Fun Spider Forest (Geomi sup): re-visit; re-think; re-spond

sitenoise

Member: Rank 5
Spider Forest.jpg Spider Forest (Geomi sup) [2004] • South Korea

Just plopping something out here to mark the spot.

Brief Synopsis (from Asian Wiki):
TV Producer Kang Min (Kam Woo-Sung) enters Spider Forest for a documentary. He enters a cabin and discovers two brutally murdered bodies. One is his girlfriend Hwang Soo-Young (Kang Kyeong-Heon) and the other is his colleague Choi Jong-Pil (Cho Sung-Ha). Kang Min also senses someone watching him and runs after that person into to the forest. He's soon knocked unconscious. When he awakens again he continues his chase into a tunnel. Kang Min is then struck by a speeding car.

Two weeks later, Kang Min awakes from a coma. Kang Min must piece back together his memory. What really happened in the forest?
I'll start by saying I found this watch even more confusing than my first and second viewings. I had forgotten about the kids part of the story which seemed a lot more significant/important this time.

Superficial kudos first:
It's a good looking film, most of the time. Atmospheric, dark, misty. Shots are framed well, lighting is superb. The soundtrack seems old school, teetering between slightly overbearing and wonderful. It's classical in the sense that some scenes are just soundtrack meant to convey a mood or meaning, or just to pass time. Jung Suh is very good in dual roles (too bad she seems to have quit acting--nothing new in ten years, after a few fine performances including: The Isle, Peppermint Candy, Green Chair). Or maybe I was just surprised by her girlishness as Kang Min's happy-in-love wife. She usually acts like she's a heartbeat shy of ripping your face off. I know it's significant that she plays two roles--the wife and the ... muse--but like so much of the film I can't articulate what the significance is.

Quick Demerits: It's starts off slow, even though there's a lot of bang for your buck, with inexpensive horror/thriller tropes. I was miffed by the chase scene in the dark woods. The "bad guy" (?)'s face is shadowed just enough that we can't see who he is. And the chase is shot such that we bounce back and forth, not sure of who is chasing whom. I think that's the point, as later developments suggest, but at this early point in the film it felt frustrating. This style of "This scene won't make sense now but remember it for later" is a little frustrating throughout the film.

I'm going to leave it at that for now, and wait until anyone/everyone else weighs in that they've watched it, before diving into all the confusing questions. I rated the film close to a perfect 10 the first time I watched it, but this viewing drops somewhere into 8.xxx territory.

 
Last edited:

plsletitrain

Member: Rank 5
After a second viewing, I can say with conviction that this movie will never get old. It is still fascinating, one of the best psychological thrillers from South Korea.

The first time I watched the film, I was mesmerized and overwhelmed. I did not have the chance to fully dissect the movie because I was so overwhelmed at how great it is. I still find it great. But this time, thanks for re-opening the case, I paid more attention to details that I think I brushed aside during the first viewing. This viewing was more of investigating the case, rather than going with the flow.

I was confused the first time. And I still am. In a good way. I like how the director employed his strategy of storytelling using shifting scenes, flashbacks, creating a puzzle and then later on fill on the missing parts rather than a chronological storytelling. This is the type of movie where you formulate a theory and you would want to watch it again and again to verify your theory and see if it fits the puzzle.

I'll start the ball rolling.

So the million dollar question and my biggest confusion is this: who was the mysterious guy/killer he was chasing—during the first few minutes of the film-- and hacked him? I get that it was “him” all along watching himself and how he is the responsible person for the deaths. Like sort of a time travel, or maybe a thought bubble in motion, but it can’t be a Kang Min vs. Kang Min encounter because that would be too absurd, how can that be possible. He can see himself from afar, yes, but to actually lay hand on his person is another story. Or the person who inflicted his wounds was his police friend? Or maybe that person was the mysterious caller who tipped him of his lover’s affair?

Some random sightings/thoughts:

1) That old guy beside his bed who gave him the key, that was his father ain’t he?

2) That little girl in the end, that wasn’t Min Su-in? Hehe I know that’s too far-fetched as Su-In died a long time ago but I thought they said Su-in was illed---just to add more confusion to the already confused viewers. lol

Despite these confusions and ambiguities, I can still say that this is a well-crafted, well-written, well-shot, thought-provoking and mentally challenging, work of art.
 

sitenoise

Member: Rank 5
Yeah, the big question(s): Who is the guy on the phone who sent him the roll of film and tipped him off about his girlfriend? And Who clubbed him in the face? @plsletitrain is right: "He can see himself from afar, yes, but to actually lay hand on his person is another story". And I am also suspicious of the cop, not sure why. Another thing that goes flippy floppy about Min watching himself is that at one point he is watching himself, and the watching persona isn't bandaged up. But at the end the bandaged up version is watching.

I never saw the old guy give Kang a key. I read that in some other review, too. When does that happen? Are we talking about the old guy in the hospital who "lost a slipper" and points at Kang to the nurse? Or the old school teacher guy? And, @plsletitrain, by the "little girl in the end" do you mean the youngster who "lost a slipper" and points at Kang to the nurse? I thought that was a boy, but who knows. The scene is cut to imply it is Min turning around to look at Su-in.

I watched this again after posting the initial blurb here. After my first re-watch I was a little underwhelmed, I think because I was watching it casually. And then the questions started to mount, so I went back and watched it again--BUT--I started somewhere in the middle, about where he is approaching the cabin after getting the tip from the mysterious guy and following his GF to the cabin. Then I went back to the beginning and watched it up to that point.

I think there might be a magic spot in the story, somewhere in the middle, that if you start there and loop around it proceeds differently ... because you have a different set of facts to go on.

So the whole thing can't/doesn't make sense (in some form of what "making sense" means). But just to make sure I'm on the right track ... do we agree that this is more or less the "timeline":
  • As a kid, Kang Min transfers to a school where Min Su-in is (notice the "Min" business--I"m assuming Jung Suh as Su-in is/was that little girl, and that she is actually dead the whole time we are watching her--but this gets into the whole problem of why he doesn't recognize her name, or the fact that Su-in looks like Eun-Ah) .
  • The two of them witness the killing (which never happened according to the teacher guy)
  • Su-in floats into space to haunt the forest and Min leaves town and loses all his memory of the situation.
  • Min hangs with Eu-in who dies in a plane crash
  • Min hangs with Hwang Soo-Young
  • Min kills Hwang Soo-Young and the Boss guy
Here's where we have to start making stuff up, I think:
  • After Min does the killing, he somehow gets knocked out in the woods
  • He wakes up in the woods and stumbles into the tunnel and gets hit by a car and dies
Why the big show of the watch at 4:00? I assume, but didn't see, that when he dies (not) on the operating table they would pronounce him dead at 4:00, but I didn't see that. (I read somewhere that the director intentionally removed scenes that would have "explained" things).

Now I get really confused:

When is Min hanging out with Su-in? I assumed she was his "guiding light" for the fourteen days he was in a coma, leading him to understand what he had done and that he had died. But But But, he's with her before he does the killings. And he's not bandaged up. I know there's an explanation for this but it's the part that befuddles me.

Maybe there's not supposed to be a "timeline". Beyond that, the two big metaphors of the film are pretty cool: People who die unloved become spider spirits until someone remembers them; Spider Forest is the tangled web of memories we navigate to define reality. Am I right about that?

Here's a tiny little point that either demonstrates the film's continuity is messed up or that we need to reassess what continuity means to us:

There's the super cute kitchen scene with Min and Eu-in. Min tells Eu-in of the plane crash dream. Eu-in says it's not a dream (btw--this is the best scene that demonstrates the Mixing of memories and flashbacks, or something). Eu-in is already dead at that point, in real time and in that scene. She tells him it's not a dream, and she also talks about how she hates to see him giving up on life after she died in the plane crash. Eu-in exits the kitchen and fades into darkness. Great shot!

Anyway, Eu-in exits into darkness. Cut to a head shot of Min who lets out a heavy sigh. But it's not of him in the kitchen. His location is undisclosed and unknown at this point (but I bet most people just take it like it's him in the kitchen. It's not). He's not heavy sighing because Eu-in just walked out of the room. He's heavy sighing because he's drunk and given up on life just as Eu-in described. So the source of the flashback has changed. The kitchen scene flashback started when a bandaged Min holds up the ice cream cones photo of Eu-in to the one hanging on his wall, as if to signal he's starting, trying to get his memories back (this is right after his first 'escape' from the hospital, after the surgeon gave him the picture of Eu-in).

But after Eu-in exits into darkness, the scene is cut to heavy sighing Min, of him after he leaves the Karoake bar scene where Soo-Young approached him. He leaves and sits down outside. That's where kitchen scene cut to, so it becomes the source of the flashback memory. This is really trippy, I know! He's sitting there after the club scene which comes next. Twilight Zone. Soo-Young approaches him and they start their thing. Min is getting on with his life as Eu-in wanted in the memory he had sitting there after the club scene, which is the same memory he's having after he escapes the hospital for the first time. It's a weird circle.

And btw - that ski lift scene. I get that that is the shortcut to Spider Forest but it seemed so random. And it made me a little queasy.
 

clayton-12

Member: Rank 4
Okay, I just finished it.

At the risk of sounding really obtuse, it took me a long time to realise Eu-in and So-young were different people.
I think there might be a magic spot in the story, somewhere in the middle, that if you start there and loop around it proceeds differently ... because you have a different set of facts to go on.
...
And btw - that ski lift scene. I get that that is the shortcut to Spider Forest but it seemed so random.
My immediate thought was that there was a 'magic' spot in the story somewhere in the middle - but for me, it was the ski lift scene. Up until that point, despite the shifting timeframes and fragmented narrative, the film seemed like a crime thriller grounded in the physical world, but from that moment on everything was transformed into a supernatural thriller.

Anyone open to the idea that Min didn't really kill So-young, as in the killing never really took place? That it was all a process of unwinding/destroying existing memories to bring back the memory his childhood friend Su-in (and thus free her spirit from the spider forest)? There was a lovely scene where Min is lying in bed with So-young for the last time, and he untangles the dolls' embrace, and floats the So-young doll away in a re-creation of Su-in's description of their parting.
 

sitenoise

Member: Rank 5
At the risk of sounding really obtuse, it took me a long time to realise Eu-in and So-young were different people.
I had that problem my first viewing as well. They look more alike than Eu-in and Su-in.
Anyone open to the idea that Min didn't really kill So-young
I'm totally open to that. Or something. The doll release scene seems significant. And at the end when Su-in sends Min through the cave door she says "please remember me".
 
Last edited:

sitenoise

Member: Rank 5
In answer to my two big questions: "Who is the guy on the phone who sent him the roll of film and tipped him off about his girlfriend? And Who clubbed him in the face?" The first answer is it's obviously just Min talking to himself. The guy says he knows him and he will meet him soon. And Su-in says pretty much the same thing about the guy Min must meet in order to wrap things up as she sends him into the cave.*** But then how/why/when did Min mail himself the roll of film?

The second answer is that Min wasn't clubbed. He just fell down and hit his head--the same way he did when he was a kid running from young Su-in's dad. The shot of little min lying there with his red scarf on is exactly the same shot as old Min lying there, except no scarf and no rock nearby (and but why does the bad guy look at Min's ID? hmmm). Something fishy there.

***Later on when the cops are looking for Min's backpack in the woods they say that Min said something about a cave. I think the scene of Min saying something about a cave got cut or I just missed it, like some old man giving Min a key.


after Eu-in exits into darkness, the scene is cut to heavy sighing Min, of him after he leaves the Karoake bar scene where Soo-Young approached him. He leaves and sits down outside. That's where kitchen scene cut to, so it becomes the source of the flashback memory.
Soo-Young wipes Min's face, they kiss and have their sex scene and Min starts narrating, "A year goes by". The very next scene is of a boy (Min) approaching the forest cabin door (I presume) and as he is opening the door an arm touches his shoulder and then the scene cuts away. What's up with that? It cuts to Min waking up, so it's meant to be Min dreaming, I guess. But it's a random scene.
 

sitenoise

Member: Rank 5
I had the same experience re-watching this as I had watching it the first go round. I watched it and thought it was beautiful and bewildering. But I couldn't stop thinking about it so I immediately watched it again and got blown away. Same thing this time. I had to watch it twice to receive full impact--and to bump it back up to a nearly perfect 10/10. We need @ebossert to do a Tale of Two Sisters take-down of this flick.
 
Last edited:

sitenoise

Member: Rank 5
Remind me to bring up the stupid movie trailer I posted above. I just watched it and it highlights that 10 second scene, I just mentioned in a post above, of the boy opening the cabin door. Like it's the centerpiece of the film. The trailer shows complete bullshit like trailers always do that's why I hate them--of the other side of the door which is a different doorknob equal to the one Min uses just before the kill.

Also, there a shot of Eu-in with the subtitle "Remember me" I don't remember from the film.

And the Caption "A house in the forest and a doubtful murder" WTF? That one's for you, @clayton-12

And the caption "if it comes out in a dream you mustn't open the door no matter what" ... where's that from? Who said it? It sounds kind of familiar.

God damn I hate movie trailers
 

divemaster13

Member: Rank 4
I barely skimmed the above, so better to give my thoughts w/o influence.

I first saw this movie some time ago, and rated it 3.5 / 5, as a good atmospheric mystery. I recall not really "getting it" and was interested if a re-watch this week would elicit a different reaction.

So, I watched it again this week. Twice, actually. Once straight thorugh to just immerse myself in it. And a repeat viewing taking notes in the hope that nuances might present themselves for clarification or understanding. My notes ran 7 handwritten pages.

OK, first off--I don't think there is a "sweet spot" or "aha! now it all makes sense!" moment. There's no magic clue to piece it all together. It's a tough movie, with time looping in on itself. Part of the movie is told in flashbacks, and those flashbacks have their OWN flashbacks. With that in mind, here are some observations.

--At first I thought it more than coincidental that our hero "Min" meets photo-lady "Min" which at first suggested they may be manifestations of the same person, especially when you think one "Min" owns the photo store but actually the other one does. But the photo-Min is obviously the grown up manifestation of the little girl "Min" who died, and they were indeed separate people, as confirmed by the school principal, who was presented as an impartial observer and not used to obfuscate.

--One of the middle photos on the photo wall seems to me to be the creepy old hospital dude. It could be that one random old Korean geezer looks like any other random old Korean geezer, but I think it possible that they are the same person, which would make sense if creepy old hospital dude was actually a manifestation of Min's father (who gave him the key to the store--not sure how folks missed that); or, possibly a manifestation of an older Min himself. At the end, could that be a manifestation of the young boy Min, bringing things full circle? The fact that both the geezer and the boy interacted with a nurse would give question to that theory; it would be stronger if no one else saw them.

--The "memory" scene of the dead wife in the kitchen was interesting. It's obviously not a factual flashback, but sortof a combination of some interaction they may have had, and her "memory" telling him that she is, indeed, dead. Plus, the pantomine with the apple crunching was pretty bizarre. But remember the Choi/Su-young scene in the woods-house ALSO had apple crunching. If hero-Min did actually observe that, could it have wove itself into his memory?

--Right before Min hears of the plane crash on TV, he is startled by a spider in the TV production studio. I'm not sure it means anything specific other than atmosphere--but I did catch that. In actuality none of the "geeze, I got bit by a spider" or "geeze, there's a spider crawling on me" scenes actually had anything to do with the plot as far as I can tell.

I have more notes to discuss, and I'll go back and look at y'all's comments and thoughts in detail before I weigh in again. It's possible some of the above has already been "asked and answered."

Oh, but I almost forgot to add--my rating stays the same. 3.5 stars. The atmosphere and the "mystery" were good, but I believe too much in the way of understanding was sacrificed at the end of the day.
 
Last edited:

sitenoise

Member: Rank 5
I’m out and about but have to say I think there are a couple different versions of this film out and about. Please tell me the time stamp of when old man gives Min the key.

And this is the one that puts it over the top: I read about a scene with Eu ah and an apple in some other review. Ain’t no such scene in my version. Unless I’m really blind. Please offer a time stamp for said scene as well.

More later
 

divemaster13

Member: Rank 4
I’m out and about but have to say I think there are a couple different versions of this film out and about. Please tell me the time stamp of when old man gives Min the key.

And this is the one that puts it over the top: I read about a scene with Eu ah and an apple in some other review. Ain’t no such scene in my version. Unless I’m really blind. Please offer a time stamp for said scene as well.

More later
That is weird. I've got the Sunday night NFL game on right now, but later I'll slip in the DVD and check those scenes. The version I have is the Tartan Asian Extreme R1 DVD.

The scene with Eu ah in the kitchen is very goofily off-kilter. She puts on a red clown nose and pantomimes chomping an apple. The sound effects are exaggerated to really sell the apple part of the pantomine. It totally mirrors Choi's apple-chomping (though not his "War" monologue--which, come to think of it, is also a totally bizarre thing to be saying/doing while pounding a lovely young lady doggie-style. But I digress).

After reading your post above, about the trailers, I agree. There are scenes and dialog in the trailers that did NOT appear in the movie; although one was in one of the deleted scenes presented on the DVD features. On thing I think I saw in the trailer was the second hand on the watch running backwards at 4:00. Aha! A clue!

But no. I double-checked both scenes focusing on the watch in the film itself, and the second-hand is behaving normally in both. Did I see the trailer wrong? Or perhaps just an instance where the director changed his mind later in the process?
 

clayton-12

Member: Rank 4
Having only seen the film once, I feel I'm gonna be a distinct disadvantage here ...

She puts on a red clown nose and pantomimes chomping an apple. The sound effects are exaggerated to really sell the apple part of the pantomine.
That scene definitely wasn't in the version I saw. I've just done a skim through, and if the old-man-giving-a-key scene is around the same time as the nurse commented on his lost slipper, then that's not in my version either.

And the Caption "A house in the forest and a doubtful murder" WTF? That one's for you, @clayton-12

And the caption "if it comes out in a dream you mustn't open the door no matter what" ... where's that from? Who said it? It sounds kind of familiar.
That's easy to explain. The production company got a copy a film, and before sending it on to the distributor said "WTF Song Il-gon, you've made a goddamn ART FILM ... how the hell are we going to market this???" And they settled on the ghost story angle, hoping enough people would already part with their money before word gets out that it isn't actually full of pale-faced white-dressed long-haired spooky girls jumping out from behind the trees.

On thing I think I saw in the trailer was the second hand on the watch running backwards at 4:00. Aha! A clue!
One thing I picked up on my skim back was that the kitchen scene occurs at 4:00. Make of that what you will ...
 

divemaster13

Member: Rank 4
Ok, it's halftime and I'm staring at losing $600 on this f'ing game, so I went ahead and checked those scenes. The old man gives Min the key at about 21:30 -- 21:45. The kitchen pantomime apple-chomping scene is the scene that immediately follows. Check right after she puts on the red clown nose. About 25:30 -- 26:40.

And in watching it again, something just struck me as to what the scene is. I can't believe I didn't see it before. As far a I can figure, it doesn't bear on the movie plot...but if the film is saying something about original sin...
 

divemaster13

Member: Rank 4
The key scene would appear to be...key (sorry, I couldn't resist.)

So in your version, hero-Min shows up at the closed up/locked photo store and pulls a key out of his pocket--and the movie explains that how? He just happens to have the key to the seemingly abandoned shop? The shop which, up to that point, was open and running and owned by Min Su-in? I know the movie leaves a lot to the viewer to try to figure out, but that would seem a bit much.

At least my version poses interesting questions, which I alluded to above. Is he giving the key to himself? Is he creating the scene in his mind to subconsciously explain that he's had it all along (and is, in fact, the owner of the store)?
 

sitenoise

Member: Rank 5
Oh man. There is no Eu-ah chomping an apple in the version I have (starts with the Universal Pictures spinning earth logo, no Tartan). And no old man key scene. And this is odd, as well: The old man lost your slipper scene is at about 11:00 minutes in. This is weird because I thought both the old man (near the beginning) and the lost slipper kid scenes where they point at Min sitting up on his bed both signaled his escape. It's true of the kid scene, but ... The old man points and then the scene cuts to the surgeon leaning over Min--essentially the scene where the surgeon gives Min the Photo of Eu-ah. Then there's that random police busting scene with the copper that adds nothing to the film, then the cop talking to Min at bedside, then the cop crime scene in the forest, THEN (after cop boss tells cop friend he thinks Min did it) they THEN cut back to Min sitting up in bed and turning around to look (at Min Su-in--who they show both escape times right before he escapes), then he escapes and goes home and holds the photo up to the photo on the wall of Eu-ah that was facing backwards. Then the kitchen scene with no apples.

It makes no sense to cut the film that way. It should be as you describe. Old man points to Min (and gives him a key or not) and then Min escapes the hospital. Goes home, etc.
 

sitenoise

Member: Rank 5
So in your version, hero-Min shows up at the closed up/locked photo store and pulls a key out of his pocket--and the movie explains that how?
He doesn't pull a key out of his pocket. He's shown walking up to the shop, although it's weird because they show Su-in looking out at him, but also as they show Min approaching it appears to be from a second story window. And then all of a sudden he's in the photo shop with the dead flowers.

wtfmad.gif
 

sitenoise

Member: Rank 5
One thing I picked up on my skim back was that the kitchen scene occurs at 4:00. Make of that what you will ...
yep I noticed that too because they really make a thing of the 4:00 watch -- which does run backwards in the trailer but not the movie.
 
Top