In my art class we have to do a film critque on the film "Stoker" (2013) directed by Park Chan-wook and I need help answering several of these questions:
1. How technically sound and sophiscated is the film, and how well does it utilize the full potential of the medium?
2. How purposeful is the star's performance?
3. How ell does the film reflect the philosphy, personality, and aristic vision of the director?
4. How worthwhile or significant os the staement made by the film, and how powerfully is it made?
5. How effective is the film as an emotional or sensual experience?
6. How well does the film conform to the patterns of its genre, and wat varaitions or innovations does it introduce into that formula?
These questions are probing your own personal responses as the viewer of the film. To help you formulate or effectively argue your responses here are some interviews with the creator and participants of the film:
Interview With the Creators of Stoker
"The movie asks, is evil inherent, is there such a thing as bad blood and a predisposition to violence? But with these complex psychologies we didn't seek to answer every question."
‘Stoker’ Director Park Chan-Wook Plays in the Castle of Genre
Film School Rejects (FSR)
"In his American film debut, Stoker, director Park Chan-wook‘s sensibility remains intact. Nothing about his sense of humor, eye for framing, or his stylish and brutal portrayal of violence has been softened or altered. The film plays in genre, which Park refers to as a “castle” he likes to regularly take twists and turns in.
The critically-acclaimed director doesn’t see himself above genre, though. Park doesn’t subvert genre staples but fully embraces them with a slightly twisted view."
And here is a good (albeit brief) film review pointing out some subtle but important technical issues:
Film Review: Park Chan-wook STOKER with Matthew Goode
Alternative Film Guide (altfilmguide)
"...some will have become so entranced by the captivating images, the visual and musical metaphors, and the sensual interludes alluding to Nabokov’s Lolita (as directed by Adrian Lyne in 1996), that the fact that much of Stoker does not add up may go unnoticed."