|
How entertaining? ★★★☆☆
Thought provoking? ★★☆☆☆ 24 October 2013
This article is a review of THE TASTE OF MONEY.
|
“Cash without trouble. There’s no such thing,” Young-Jak Joo (Kang-woo Kim)
Director Sang-soo Im follows up THE HOUSEMAID with another tale of the South Korean super-rich. His 2010 film felt anachronistic, dealing with issues that were relevant generations ago. THE TASTE OF MONEY begins strongly. Might this be a perceptive take on the world we live in, the haves and have nots? Unfortunately, we are not in SYRIANA or MARGIN CALL territory. Tired thriller mechanics take over and we are left with an empty, polished vessel.
Director Sang-soo Im follows up THE HOUSEMAID with another tale of the South Korean super-rich. His 2010 film felt anachronistic, dealing with issues that were relevant generations ago. THE TASTE OF MONEY begins strongly. Might this be a perceptive take on the world we live in, the haves and have nots? Unfortunately, we are not in SYRIANA or MARGIN CALL territory. Tired thriller mechanics take over and we are left with an empty, polished vessel.
|
|
|
|
|
Opening on an alarm being switched off and a room light blinking on, inside a storage facility piled to the ceiling with cash (even more money than that shot in BREAKING BAD season five part one). President Yoon (Yun-shik Baek) and his chauffeur/assistant Joo fill a suitcase. The former tells the latter to help himself to some, everyone does. Then a speeded up look at the city, just these two at a normal frame rate. They meet someone and give the huge bribe. The family, which Yoon is the ostensible head, think they can buy whoever they need to – politicians, judges, police. THE TASTE OF MONEY looks to be an exposé of corruption, greed and illegality, but fumbles the commentary. It may appear to be critiquing the societal elite, it at times feels seduced by it. There are allusions to their impact on the average person, not enough, instead 1980s television springs to mind: DALLAS, DYNASTY and THE COLBYS.
The family house is jaw-dropping; a bastion of exquisite, expensive discernment. You think director David Fincher has good taste when it comes to décor, wait till you see this set design. Our way into this world is Joo. His attempts to reconcile morality and ambition are obfuscated by his enigmatic motivations. At first commenting under his breath at the shenanigans, and then quickly acquiescing to every dubious request. Capitalism as feudalism is again dealt with by Sang-soo Im, where servants are exploited sexually. The focus is in-fighting among the nuclear family. It’s not THE GODFATHER, using the microcosm to talk about the macrocosm. There is only the veneer of sophistication. Sly digs at the westernisation of class, i.e. the elite has appropriated afternoon tea, but the filmmaker’s previous work already covered such observations.
The descent into histrionics and murder smacks of unbelievability. At least MICHAEL CLAYTON tried to show how killing and corporatism might go hand in hand.
Voguish, disappointing.
|
|
