Syed Shahriar Hossain:

PARASITE, directed by Bong Joon Ho in 2019, had been critically acclaimed as one of the most effectual cinematic commentaries on modern society and hailed as one of the best films of the 21st century. With an airy balance of dark humour, suspense, and sharp-eyed social critique, Bong launches a scathing attack on the ideology of capitalism, fuelling those self-perpetuating cycles of exploitation, resentment, and dehumanisation that structural economic inequality creates. The movie tells a serendipitous story of the entanglement between two families: the rich Parks and the poor Kims — entwined in circumstances, yet divided by an insurmountable barrier of class.

With layered storytelling and vast attention to detail, Parasite debunks the myth of social mobility, pointing out structures that impede the working class from ever being pulled out of their perpetual marginalization. Setting, imagery, and the psychological toll wrought by economic disparity — these things come across as an unflinchingly honest look at a society where the working class exists only to support and reinforce the lives of those privileged.

Parasite isn’t a movie; it’s a cultural phenomenon. It was a violently honest illustration of class struggle and systemic inequality that the viewer was forced to confront. The universal theme resonates across cultures and borders; hence it is timeless; it will outlive film as an expression medium. Parasite bears a powerful message on the unsustainable dynamics of dependency and division, cultivated by capitalism, told through bold storytelling and incisive critique. This essay explores class conflict through the prism of Bong’s visionary work through, among other things, the use of physical space, symbolism, character dynamics, and cinematographic technique to underscore the injustices innate in the capitalist system.

Class hierarchy and spatial division

THE spatial geometry in Parasite, therefore, spells out the deep-seated divisions of class in capitalist societies. The Kim family lives in a semi-basement apartment that reflects their position in society — on the margins, neither submerged into poverty nor elevated into affluence. It is a small, dark space, semi-subterranean by nature, to illustrate their limited view on life outside their class. While they are able to see the outside world through the small window, this is the extent of their social location constraint. Bong drives this message of division home through the catastrophic rainstorm that floods their home, washing away their few belongings and obliging them to find shelter in a hot, steamy public gymnasium. This is, of course, also symbolic of the precarious existence that capitalism lays upon the working class, whereby even minimal disruption will result in disaster.

In contrast, the hilltop mansion belonging to the Park family becomes a symbol of wealth and privilege. This place-developed architecture with open spaces, natural light, and modern aesthetics represents all those securities and comforts that money affords. The Parks are physically and metaphorically separated from the struggles of the working class. This division is furthered by the movie’s recurring use of stairways: the Kims have to go upstairs to get to the Parks’ house but then also down to the subterranean areas of both their own semi-basement or the bunker hidden in the Parks’ house. As Timothy Corrigan duly observes, Bong mobilises here verticality to stress ‘spatially insurmountable barriers between rich and poor, reflecting the rigidity of class structures’ (Corrigan 89). These spatial juxtapositions critique the ideal of social mobility in capitalism; it is to say, the system is designed that way to keep working-class citizens at the bottom and never able to escape the bonds of their socioeconomic status.

Symbolism and the dehumanising effects of wealth

BONG uses symbolism to expose psychological and emotional distance between classes. Perhaps one of the more obvious themes of Parasite is that of ‘smell.’ Mr Park constantly remarks on the smell of the Kim family, how it is just so repulsive and unique. In one instance, he mentions to his wife that Mr Kim smells ‘like a subway,’ or something definitely recognisable and lower class. This reveals how the upper class truly sees the working class as less and grimier. Smell becomes an invisible yet potent marker of class difference, symbolising the Kims’ inability to transcend their socioeconomic status, no matter how convincingly they mimic the Parks’ behaviours.

Christopher Bell argues that this trope demonstrates how capitalist societies impose intangible but powerful markers of class distinction on the working class (Bell 112). The disgust of the Parks towards the smell of the Kims is one not of hygiene but rather of the deeper underlying dehumanisation of the poor. By reducing the Kims down to their smell, Mr Park dehumanises them, reinforcing the psychological divide that exists between classes. Dehumanisation like this creates resentment in the Kims, especially in Ki-taek, whose eventual outbreak in violence reveals the breaking point of the oppressed.

The storm also works as a strong metaphor for the indiscrimination of capitalism. For the Parks, it is little more than a minor nuisance that postpones a garden party. For the Kims, on the other hand, it is the bringing of devastation upon their makeshift home and forcing them into further despair. This scene ‘exposes the precarity of the working class, whereby even a minor natural event can have disastrous effects’ (Lewis 67). Using the storm as a metaphor, Bong shows the inequities of capitalism — where the poor are helpless against forces beyond their control and the rich sit in a bubble without a thought to such inconveniences. This juxtaposition visually and narratively critiques a system that prioritises, at all costs, comfort for the privileged over the survival of the underprivileged.

Character dynamics and the fiction of social class mobility

THE dynamic nature of the relationship between the Kim and Park families shows that social mobility in a capitalist society is a delusion. Initial infiltration of the park household by the Kims illustrates a determination to rise above class status. By hijacking jobs with the Parks, the Kims fleetingly get to enjoy the trappings of success. The success they realise, however, is predicated on a lie; it speaks volumes regarding the nonexistent avenues available and/or legitimate for poor people to climb the social ladder. Their threat of being found out is represented in a wonderfully tense scene where they all crouch under the Parks’ living room table, revealing how precarious their position is. They are aliens who cannot be completely assimilated into the world of the rich and affluent.

These psychological burdens most vividly come to the forefront through Ki-taek. The consistently critical comments Mr Park makes about his smell, as well as his careless indifference to working-class struggle, slowly strip Ki-take of dignity. This anger bursts into a violent action during the climax of the movie and blasts the illusory harmony between the two families. According to Sarah Lewis, ‘The outburst by Ki-taek is the internalised frustrations of the working class, which, when left unaddressed, erupt in confrontation’ (Lewis 67). Bong indicates that not only does capitalism perpetuate inequality, but it creates an environment in which resentment and violence are inevitable.

The desperation inherent in the pursuit of financial security is also underscored by how the Kims have incrementally infiltrated the Park household, having displaced the Parks’ original staff. The Kims’ deception and willingness to exploit others in similar socioeconomic positions reflect the pressures that capitalism places on the working class to compete for survival. This dynamic underline class division between the working class and the rich, showing how a capitalist system even pits poor people against each other for limited opportunities.

Dependency and exploitation in capitalism

PARASITE critiques exploitative relationships that are at the foundation of capitalist systems by driving home the point about mutual dependency between rich and working-class counterparts. Instead of recognising the Kims as human individuals, the Parks use them as labourers to help sustain the ‘lifestyle’ to which they have become accustomed. Conversely, the Kims rely on the Parks for economic survival. The contingency the Kims face with the Parks puts them in a so-called submissive position that denies the family agency.

This sets up a self-perpetuating cycle in which neither family is ever free. Therefore, the Kims are at the mercy of the Parks’ goodwill since it is filling their need and belonging, and any economic dependence within a capitalist society may be precarious. According to Peter Kim, Bong shows this dynamic as ‘the ultimate danger of the capitalist structure, where both the oppressed and oppressors are caught in a system where resentment, exploitation, and violence become self-perpetuating’ (Kim 54). The violent ending to the film represents this cycle that destabilises a society. Ki-teak’s killing of Mr Park, therefore, represents not only revenge but also a symbolic renunciation of a system that dehumanises both families. The inherent critique by Bong insists that capitalism cannot survive; through making groups vulnerable to conflict and collapse, such developments cannot endure. The denouement of the movie, with sudden outbreaks of violence, insinuates that these tensions, if unresolved, may have disastrous effects on individuals and society in general.

Technical elements and cinematic language

CINEMATIC technique is used by Bong Joon Ho in order to emphasise the critique of capitalism in the movie. It can be noticed in the visual design of the homes of the two families: the poor Kims lived in a cluttered semi-basement, whereas the rich Parks lived in a spacious mansion. All of these points are well-supported and quite relevant to the plot of the film. Other symbolism involved the staircases that connected the main floors of the mansion to the basement level; often, the camera would fixate on the physical rise and fall of the Kims. Such movements symbolically betrayed their fussy efforts to escape poverty.

At the same time, editing underlines the main themes of the film. For example, cross-cutting during salient moments, like the rainstorm sequence, puts together both families and serves to underscore the experiences of both, making a statement on the inequities of their lives. Bong pays great attention to minute detail — from the placement of objects in the Park home to the framing of characters in confined spaces — creating a visual language that underscores the ideological message of the film. As Linda Williams observes, ‘Bong’s use of architecture and framing mirrors the physical and ideological separation of the classes under capitalism’ (Williams 44). Such attention to craft means that the film’s message of critique operates both narratively and aesthetically for the benefit of its viewers, who are then enveloped in the visual and emotional topography of class division.

The movie Parasite strongly condemns the system that nurtures class inequality. Bong Joon Ho points out, through this juxtaposition of physical spaces and with strong symbolism, how the psychological consequences of economic inequality arise and how capitalism is maintained through cycles of dependence, exploitation, and dehumanization. There are layers within the movie’s narrative, while there is precision in technique that defies the viewer to consider the feasibility of such a society on the basis of huge inequities. Ultimately, Parasite pushes audiences to fantasise about a different kind of future, one where dignity and security are within the grasp of the many and not limited to the few who earn their status. The meaning of this movie extends much farther than its fantasy world, as it leaves viewers to reflect on real-world, deep-seated societal structures that limit.

Parasite, a film by Bong Joon Ho, is a real powerhouse in critiquing capitalism by showing how this deep systemic inequality entraps the poor while raising privileged few. The movie challenges the very myth of social mobility through the contrast in the lives of the Kims and Parks. The luxurious mansion of the Parks heaves its great view, while that of the Kims is a cramped basement apartment, representing how insurmountably far apart classes are. The recurring motif of stairs endorses the lie of upward mobility; it shows that often, forced measures — like deception for mere survival — are the only hope of the lower class. As the story unfolds, the Kims infiltration into the Parks’ lives reveals a kind of moral blindness among the rich, while the mayhem that erupts in the film’s climax reveals the brutal consequences of inequality. In that sense, Parasite soars beyond its narrative into a sharp, unsettling contemplation of the social and economic order that perpetuates injustice and calls on the viewer to reimagine another system that separates us and to dream of a better future.

Syed Shahriar Hossain is an intern camera operator with CTV Canada.