Do you remember when Dee-Jone had a fight when he was in prison, and when his mother blamed him, he said : ( MoM, You told me if anyone insluted me, i should beat him ) !
So, what I am trying to say that the mother was the one who encouraged Dee-Jone to that aggressive behavior, despite she is aware of her son's situation.
yes, she's aware of his mental capacity. but could she have predicted what happened to the girl? no. no one could have. what parent hasn't encouraged their child to stand up for themselves? and she probably only had other boys in mind because kids can be cruel and boys tend to instigate fights a lot. i dont think she wanted an aggressive son, in fact, im sure she believed and accepted that her son 'wouldn't hurt a water bug' like she said in the movie.
shareThat is the whole point of the movie.
shareExactly. The whole film has her coming across as this incredible mother who will do anything for her son when the reality is, it is all her fault. She knew how her son was, and should have given him better advice.
shareThanks OP. Great post. I actually saw that too, but could not make the connection. Now the movie has impressed me much more.
I knew that in a Korean movie always are philosophical messages. Here it is...
yes, she's aware of his mental capacity. but could she have predicted what happened to the girl? no. no one could have. what parent hasn't encouraged their child to stand up for themselves? and she probably only had other boys in mind because kids can be cruel and boys tend to instigate fights a lot. i dont think she wanted an aggressive son, in fact, im sure she believed and accepted that her son 'wouldn't hurt a water bug' like she said in the movie.
Of course there's nothing wrong with encouraging your children to stand up for themselves, but obviously you'd need to deal with a mentally challenged child differently.
If she was only thinking of other boys, then it's a pretty serious miscue on her part. While it's less likely for girls to instigate fights, name calling is not that uncommon at all for girls.
Also, his aggressive behavior looks more like something that would have been a persisting problem throughout his life. Kids can be cruel, and with his situation, I'm pretty sure he's been called degrading names all his life. If this was a persisting problem like it likely has been, and it eventually evolved into someone getting killed, then she does have to take a lot of the blame.
You could take that view but the reality was she was trying to teach a special needs child to defend himself. While she might have made more of an effort to teach him to fight with words and not his fists at least she was able to teach him that he shouldn't put up with people putting him down just because of who he is.
If you want to blame someone, blame all the people who called him "retard" to the point where he threw a rock at someone for doing it.
oh snap, so its societies fault, its always societies fault.
shareHow can she teach a special needs child to fight with words? She taught a boy with a disability how to survive around taunts & bullying. The problem I noticed was maybe due to her guilt, she didn't discipline him well enough, she did not teach him well enough, she didn't teach him when to fight & who to fight, not just every taunting from just about anyone. She didn't teach him patience, he was pretty impulsive & reckless & she didn't discipline him to minimize it. So in a way, her lack of discipline & over-nurturing is the problem, not necessarily her teaching him to fight those who bully him, the problem was she never defined those boundaries for him.
OPEN YOUR EYES! dailymotion.com/video/xbi2hi_1993-chandler-molestation-extortion_news
Yes that is obvious. Also the Mother only taught her son to make things even. Of course she couldn't have predicted a girl would throw a large rock at him.
shareYes, but additionally adding to that. I was doing a little thinking into this theory, and while she could not have predicted she would throw the rock at him, and he did not have the rational decision making capability to realize it was a bad idea to throw the rock back. However, when you look at it this way, the mother is also directly responsible for him no longer being mentally capable to think things through rationally. This is because he most likely got brain damage when she tried to kill him and herself when he was only 5 years old. So really, you can still tie the mother directly to the cause of the murder. Great film.
shareI don't think that she is responsible for him being the way he is, i mean i understood that she wanted to kill him and herself back than because he is mentally ill and she was a single mother with no money and that was tough for her.
And of course it's partialy her fault for the crime he commited but i can only imagine that it's hard to have a kid like that and to raise him alone and she did what she thought it's the best for her child and btw that people were really mean.
And sorry if my english is poor.
The mother didn't just teach him to fight back. Right before the night of the murder, she encouraged him to have sex with a woman. She even gave him some obscure medicine to improve his virility. Without that encouragement, he probably wouldn't have been so stalkerish and the murder wouldn't have happened.
But although she is part of the cause chain, she couldn't have seen the murder coming, so this is barely her fault. Also, encouraging her son to fight back and date women isn't something bad. It's other things she is guilty of.