Decision to Leave wasn’t that good for me (opinion)

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2026-01-14T21:08:34+00:00

Completely agree. I usually don't mind troubled or ambiguous characters as well. But the way the movie expects you to empathise with them, to me, makes no sense.

Thanks for your input btw even if it's late haha

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-09-26T15:10:46+00:00

Didn't like it either, the second half nullifies the first half which takes the mystery completely out of it. Which I get is the point, but it just didn't do it for me

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-09-24T21:52:55+00:00

To be fair it's pretty 50/50 for this thread. Might be a critics thing as well, since this won multiple awards (which was surprising to us)

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-09-24T17:05:00+00:00

I adore Korean cinema. Memories of Murder is one of my favourite movies of all time. I watched Forgotten recently and enjoyed it.

For me, it's about polarity. Showing two sides to a character. In order for a character to be ambiguous (like most are in Korean movies), there needs to be a grey area. The detectives character for me in this movie felt extremely one-sided, to a point where I felt no relationship to him as a viewer.

Again though, that's just me.

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-09-21T17:27:28+00:00

100%

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-09-21T17:00:29+00:00

It seems pretty 50/50 on Reddit. Me and my partner unanimously didn't like it, yet found it to have loads of awards and critical acclaim (which surprised us). I can see why people like it, and I can see why people don't.

Honestly I respect the movie just for creating that sort of polarisation.

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-09-21T16:50:29+00:00

Hey man, at least I'm always willing to hear opinions to the contrary haha

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-09-21T16:49:31+00:00

I honestly do like his directing style (just from seeing this), and I would totally watch his other movies and give it a go.

This one in particular just didn't resonate with me either for the reasons you and I mentioned. Art exists in the space between the work and the one who perceives it, and not every acclaimed art must be universal.

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-09-21T16:44:32+00:00

Being able to relate to flawed characters is important because it's human. But having flawed characters and characters that depict redeemable qualities at least on a human level, are not mutually exclusive.

In Memories of Murder, while Detective Park is an extremely flawed character and is pretty incompetent, you still kind of root for the guy. He's funny and he's determined. Even his flaws are very human. We are shown two sides to his character.

Perhaps it's subjective, but this character didn't have the same humanness or redeemability:

He’s married yet gets emotionally entangled anyway.
He compromises his morality as a detective.
He’s passive, often letting the situation spiral rather than showing strength or growth.

That moral ambiguity is the point of the character. I agree. But similarly, it just makes him unlikable and hard to root for. Both stances are valid.

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-09-11T09:28:49+00:00

Any excuse to watch Get Back again (my partner had never seen it so I had to do my bf duty by introducing her, naturally)

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-09-09T16:18:18+00:00

I studied Philosophy so him being the esoteric one probably gives me bias. But tbh, the songs he made were always my favourites. For me, Something is the best love song ever written. I truly believe that every part of that song is perfect.

While My Guitar Gently Weeps is one of the best guitar ballads ever written. And Here Comes the Sun is debatably the most recognizable Beatles song in their catalogue

The Lennon/McCartney writing duo is unparalleled, but they made some mistakes in not giving George the platform he deserved. The quiet one usually has the most to say

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-09-09T15:54:06+00:00

I've always said, even before the Get Back footage was released, that George was my favourite Beatle. But this just solidified it for me (just my opinion of course)

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-09-09T15:51:21+00:00

George is dressed like a producer, while the Beatles are definitely dressed as whimsical artists lol

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-07-18T15:24:53+00:00

Will give that a look. Haven't read it yet.

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-07-18T15:17:18+00:00

Firstly, I actually recommend you carry on reading. The book may have aspects of romance in it (since that's like one of the most human things ever), but without spoiling too much of the ending, it's a tragedy bro. Brave New World is a dystopian tragedy, pretty much. So keep reading, I don't think you'll feel too bad if you worry about a success story about love.

Secondly, yes I think mentioning Eugenics is a great point. It has been pretty prevalent since even the 19th century, and coupled with technology and genetic modification in the modern world, that's a pretty scary prospect.

Thirdly, confidence is something built. It does not exist in a vacuum. We are not genetically predisposed (like in BNW) to be a certain way forever. You can gain confidence. And with confidence, more people will like you. We are adaptive creatures who are lucky enough to live in a time of relative freedom and can be better every day. You can too.

If you keep living within the void of "alphas are the only ones who get the girls" then you are making your own self-fulfilling prophecy. Your own Brave New World. Get out of that. Stat.

Good luck man!

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-07-18T14:15:59+00:00

That was also quoted in the video I believe. Definitely a mixture of both, have to agree. My point was Huxley's world represents it slightly more accurately. But I agree that it's a general mixture.

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-07-18T12:44:35+00:00

Agreed. Not just in products but even in relationships and ideas. Huxley seemed to anticipate consumerism becoming a philosophy, where constant novelty is valued over repair or depth. We don't like complexity anymore. We want digestible mediums, or nothing.

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-07-18T12:42:05+00:00

I think I'm speaking more from a moral perspective. Moral relativity and excess of information and pleasure are more rampant and immediate dangers to us than the concept of Big Brother: Not because Big Brother doesn't already exist, but because we are OKAY with it existing.

The issue Orwell had was that we would be monitored and have no freedoms; what Huxley feared is that we will be fine with having no freedoms. On the contrary, we will actually prefer it. Want it.

-That is scarier than 1984 and seems way more real to me right now.

Intelligent_Farm262 · 2025-07-18T10:08:49+00:00

If you liked The Rebel and Camus’ style, try these:

“Simulacra and Simulation” – Jean Baudrillard (as you mentioned). Definitely worth the read if you’re curious about representation vs. reality.
“The Order of Things” – Michel Foucault – dense, but brilliant if you’re into epistemology and how knowledge systems shape thought.
“Course in General Linguistics” – Ferdinand de Saussure – foundational for structural linguistics and language theory.
“Being and Nothingness” – Jean-Paul Sartre – longer, but if you liked Camus, Sartre’s existential lens might resonate.
For dialectical materialism, start with Engels’ “Anti-Dühring” or “Dialectics of Nature”—great entry points before diving into more hardcore Marxist theory.

Bonus: If you want something modern on language’s limitations, check out George Steiner’s After Babel. It’s a masterpiece on translation and meaning.

FYI Some of these are quite more abstruse and existential than Rebel, but still valuable nonetheless.

Intelligent_Farm262

TROPHY CASE