Insane: Burning up the Madhouse

The problem with plot twists at the end of the movie where they show footage of what actually took place at a crucial moment is it throws into question everything that happened beforehand. Must we trust the new scene without question? Are there other scenes that also didn't unfold as previously shown? Throw into the mix that Insane's female lead (Kang Ye-won) was kidnapped to a psych ward where she was tortured by a diabolical doctor (Kim Jong-soo) who harvested his other victims for their black market organs and you realize how slippery the truth is destined to be. Are we really expected to believe that a discredited reporter seeking fame is our most reliable source?

So Insane is insane and inane; Lee Cheol-ha's maddening whodunit Is also a whodunwhat as we struggle to figure out exactly what crimes were committed first then figure out who is responsible for each one. Arson. Murder. Abduction. Torture. Dirty medicine. Shady journalism. Castration. You'd assume with that last one I'd know who the culprit was but I don't feel confident that I do. And I did see who the victim was! But was it a trick castration? Or should we write that grisly crime off like the woman who claimed her uterus was messed up by vaseline? I'll leave solving this puzzle to someone else.

Quick: An Action-Comedy That Will Make Your Head Explode

Let's pretend for a moment that you're a movie director and a highly amusing action-comedy script comes across your desk. From the looks of it, if you can get the required budget and the right actors, the action sequences promise to be breathtaking and the best comedic bits will be gut-bustingly funny. The problem is that the parts in between them are, frankly, kind of boring and border on the incomprehensible. What do you do? Do you bring in another writer, a crackerjack script doctor perhaps, to tighten up the exposition and iron out the wrinkles or do you go back to the original screenwriters and say, "Give me more action, more slapstick, and less talk." I'm guessing Cho Beom-gu took the latter approach -- many times in fact -- because while Quick still has a few, fairly short, dull explanatory sections that tell us why this rash of bombings is happening throughout Seoul, it's a hell of a lot less concerned with explaining why the leather-clad pop diva Ah-rom (Kang Ye-won) has a time-bomb motorcycle-helmet strapped to her head and more committed to having her scream nonsensically and gesticulate wildly as former-boyfriend/expert-motorcyclist/indie-courier Gi-soo (Lee Min-ki) races from one location to the next. Who cares why these two ex-lovers are being forced to execute a series of death-defying assignments when you get to see so many spectacular car pile-ups and so many glamorously fiery explosions? Not me.

You'll see Gi-soo's motorcycle leap from buildings, smash through glass, crash through steel, outrace trains, cop cars and overweight detectives running nonsensically after him on foot. The implausible part is a major contributing factor to why Quick is so deliriously good. The ridiculousness elevates the movie, even as it extends outside the action. How crazy does it get? How about when a weary, naked Ah-rom showers with her helmet on or when Gi-soo's self-deluded romantic rival Myeong-sik (Kim In-kwon) backbends under a sixteen-wheeler careening and aflame right above him? While that particular moment is clearly the result of some fancy green screen CGI special effects, Quick is by no means without its own dose of reality. Stick around for the closing credits which reveal behind-the-scenes footage of the bruises, the bang-ups, and the broken bones suffered by both the cast and their body doubles who skid motorcycles under trucks or propel their bodies recklessly through space for the perfect shot. The risks taken may seem crazy when you consider that they're all just for a silly action pic but personally, I think their efforts were worth it.