaker 1: And then in the second half, we're being encouraged to
Speaker 1: think of Suki as someone who is not as smart
Speaker 1: as Lady Hideko based on how she's been conditioned to view,
Speaker 1: you know, poor women and and poor people in general.
Speaker 1: And then in the third part you realize, uh, guess
Speaker 1: what neither was true? And it was somewhere in the middle,
Speaker 1: and and they're on the both geniuses, both geniuses, and
Speaker 1: and they're on about I really liked Suki had this fun,
Speaker 1: like Aladdin style introduction to who she was that I
Speaker 1: thought was very exciting, where I like the the mythos
Speaker 1: of Suki's life where she's like, I am the world's
Speaker 1: greatest thief, and I was like, oh my god, she's Aladdin.
Speaker 1: This is exciting. And that was I don't know if
Speaker 1: that has anything to do with anything, but I wrote down,
Speaker 1: Suki equals Aladdin and she falls in love with her.
Speaker 1: Princess Jasmine um Hitiko teaches Suki how to read. So
Speaker 1: women helping other women, women, uplifting women, you love to
Speaker 1: see it. Although reading for Hideko was a prison for
Speaker 1: a long time. She was to read for evil. It's true,
Speaker 1: and that's why we don't read books. And that's why
Speaker 1: on the Bectel cast we don't read books because reading,
Speaker 1: actually women reading is a prison dangerous. We've been saying
Speaker 1: this for years. At this point, it's dangerous. I mean
Speaker 1: to call back to another Disney movie. According to Guston
Speaker 1: in Beauty and the Beast, women who read it gives
Speaker 1: them ideas and then they start thinking, and that is dangerous.
Speaker 1: It's dangerous. Um, does anyone, Does anyone have anything else
Speaker 1: they would like to talk about? Ah, that's all I had. Yeah,
Speaker 1: I just wanted to add. So there's in the second
Speaker 1: half of the movie. There's a scene we've seen a
Speaker 1: couple of times from two different points of view where
Speaker 1: Suki is like standing in as just like a model
Speaker 1: for the art, like the painting that Hideko is doing
Speaker 1: of Suki. And you see a quick reveal of her
Speaker 1: drawing of Suki, and it's the funniest thing in the
Speaker 1: world because it's so bad. It's really bad. But they
Speaker 1: it's like what Leonardo DiCaprio was actually drawing. In the
Speaker 1: Satanic he's like, um, circled dot dot smile, and then
Speaker 1: you just get like the quickest glimpse of it. But
Speaker 1: it's not really played as a joke. But I like,
Speaker 1: I burst out laughing every time I see it because
Speaker 1: it's so funny. Because then because first you see so
Speaker 1: the council thing is that he's been training for years
Speaker 1: to be a forger, so he like he's a talented artist,
Speaker 1: Like he's a really good artist. He's really good at
Speaker 1: creating these forgeries of these books and like the art
Speaker 1: in the books, so he knows what he's doing. And
Speaker 1: you see like his little sketches and paintings of Suki
Speaker 1: and you're like, oh damn, Like he's great, and then
Speaker 1: it pans over to Lady Jideko's drawing. It's the funniest
Speaker 1: thing in the world. It's really bad. It's um, I
Speaker 1: guess the last serious thing I wanted to talk about.
Speaker 1: And I don't know a whole lot about Park chan
Speaker 1: wooks filmography. I've seen Old Boy, but it's been several years,
Speaker 1: so I don't remember it that well. So I don't
Speaker 1: really know much about him as a figure, and sort
Speaker 1: of like his his background and stuff like that. But
Speaker 1: one of his reasons for wanting to make this movie
Speaker 1: is that his intention was to normalize queer relationships in cinema,
Speaker 1: and you know, that's not something that most straight male
Speaker 1: directors are concerned with. So I feel like it's a
Speaker 1: it's a classic step in the right direction kind of
Speaker 1: move where we've talked about I think a lot of
Speaker 1: instances like this where the attempt is perhaps in perfect
Speaker 1: in some ways. But the endorsement of a you know,
Speaker 1: super fame mis director, and I mean not even the internship,
Speaker 1: but like a super famous director prioritizing representation of queer
Speaker 1: people and of a lesbian relationship in their work is
Speaker 1: like a good step in the right direction. Does it
Speaker 1: mean that everything was represented perfectly and in a way
Speaker 1: that made total sense? Usually not in those cases, because
Speaker 1: most of these hot shot directors are normally straight men,
Speaker 1: and they're you know, and there, and therefore they're fucked
Speaker 1: in terms of their worldview. But but it usually indicates,
Speaker 1: I feel like, at least historically, it usually indicates that
Speaker 1: better movies and better representation is close behind, or I hope.
Speaker 1: So yeah, yeah, And this movie being a success and
Speaker 1: critically acclaimed hopefully paves the way for queer women in
Speaker 1: South Korea to be able to tell their own stories next,
Speaker 1: let's hope. So yeah, so the movie does pass the
Speaker 1: Bechdel test. Hell yeah, a lot of women scheming, a
Speaker 1: lot of women lying to each other in a way
Speaker 1: that passes the Bechtel test. And as far as our
Speaker 1: nipple scale, our scale of zero to five nipples, based
Speaker 1: on how the movie Fair is looking at it through
Speaker 1: the lens of intersectional feminism, I'm tempted to give this
Speaker 1: like a four point to five. Just the narrative that
Speaker 1: unfolds of ultimately like women teaming up two overthrow and
Speaker 1: manipulate their oppressors the way that they had been manipulating
Speaker 1: them and coming out on top being allowed to like
Speaker 1: be together on this ferry and then hopefully after that
Speaker 1: for however much time they want to spend together, if
Speaker 1: they live, you know, the rest of their lives together.
Speaker 1: And yeah, just like all the commentary on the patriarchy
Speaker 1: and the smashing of that patriarchy is just very satisfying
Speaker 1: and cathartic to watch. Um, the sex scenes are pretty
Speaker 1: male gazy, they're pretty fetish. She a bit gratuitous, will say,
Speaker 1: you know, it always kind of begs a question was
Speaker 1: this the right director to tell this story or you know,
Speaker 1: like is this is there the right person to be
Speaker 1: shooting these scenes, and like how much consultation was actually done,
Speaker 1: et cetera. So that's where the movie loses some points.
Speaker 1: So I think I'll land on a four and a quarter.
Speaker 1: That might be too generous, but I just think this
Speaker 1: movie rules, So I'm gonna go easy on it, and
Speaker 1: I will give my nipples to try Kim who plays
Speaker 1: Suki Minhi Kim who plays Hiteko, the screenwriter John s Kion,
Speaker 1: and I'll give one to the aunt a tragic fate
Speaker 1: and she she deserves something. I'll give my quarter nipple
Speaker 1: to that amazing drawing. I'm gonna go I think're gonna
Speaker 1: go there. We when we get into the fractions to
Speaker 1: get so messy. I'm gonna I'm gonna go three point
Speaker 1: seven five because ultimately this movie is directed and shot
Speaker 1: by straight guys, So I I can't Yeah, I I
Speaker 1: don't want to go too much higher than that. That said,
Speaker 1: A period piece that has a female co writer based
Speaker 1: on the work of famous lesbian writer. It's a period
Speaker 1: piece where the lesbian couple stays together at a happy
Speaker 1: ending for them, we see the their patriarchal structure, um,
Speaker 1: at least in the terms of the two of them
Speaker 1: crumble and is very cool and very rare in terms
Speaker 1: of lesbian period pieces unfortunately. Uh So, I think that's
Speaker 1: definitely something worth praising. The movie itself fucking rocks. Like,
Speaker 1: if you haven't seen it, it's so fun. I wish
Speaker 1: I had watched it with someone else so we could
Speaker 1: have like, like all the right moments. But it's just
Speaker 1: it's it's a really fun movie. It's very accessible if
Speaker 1: you have Amazon Prime. Hail Basos. Sorry, we can legally
Speaker 1: have to say that we love what we we love
Speaker 1: our bald king. Uh but um, yeah, I mean I
Speaker 1: think that there there are like little this The sex
Speaker 1: scenes are male gazy, and they are quite long, and
Speaker 1: there are I don't know, I mean, this is sort
Speaker 1: of inherent to the kind of story that this is.
Speaker 1: But anytime, it's like, the patriarchy is two people and
Speaker 1: you know them. So if you can just get rid
Speaker 1: of these two people, right, you're free. Like it's it's
Speaker 1: fun in a fantasy way. But I'm always just like, Okay,
Speaker 1: but what about the rest of it. Yeah, it's not
Speaker 1: so much smashing the patriarchy. It's more smashing too much
Speaker 1: those two guys, you know, which is also very hard.
Speaker 1: But you know whatever, I'm getting very in the weeds there. Um,
Speaker 1: I guess you know, I'll go for for a four,
Speaker 1: but I can't go higher because when it's when it's
Speaker 1: two straight guys, it's just like, okay, so this is
Speaker 1: a step, but more please. Uh So I'll go for
Speaker 1: and I'm giving them all to that go pro. So yeah,
Speaker 1: what would what would you give it? Um? I think
Speaker 1: I'd give it a solid for because you know, it's
Speaker 1: a good story. It's it's great that it exists in
Speaker 1: this world from you know, Korean stuff like that. But
Speaker 1: just yeah, the sex scenes are so long. They're so long,
Speaker 1: and I was just like, it's too long, and we
Speaker 1: had to see multiple angles of it, and um, you know,
Speaker 1: I feel like, you know, you could have shortened it
Speaker 1: just a little bit, not like, you know, get rid
Speaker 1: of it, but shortened it. But you know, I like
Speaker 1: the story being told in that time of the occupation. Um.
Speaker 1: And you know, their love actually you know, happy ending
Speaker 1: they both get to be together. You know, the men
Speaker 1: they die and everyone is happy who's alive? So I
Speaker 1: give it a solid for amazing. Yeah, well, thank you
Speaker 1: so much for joining us on this journey. Thank you
Speaker 1: for having me. Of course. Do you have anything you'd
Speaker 1: like to plug a social media or anything like that.
Speaker 1: I do not. I do not have social media. It's
Speaker 1: probably it's better that way. Wow, our bravest guess yet,
Speaker 1: that is the healthiest thing I've ever heard in my
Speaker 1: entire life. Congratulations. Yeah, Unfortunately, we're still on social media.
Speaker 1: You can find us at the Bechtel Cast on Twitter
Speaker 1: and Instagram or Bechtel Cast on Twitter and Instagram. Oh
Speaker 1: my god. You can go to our patreon ak Matreon
Speaker 1: at Patreon dot clam dot colmom slash Bechtel Cast. This
Speaker 1: this month on the on the Patreon, we're doing movies
Speaker 1: that have animals in them. I forget why, but we are.
Speaker 1: And so if you want to hear episodes about Stuart
Speaker 1: Little and Babe and Babe the Pig, it's only five
Speaker 1: dollars a month and you can hear whatever that is.
Speaker 1: I mean, Jamie, it's famously Animal June. What are you
Speaker 1: talking about? It's yeah, it's Animal June, which we've observed
Speaker 1: for many, many years. There's all so our T public store,
Speaker 1: T public dot com, slash the Bechdel Cast where you
Speaker 1: can get all of your merchandising needs. And uh with that,
Speaker 1: I'm glad that we all stopped lying to each other
Speaker 1: and tricking each other. Let's get on a boat to Shanghai.
Speaker 1: Let's get out of here. Let's do it. Bye bye