The mystery of the Parasite movie have won Joker
Edward Vogel

Still reflecting on the last Oscar that can be taken seriously, held before this damn pandemic.
Hey there, what's the name of that South Korean man who invented it, I don't remember if it was a little song or a little dance, and became the record-breaking champion of internet access? He forgot? Me too. No matter how many media or entertainment formats there have been and how many revolutions will occur, cinema is still the format that saves the world. From the void.
That's why a "simple" Oscar decision continued to move a lot of people, even after weeks of that event. And coincidentally, due to a Korean result that I believe no one will remember for some time to come.
The then president Donald Trump, when making one of his usual provocations, commented on the result of the Oscar 2020, finding it strange that the result that elected the film "Parasite" the best of the year. "We need something like Gone With the Wind," he said, comparing the Korean to a movie classic, romantic epic about the American Civil War. Without going into the merits of former president Trump's balance sheet (I was at home, and I saw a lot of people threatening to throw themselves into the San Francisco Bay, when his election surprised everyone, especially here in NYC). But he may have been right on target in his comparison. In one of his anthological replies, one of the characters from "Gone with the wind..." comments that "we are living at the end of an era", given the defeat of the racist south against the abolitionist north. This sentence alone shows the greatness of the film, and we are forced to agree with the President of the United States. We need more of "Gone with the wind..."
One of the most important living philosophers, Frenchman Edgar Morin, believes that "cinema shows human beings in their complexity and even difficult characters attract our sympathy, in a non-Manichean way." Finally, the thinker believes that cinema is better than life, as it has the capacity to make us more human. Common life, on the other hand, turns many human people into beasts. Based on the assumption summarized above, there is the question: what led the Korean film «Parasite» to win the Oscar for best film, among other questions? Could this be the script for a mystery story... bye, bye, bye...
Although we are not politically correct radicals, their Manicheism abuses ridicule and goes against all the thoughts, doctrines, theories, beliefs that make the world more human. In the Korean film, the rich are naive, deceived by a family of poor, cunning, rogues... Stop the tape, I want my ticket back! In terms of language, the work does not innovate at all. In terms of content, it's confusing and disjointed. In terms of morals, yes, morals, the film is disappointing, as it starts out as a social comedy and ends up as a teenage horror movie, without saying what it came from.
The Joker, the Joker! it is much better! Great! There is, too, the apparently naive rich man and a poor mad mother. But the complexity of the story and the upheaval at the end, this is wonderful, it doesn't even seem like an American film from an absolutely reactionary era.
But Uncle Oscar, perhaps afraid that revolution would spill over from the end of the film to society, resigned himself to giving the title of best actor to the supporting role of Batman. The choice of a South Korean film could have entered the political correctness quota so dear to the seventh art that, from Frank Capra to Clint Eastwaood, he is sensitive to the mission of collaborating positively so that the world is less cruel, irrational and violent. In this case, the answer would be kind of correct. If, on the one hand, choosing a film outside the Anglo-Saxon circuit may indeed mean paying attention to diversity, in the moral aspect there is no explanation for the choice.
The naive rich take advantage of a wealth that nobody knows where it sustains itself, and the poor, who start the film looking to smuggle wifi connection, are able to disguise themselves, create and undertake a whole plot of plots just to get jobs that rich people altruistically make possible for lower classes. Anyway, what moral would there be in this movie? The other clue to solving this mystery would be to believe that the Oscar decision is due to the fact that the South Korean film, since its Cannes Film Festival debut, has had a successful box office career, to the point of having broken the closed scheme of the North American market. This could be the strongest clue.
But then Oscar would be surrendering, contrary to its raison d'être, from a reference of quality, to a commercial indicator. End of the line. In this logic, they can close the Oscar. Now the quality award is always won by the one with the highest quantity box office...
The Oscar organizers no longer need all that work.