ZEITGEIST

Review by Kyu Hyun  Kim

    The Evil Twin

The film is set in the Joseon Dynasty period. So-yeon (Park Shin-hye, Love Phobia), a teenage daughter of a moderately powerful yangban family, awakens from a ten-year coma, following a drowning accident that took the life of her twin sister Hyo-jin. So-yeon's mother (veteran TV actress Yang Geum-seok) is ecstatic, and aggressively orchestrates a marriage with Hyun-shik (Jae Hyuk, 3-Iron), the twin's childhood friend and So-yeon's betrothed. The village community, however, is soon plagued by mysterious deaths: So-yeon also seems to suffer from strange memory lapses and mismatched recollections of the drowning. Her childhood rival Seon-young (Han Yeo-woon) is convinced that So-yeon not only killed her own sister but is behind the recent murders as well. It is up to Hyun-shik to uncover the shocking truth about the twins' relationship...

Hoo boy, did I just write "shocking truth?" Let me speculate: I venture to guess that at one point The Evil Twin was supposed to be a straightforward retelling of a traditional ghost story, usually a young virgin wronged by the Confucian family system and blamed for sins she did not commit. Alas, the only carryover from that type of classic Korean ghost story is the long-haired, white-clad visage of the vengeful spirit. Nearly everything else has been updated disastrously. The film borrows its Korean title from the extremely popular TV program, Jeonseor-eui Gohyang ("The Heartland of Myths"), virtually the only anthology horror show in '70s and '80s Korea (and recently revived with better special effects but not necessarily better teleplays), but do not expect any purposefully retro look or gently satiric take on old things-that-go-bump-in-the-night cliches.

Instead, Evil Twin is yet another lugubrious, preachy genre film that takes itself way too seriously and loses sight of its primary objective: to scare and entertain its viewers. Director-writer Kim Ji-hwan seems to think that his film has some serious moral lessons about motherly love and sibling jealousy to impart. Sorry, but no dice. The dialogue is atrocious, sub-TV drama-level stuff, the pace is as slow as a cart pulled by a grazing mule, and the occasional outbreak of para-MTV editing hustle-bustle miserably fails to camouflage the fact that the story sucks like a leech lying in a flooded rice paddy. There is zero creativity in the way the ghost is presented, too: despite her traditional Korean imprimatur, she is just another PSC (Pointless Sadako Clone), complete with the awkward, in-need-of-a-chiropractor choreography.

The young actors and TV veterans work rather well together (one of the film's few pleasures is to spot recognizable veteran faces among the cast, such as Yang and Hong Seong-min, who has a brief cameo as So-yeon's physician) but they are mostly defeated by catatonia-inducing dialogue and characterization. And what's with the verbal catfight between So-yeon and Seon-young? They talk like 8th-graders enrolled in a chi-chi South-of-River junior high arguing over who's got the cooler-looking cell phone. Park and Han are reasonably cute, and the latter has at least a chance to run around fetchingly dressed as a young man: on the other hand, Han also has to suffer the humiliation of having to act enraged while covered with open sores and black sesame seeds… Eeew, don't even ask what I am talking about. To cap it all off, the film rips off the finale of the dorky Macaulay Culkin (remember him?) vehicle The Good Son (1993) and splashes it all over the audience as if it were a big, original plot twist.

Given such enervating examples as Evil Twin, even a die-hard horror film fan like me must take the news that the 2008 summer season will be devoid of the usual glut of K-horror as a positive development. This movie is a particularly galling experience, since a simple, no-bullcrap retelling of a Tale of Two Sisters-like classic ghost story would have been many times superior to it. Why give a film a Korean title like Heartland of Myths, if you are not going to live up to the expectations it brings?      (Kyu Hyun  Kim)

We are pleased to announce that Opus Creative’s hosting division, Opus Interactive, is now operating as an independent company led by Mark Brody. We look forward to a continued working relationship with Opus Interactive to support Opus Creative’s integrated marketing solutions.

2008.05.11:  May, the month of classic films   The most exciting Korean films scheduled to appear in theaters this May all happen to be made decades ago. This is because the Korean Film Archive (KOFA) is holding a festival to commemorate the official opening of their new cinematheque and film museum. It is also because the lineup of new contemporary films this month looks like the crumbs left at the bottom of the cookie jar. Not to denigrate those few low-budget films that have secured a release -- I haven't seen them yet, and they may turn out to be OK -- but as a measure of the current state of the Korean film industry, it's pretty depressing. (June and July, at least, should be better)

But the classic movies are indeed big news. The festival's opening film, which screened on Friday and again on Saturday, was the recently re-discovered 1934 silent feature Turning Point of the Youngsters. An original nitrate negative of the film was discovered in Korea last year by the son of a former theater owner. It was then handed over to the Archive, which arranged for restoration work to be done in Japan. Eight of the film's nine reels were salvaged, making for a 73-minute feature.

Most notably, Turning Point of the Youngsters (it seems like a more natural translation would be Crossroads of Youth) is now the oldest Korean film in possession, and the first film from Korea's silent era which is available for viewing. (There is another Korean silent film, The Prosecutor and the Woman Teacher, from 1948, but this is an odd exception because it was only shot in silent format because some older film stock happened to be available. At that point, it had been over a decade since Korea had switched over exclusively to sound)

As in Japan, Korean silent films feature no intertitles but are instead screened to the commentary of a live narrator (called a "byeonsa" in Korean, or "benshi" in Japanese). To fully revive the experience, KOFA staged a show with live music, onstage singing, and the narration of a byeonsa dressed up in 1930s-style clothing and speaking in a period dialect. The byeonsa was film and theater actor Jo Hee-bong (Midnight Ballad for Ghost Theater), the narration was written by Oh Ryu-mi, and overall direction of the screening/performance was done by Family Ties director Kim Tae-yong.

It was quite an impressive experience, actually. I once read a fascinating article about how, in the West, pianists who accompanied the screening of silent features in the 1910s and 1920s could drastically affect the viewing experience based on the tone of their music -- and would sometimes, if they sensed the crowd to be bored, even mock the film with sarcastic music. (For anyone who might want to track the article down, it's by Tim Anderson, in the fall 1997 volume of Cinema Journal) For a byeonsa, who not only describes what happens onscreen but throws in all manner of comments, the effect is vastly multiplied. A KOFA employee told me that at first, when planning this screening, they intended to do it "straight", and maintain a respectful, serious attitude towards the film. But later -- and I feel this was absolutely the right decision -- they decided to let the byeonsa throw himself into the melodramatic narrative and insert comedy when appropriate. The end result was very involving and funny, and it never felt disrespectful.

The film itself, about a brother and sister who come from the country into Seoul and encounter modern life (and heartless playboys) for the first time, would never be mistaken for a masterpiece. It is directed by An Jong-hwa, who made 12 features between 1930 and 1960. It also features Shin Il-seon, who starred in the lost classic Arirang (1926). Its biggest charm for modern viewers is probably the way in which it presents upper-class 1930s Seoul as if to the eyes of a first-time viewer. Many viewers of that time period would probably never have seen a golf course, an elevator, or the interior of an upscale restaurant. And we too, of course, take a similar perspective watching it today.

There is only one more screening scheduled, this one without the performance/narration, on May 21 at 5:30pm (seeing it in this way will be infinitely drier and more confusing, I'm sure). But the Saturday screening I saw was completely sold out and the young audience went crazy over it, so I think that KOFA will have to plan to do this again sometime.

In the meantime, they have the rest of the festival to finish. And in addition to a selection of overlooked Korean classics, restored films from around the world, a screening of early-twentieth century footage of Seoul, and more, they have another surprise for the closing film: Korea's very first animated feature, Hong Gil-dong (1967). Tom Giammarco wrote a great introduction to the film in his Brief History of Korean Animation, Part II. It was believed to be lost, but recently the film was discovered in Japan and returned to Korea. There is one (unsubtitled) screening only, on May 25 at 7pm. If you plan to be there, buy your tickets early.

Starting today, this blog is moving to http://dilbert.com/blog/.

There you will be able to vote on comments, and the best ones will float to the top.

Scott

My jaw dropped when I heard that presidential candidate Clinton dismissed the unified opinion of every economist on the planet and supported the gas tax rebate. The rebate is John McCain’s proposal. I think that proves both of them are unqualified to be president. Obama isn’t much better when it comes to sorting out economic policy from pandering, although he did avoid that particular landmine.

So I decided to start my own political party. I call it the Economics Party. There’s no paperwork involved, and you don’t even have to stop being a Democrat or Republican or whatever to join. The Economics Party won’t have its own candidates. All we’ll do is agree to vote for the candidate with the best long term economic policy, according to the consensus of leading economists.

The Economics Party would ignore superstition in its decisions. Here are a few things I think would end up on the platform, assuming most leading economists agree:

- Withdraw from Iraq
- More aggressive energy policy (back off on ethanol)
- More sane tax policies
- Limited government
- Legalize doctor assisted suicide
- Keep abortion legal
- Decriminalize marijuana
- Strong education policy

We’d make some exceptions for humanitarian reasons. For example, if a natural disaster hits a poor part of the country, it might be cheaper to let everyone die, but you have to put life ahead of money at some point.

The platform might look Libertarian, but it has differences. For example, a Libertarian might be opposed to the government making people wear motorcycle helmets. The Economics Party would just look at the likely higher cost of insurance in a helmet-free world and decide on that basis. I don’t know which way it would come out.

The Economics Party would be committed to changing its policy recommendation whenever the facts warranted. We’re pro flip-flop when it makes sense. In other words, our brains function properly.

If thirty or forty million people join the Economics Party, all major candidates would have to start paying attention to the consensus of economists. At the very least, voters would become more aware of what the leading economists think makes sense. That seems like a good thing.

Are you in?

I ran into a friend the other day who is a home builder. He had been planning to build several homes that would be extra-green, both because he wants to help the environment, and because he figured buyers would want that. After much research he abandoned the extra-green approach because he was assured by people in the know that no one would pay extra for an extra-green home. Buyers look at the location, square footage, kitchens, and all the usual stuff. No one even asks about the energy efficiency or indoor air quality.

The next time you go to buy an existing home, ask the real estate agent about the energy costs over the prior year. The agent will look at you like you have a giant turd on your head. I know because I asked that question the last time I was looking at houses. The agent can rattle off the homeowner association fees, tell you the school district, and an impressive array of other details, but never the energy costs.

Suppose you want to build your own energy efficient home. I’m trying to do that right now. So I look on the Internet to get the best information I can get on green building techniques. My federal government has a website filled with what seems to be useful tips. But on closer inspection it is just a laundry list of options with no quantitative comparison of the costs or benefits.

http://www.eere.energy.gov/consumer/your_home/water_heating/index.cfm/mytopic=12980

All I learn about insulation from the site is that higher R-values are better, except when they are unnecessary. Other sites appear to be funded by manufacturers, so I don’t trust them.

I met with an engineer whose job is to calculate whether your new California house will meet the minimum energy efficiency standards required by the state. I asked about our choice of insulation. I wondered how much I should spend on cranking up the R-values. He told me the walls weren’t nearly as important as the windows, because windows are the weakest link. Okay, fine, so how do I get the best windows?

That’s not so easy. It looks as if the big name window manufacturers carry only windows of average to good energy efficiency while the super efficient windows are made by someone named Karl in his woodshed. And my builder doesn’t know Karl.

Your home isn’t green because you can’t get there from here. I blame the government. It shouldn’t be so hard to make energy efficiency information available in a useful form so buyers and builders can make informed choices.

[A reader provided this link, that looks pretty cool if it works: http://www.enertia.com/]

Yesterday I was updating my retirement plan through age 110 and wondered if it was long enough. It seems to me that medical science is progressing so quickly I have a good shot at reaching 140.

This got me thinking. What will happen when medical science can keep almost anyone alive indefinitely, albeit looking like a peach that has been left in the sun for a month? Isn’t it inevitable that assisted suicide will be legal?

There’s no way the global economic system can keep several billion people alive over the age of 100. And if we assume most of those people can vote, and most of them will want at least the option of checking out early, then legalized assisted suicide is a near certainty.

The people over a hundred will want it, and the young people who wish the old people were dead so it would free up resources will want it too. There’s your majority right there.

In the short term, assisted suicide only needs to be legal in one country that has a good airport. Just fly in, let the doctor kill you, and go home in an urn.

Is it inevitable?

Regarding my previous post, how much water would a typical home have to pump into its own virtual dam in order to provide energy during a typical night while the water flows back out and through a generator?

Are we talking swimming pool size?

How big a container would you need to store the compressed air for the same purpose? Refrigerator size? Garage size?

I have the smartest readers in the world. Someone can probably answer that question on the back of an envelope.

In yesterday’s post I mentioned two Israeli companies that allegedly made big breakthroughs with solar power. Many of you noted that solar power is limited if you can’t store the energy in a cost-effective way for night use.

I did some Googling to see what’s new in battery storage, and this potential breakthrough popped up. Obviously it must be viewed skeptically until proven viable.

http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2008/january9/nanowire-010908.html

But I got to thinking that there must be a more natural way to store energy, using gravity. It might not surprise you to learn that I found exactly this sort of idea, appropriately, in the halfbakery.com web site:

http://www.halfbakery.com/idea/energy_20storage_20gravity

http://www.halfbakery.com/idea/Windmill_20Compressor_20Home_20Energy_20System#1121567081

I know, I know, you will point out that even if such systems of energy storage existed, they would be inefficient. It takes more energy to move a rock up a hill than you can capture from the return.

But how inefficient can your storage device be and still be viable? There is some theoretical amount of cheap energy production that compensates for almost any degree of inefficient storage. So if, for example, solar panels became 1,000 times more efficient and cost you next to nothing, it might not matter if your storage device could only capture half of what you generated. You’d still have plenty to get you through the night and charge your electric car too. I think it’s entirely plausible that we’ll have home battery systems, whether gravity based or not, that make oil obsolete except for specialty situations such as jets and maybe big trucks.

Some of you noted that oil has so much energy for its weight that solar power can never be expected to replace it for cars. But that too is more of a function of battery storage. Perhaps the nanowire battery or something like it will solve that. I think it will happen. And I think Israeli companies will be in the forefront, for national defense reasons, while the United States argues about flag lapel pins.

Yesterday I had one of those oh-my-God moments, the kind where I thought I could see the future. It started by reading some articles about the lack of a serious energy policy in the United States. The problem is that our politicians believe, probably correctly, that they can’t get elected if they propose an energy policy that could work.

Then I stumbled across an article about two Israeli companies that have allegedly made huge breakthroughs in solar power. As with all of these breakthrough stories, you have to assume they are more hype than substance, but take a look:

http://nextbigfuture.com/2008/04/solar-power-breakthroughs-sunrgi-7.html

The oh-my-God moment came when I realized that Israel can destroy all of its local enemies by inventing solar technology that makes oil uneconomical. Such an invention would do more harm than any military attack. And it’s all legal and moral. The politicians and business people in Israel have all the right incentives times a thousand. Their very survival is at risk. Israel is one patent away from crushing every oil producing country in the world.

So that’s my prediction. Whether these latest announcements are real or hype, I think Israel will eventually create the technology to make oil irrelevant to energy production.