Home Forums Movies Lead or Supporting: Cho Yeo-Jeong (Mrs. Park) in Parasite

Lead or Supporting: Cho Yeo-Jeong (Mrs. Park) in Parasite

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 30 total)
Created
1 month ago
Last Reply
4 weeks ago
29
replies
1557
views
13
users
BetteDavis
9
Wanda
7
Jacob Boe
2
Lead or Supporting: Cho Yeo-Jeong (Mrs. Park) in Parasite
Lead
Supporting
  • Profile picture
    BetteDavis
    Joined:
    Feb 4th, 2020
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203581318

    The film is clearly about the family, its social status and the decisions they collectively make to move from it. They all share the same struggles and similar screentime. The four of them are lead and the other two families are supporting.

    They definitely do not share the same screentime and the focus is definitely on the son’s arc more than anyone else’s. That being said, you can make the argument that the whole cast is supporting, but you really cannot make the argument that the whole family is lead.  Certain members of that family definitely have more screentime and focus than others.

    My profile on Letterboxd https://letterboxd.com/Icecreamb

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Wanda
    Joined:
    Feb 16th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203581326

    but you really cannot make the argument that the whole family is lead.

    I just did it

    Last.fm: https://www.last.fm/es/user/Into_You
    https://letterboxd.com/cherry123/

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    BetteDavis
    Joined:
    Feb 4th, 2020
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203581330

    I just did it

    Yeah but it wasn’t a good or solid argument.

    My profile on Letterboxd https://letterboxd.com/Icecreamb

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Wanda
    Joined:
    Feb 16th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203581332

    Yeah but it wasn’t a good or solid argument.

    I’m pretty sure I got the synopsis of the film and what a lead character means right.

    Last.fm: https://www.last.fm/es/user/Into_You
    https://letterboxd.com/cherry123/

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    BetteDavis
    Joined:
    Feb 4th, 2020
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203581346

    I’m pretty sure I got the synopsis of the film and what a lead character means right.

    Your argument is that the entire family has the focus of the film and similar screentime. This is incorrect.  The son is clearly the main focus of the film, followed then by the father.  The son has more streentime than the father who has more screentime than the sister who has more screentime than the mother.

    In fact, the Park (rich) mother probably has more screentime than the two women from the poorer family.

    There really isn’t a “lead” to the film. The son has probably the most screentime and the epilogue being from his PoV makes him feel lead, but it’s truly an ensemble piece. The only character where you can truly say that they could be the lead is the son.

    You can’t say that the entire family is lead. They don’t have the individual screentime or the focus to make that argument.

    My profile on Letterboxd https://letterboxd.com/Icecreamb

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Wanda
    Joined:
    Feb 16th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203581363

    Your argument is that the entire family has the focus of the film and similar screentime. This is incorrect.  The son is clearly the main focus of the film, followed then by the father.  The son has more streentime than the father who has more screentime than the sister who has more screentime than the mother.

    Lol, you are confusing “being the focus of the film” with screetime. Like I said, the film uses the whole family to depict different economic realities between different social statuses. The kid or his father having a little more screentime than the female characters or a few more scenes with shock value is not relevant to their placement as lead or supporting.

    Last.fm: https://www.last.fm/es/user/Into_You
    https://letterboxd.com/cherry123/

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    BetteDavis
    Joined:
    Feb 4th, 2020
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203581379

    Lol, you are confusing “being the focus of the film” with screetime. Like I said, the film uses the whole family to depict different economic realities between different social statuses. The kid or his father having a little more screentime than the female characters or a few more scenes with shock value is not relevant to their placement as lead or supporting.

    I’m not confusing the two. The son has the most focus throughout the film.  You have to look at the characters individually. You can’t convince me that the poor family’s mom is lead.  She doesn’t have the focus or the screentime.

    The whole family is not lead. They don’t have the individual focus throughout the film.

    My profile on Letterboxd https://letterboxd.com/Icecreamb

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Wanda
    Joined:
    Feb 16th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203581383

    You can’t convince me that the poor family’s mom is lead.  She doesn’t have the focus

    But she literally does.

    Last.fm: https://www.last.fm/es/user/Into_You
    https://letterboxd.com/cherry123/

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    BetteDavis
    Joined:
    Feb 4th, 2020
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203581442

    But she literally does.

    She doesn’t. Have you not seen this movie?

    My profile on Letterboxd https://letterboxd.com/Icecreamb

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Wanda
    Joined:
    Feb 16th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203581453

    She doesn’t. Have you not seen this movie?

    I think you could come up with real arguments instead.

    Last.fm: https://www.last.fm/es/user/Into_You
    https://letterboxd.com/cherry123/

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    BetteDavis
    Joined:
    Feb 4th, 2020
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203581490

    I think you could come up with real arguments instead.

    I have been but your argument sounds like you read a Wikipedia synopsis.

    The focus of the film is clearly on the son with his arc about the rock and his epilogue at the end.  I don’t even understand what you’re talking about with “shock value.”  The son clearly has the most focus with him opening and closing the film as well as being the person who comes up with the idea as well as him having the most screentime.  The only person who gets close is the father.  You could say that the father is borderline lead. However, I would argue that everyone but the son is supporting.  It’s truly an ensemble film where everyone could go supporting, except the son, who really doesn’t have an argument to go supporting.  He clearly has the most focus throughout the film.

    My profile on Letterboxd https://letterboxd.com/Icecreamb

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Jacob Boe
    Joined:
    Apr 20th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203581701

    Okay. No need for this discussion because there isn’t one. For (almost) every performance, there is a clear, cut, and dry category they belong to. In Parasite, EVERY SINGLE character is Supporting. Why, you ask? Well, for a character to be a lead they either, a) must be the clear protagonist having the most screentime (e.g. Frances McDormand in Three Billboards), b) have a screentime greater than or equal to 50% of the film’s runtime (e.g. Lady Gaga in A Star Is Born), or c) have a screentime greater than or equal to 75% of any of the film’s leads (e.g. Felicity Jones in The Theory of Everything). These rules are of my creation, but they have worked with every film I have applied this to, and I honestly believe the Academy should adopt it. Anyway, following this, Parasite has no lead. Nobody is in 50% or more of the film. There is not a clear lead, obviously, as we have an entire discussion on it. And finally, according to the 75% rule, there would be five leads: the family and the Park mother. But, the two mothers are in less than 25% of the movie. So, unless you think that is enough to be lead, which is technically debatable according to the aforementioned rules, there is no lead.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    ArtIsntEasy
    Joined:
    Dec 17th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203582461

    Yes, I still have to agree that the four actors that portray the Kim family are not all Leads.

    Only Choi Woo-shik has the screentime/arc that would make me justify putting him in Lead.

    Then I would MAYBE consider Song Kang ho and Cho Yeo Jeong as borderline leads but both belong and should’ve won in Supporting.

    Park So-dam made a strong impression, to be sure, and she is the one who seems to assimilate into the Parks’ lifestyle the most, but she is definitely Supporting.

    I can’t even justify the Kim mother, Jang Hye-jin, as being a Lead.

    Now, to counter this, I do think a performance such as Anthony Hopkins in THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS does throw a wrench into this as he certainly had the screentime to be Supporting. However I feel like that is one rare example where people seem to let the one slide….probably because he was far and away the best in that category.

    “The art of making art is putting it together...”

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    Jacob Boe
    Joined:
    Apr 20th, 2019
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203582827

    The whole Anthony Hopkins thing doesn’t make sense to me. He was in it for only a little bit. He’s supporting. Who cares about the kind of impression he had? That doesn’t make him leading. Because of this, and the characters in Parasite, I think there should also be a stipulation that a lead must be in at least 25% of the film.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Profile picture
    BetteDavis
    Joined:
    Feb 4th, 2020
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1203582863

    The whole Anthony Hopkins thing doesn’t make sense to me. He was in it for only a little bit. He’s supporting. Who cares about the kind of impression he had? That doesn’t make him leading. Because of this, and the characters in Parasite, I think there should also be a stipulation that a lead must be in at least 25% of the film.

    Weirdly enough, I was shocked to hear that Anthony Hopkins is in so little of Silence of the Lambs because I would swear that he’s in most of the movie.  Maybe because he’s the most memorable part and makes the biggest impression.  I also wonder if it’s because his screentime is spread throughout the film, making him feel like he’s got more screentime than he really has.

    Nicole Kidman in The Hours and Olivia Colman in The Favourite are interesting cases because they’re both borderline roles (with Kidman leaning more supporting), but all of the film’s events revolve around their characters.  They’re basically the lead regardless of screentime because the entire focus of the film is on them, even when they aren’t on screen.

    My profile on Letterboxd https://letterboxd.com/Icecreamb

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 30 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Similar Topics
Nameizmann - Aug 6, 2020
Movies
Nameizmann - Aug 6, 2020
Movies
darthva... - Aug 4, 2020
Movies