MovieChat Forums > H (2002) Discussion > The ending (spoilers included)

The ending (spoilers included)

posted 18 years ago by Ronin-38
9 replies | jump to latest

From what I understand, you can't hypnotize someone into killing a person. You can't hypnotize someone into doing something that is against their nature. Heck, I don't even think if it WAS in their nature it could be done. And sure, someone could argue that it was in the cop's (Kang's) nature to do something like that, but I find it to be a stretch. I never got the idea he was violently angry at his mother for what she'd done in the past, and that still doesn't cover the other 'murders' that Kang commits in the film. I just thought it was a pretty weak 'twist' or solution as to how a killer commits his crimes while being locked up in prison. I had actually quite liked the film up until the proposterous ending.

J.

[–] orsonlovespeas 18 years ago

Didn't think so much it was absolutely preposterous, but def. somewhat of a stretch. I thought it was clever, but it didn't make me go WOW! probably cause I didn't completely buy it. The thing for me with this film was that the first 40 minutes or so were great, but then it was... just missing something. It wasn't bad by any means, the acting was solid throughout, Kang was superb, but it was missing...that ingredient that makes a movie really good.

[–] terramax02 18 years ago

acting... solid? Are you kidding. The interrogation scenes were a mess. The main character (Jong-yang poo or whatever) seems to shake with anger or fear whenever someone does the most remotely obnoxious things around him. Sure, Kang was a weirdo, but his acting was plain silly. If I were in that room, I'd be wetting myself with laughter every time he said something. He came out with drival half the time, and the most queer look anyone could ever have.

Heroes win the battle, cowards win the war.

[–] Dr_Acula_112 18 years ago

i really liked most of the film most of the way through and i did like the way the twist came about, but i was slightly confused. i understand kang committed murders under hypnosis, but he didn't commit all of them did he? can someone throughly explain the end, it would greatly help.

[–] squarefandaniel 18 years ago

I actually thought the acting was very good on Kang's part especially. How the character acted in those certain situations has nothing to do with you or anyone else. It had to do with how the writer envisioned the main character acting. The actor simply acted how he was told to in those interrogation scenes. You can't compare how you would act to how others would, simply because the fact remains that those people are not you.

[–] masaty 18 years ago

I have my Psychology textbook right here, and it says:

"Researchers Martin Orne and Frederick Evans (1965) demonstarated that hypnotized people could be induced to perform an apparently dangerous act. The participants followed a request to dip one hand into fuming acid, and then throw the "acid" in a research assistant's face. When interviewed a day later, they exhibited no memory of their acts and empathetically denied they would ever follow orders to commit such an act."

However, the textbook goes onto say that all the <i>unhynotized</i> partipiants (perhaps believing that the lab setting assured safety) performed the same acts as the ones that were hypnotized.

"Similarly, most hypnotized subjects can be induced to deface a secret book, and a few will even steal an exam or sell illegal drugs [how'd they test this?]. But most people asked to simulate hypnosis are equally likely to do the same (Levitt, 1986)."

So...I don't know. It doesn't say anything about murder. Obviously, no lab group has ever experimented with murder. Does anyone have any links saying that you can't murder someone under hypnosis? Because that'd reassuring, although I still think the emding was dumb and totally farfetched. I should have just rented Match Point or another foreign crime drama they had instead....

[–] sephiroth-clone-0 18 years ago

Well...
I thought it was an alright movie, and liked it better than the movie Se7en (which it could be said that this "was inspired by" or quite simply "ripped off"...)...
but it wasn't like all "woo-hoo omg, I totally didn't see that ending coming"... I mean, shortly after his "if you stare into the abyss, be aware that the abyss stares back at you" line, I started wondering if the female cop (Kim??) was the killer, because she might have gone nuts- the shrink had said something about cops involved with the first case getting mental illnesses, so I was wondering if she'd totally gone off the deep end. And then, of course, with Kang wandering around right after his car accident, made me wonder if he was for some reason the killer, but that kind of abated... until, of course, he woke up in the basement with the other female detective, and the dead body...

My problem was, there were too many suspects, and it didn't make that much sense. I mean, who commited the first two crimes? Was it the guy that got shot- the doctor that quit because he was stealing supplies- or the guy who slits his own throat towards the end? (who had another personality that thought it was the original killer, Shin Hyun, or whatever his name was). -- the first two COULDN'T have been made by Kang, obviously, as he hadn't met the nut to GET hypnotized yet. Well, or the third, for that matter. So it was just the last two killings that were actually his (and then the unfortunate 6th one which also mirrored Shin Hyun's... well, was that his wife, or his mother, anyway? I what seemed to be a fansub... or just a horrible official one, one of the two.)

But hey, at least unlike Se7en, the ending didn't suck so much ass, because you could tell he WANTED to die

[–] kisa_crow88 18 years ago

Yeah, the ending was a bit of a letdown, and a bit odd... He didn't kill himself so why did the other detective decide she'd go ahead and do it for him? Furthermore, alot of events aren't very well explained or fleshed out and alot goes unsaid.

I agree with the other person who said the serial killer was amusing. I know I didn't take him seriously and all that pseudo-philosophical/spiritual BS was just ridiculous, not to mention irritating...

The acting was alright, and this wasn't a terrible film, I just felt that it could have been better...

Oh, and Se7en is far cooler ^_^.

You're all geniuses, and you're all beautiful. - John Lennon

[–] spacecube2000 16 years ago

remenber the scene with the lighter ? i think thats when he hypnotised her , ...
and before leaving he says ''someday we will enjoy the light from the sunny sky'' and thats right at the end .
she was hypnotized to kill him ,

[–] baygerbieger 15 years ago

so often in movies, things happen that aren't true. pretty crazy huh?