Q. How does the ‘Serial Killer’ subgenre change when applied to different cultural contexts, shown with ‘Zodiac‘ (David Fincher, 2007) and ‘Memories of Murder‘ (Bong Joon-ho, 2003)?

POINT BY POINT COMPARISON	‘Zodiac‘ EXAMPLE	‘Memories of Murder‘ EXAMPLE
Comparative Point 1 Genre
Comparative Point 2 Perspectives	The main characters	The murderer
Comparative Point 3 Cultural Background	USA	South Korea

Comparative Point 1:

Zodiac and Memories of Murder are both remarkably similar, yet strikingly different interpretations of the ‘Serial Killer’ subgenre. These films can be viewed through Steve Neale’s genre theory, where he argues that enjoyment is extracted from “repetition and difference.” [PRESENT WORDS ONSCREEN] He suggests that genres are interpreted and understood by audiences through the repetition of the use of components utilised within those genres, in addition to newer or more unique elements that the filmmaker has chosen to include, to differentiate from other films with the same genre. This blend of repetition and difference arguably creates more engagement and intrigue for the audience, since rather than watching the repetitive narrative and predictability of the films, they are introduced to slight or major variations in story and content. The films can also be viewed through Christian Metz’s genre theory, in which he believed that genres go through a cycle of stages during their lifetime. These were: the experimental stage, with films such as The Cabinet of Dr Caligari, where the generic codes and conventions are set; the classic stage, with films such as Dial M for Murder, where the codes and conventions become iconic and idealized as guidelines for the genre; the parody stage, with films such as Clue, where the codes and conventions are used to mock the genre; and the deconstruction stage, with films such as Pulp Fiction, where the genre begins to evolve and merge with other genres. Both Zodiac and Memories of Murder fall under the category of the deconstruction stage.

Comparative Point 2:

These films create their own unique identities through the distinguishable perspectives they are told from. Zodiac takes the traditional approach, in which the audience connect with the principal characters working on the case, with the narrative being told from their perspectives throughout. Even when they are not present during a scene, Fincher presents their perception of each crime through the similar and differing accounts that the surviving victims gave to the detectives. This is made clear through the inconsistent appearance of the Zodiac killer in the recollections of each crime, where he is described with contrasting physical features including size and stature, with a different actor playing him each time. The decision to direct the film in this way was through David Fincher’s intense obsession for historical accuracy. When deciding which Zodiac murders he should include in the film, he made certain that every death he included had a surviving witness that he was able to interview. With so much misinformation surrounding the Zodiac killer, he only wanted to include moments in his film that he could verify the accuracy of. By watching the film through the protagonists’ eyes, the audience are easily misled and only receive information when it is revealed to the main characters. Memories of Murder, on the other hand, has a clear borderline between the audience and the characters onscreen, by giving them the perspective of ‘spectators’, watching the action unfold without needing to participate. Through this perspective, the audience is allowed to witness the murders as they take place, gaining information that the detectives don’t even have, and there are even moments of intra-diegesis from the killer’s point of view as he stalks his next victim. The final shot of Memories of Murder, where Detective Park breaks the fourth wall and looks directly into the lens of the camera, as though looking for the killer in the audience, puts the viewer in the culprit’s perspective, which forms the revelation that the scenes where he commits the crimes, are his memories.

Comparative Point 3:

With both Zodiac and Memories of Murder being based around true past events, there is plenty of historical and cultural context that can be used when comparing the two films. In Zodiac, the main story is set in the busy city of San Francisco during the late 1960s to early 1970s, where most citizens of San Francisco see the taunting letters, phone calls and murders as more of an interesting story than an actual danger, making the Zodiac killer seem insignificant and unthreatening. The director, David Fincher, grew up in the San Francisco Bay Area and could recall being afraid of the Zodiac killer as a child, so he had a personal connection to the material which assisted in the crafting of the film, as well as the 18 months both Fincher and screenwriter, James Vanderbilt, spent researching the case by reading thousands of documents, and interviewing many surviving witnesses and police officers to piece together the most accurate version of the story. In Memories of Murder, the main story is set in a small, isolated village in South Korea during the 1980s, where the people live in fear of the serial killer roaming their town. With the bigger cities in South Korea developing at a much faster pace than the small villages, the characters are poorly educated, and systems in place to deal with crime scenes are non-existent, with evidence constantly being mishandled or tampered with. For example, when a tractor drives over a footprint at the place of the murder, ruining it, Detective Park uses the shoe of his first suspect to plant a new footprint, and takes a photo for evidence. By re-examining a real-life crime that many Koreans would still remember, the film has the chance of appealing to its Korean audience and remind them of the politically and socially dark period during the 1980s.