andjel

A day before watching this movie, I read a book about our last king, who was sent into exile after World War I. One of the reasons was that he refused to sign a contract with the Masons. He sacrificed his position of power to stand up for what he believed was right. Naturally, watching this film about a king in exile, I found many parallels and deeply appreciated its themes. The king here is a young boy sent to live in a house on the other side of the river, separated from his people. The movie uses the river as a powerful symbol, but I won’t spoil it here because it is connected with the finale of the movie.

The film also promotes themes of overcoming selfish intentions, loyalty, friendship, community, breaking the boundaries of class — all of which I found meaningful and well-executed.

Unfortunately, the movie didn’t really move me emotionally. For me, it felt too uneven, constantly shifting between comedy and drama. It also relied heavily on cinematic tropes (for example, rain suddenly starting and stopping at the perfect dramatic moment for visual impact). Many scenes felt overly staged, which prevented me from fully immersing myself. Aside from the king’s warden (Yoo Hae-jin) and the king himself, the other characters were mostly caricatures in the background. Strangely, the moment that had the strongest emotional impact on me was the historical records shown at the end of the movie.

Although I respect and like this film, I can’t help but feel it could have been much better.