What Is The Plot Twist In Memoir Of A Murderer?

In 'Memoir of a Murderer', the ending is a haunting blend of justice and ambiguity. The protagonist, a former serial killer with Alzheimer’s, confronts a younger murderer who’s been terrorizing the town. In a tense final showdown, he manages to outwit the killer, but his fading memory leaves him unsure if he’s truly stopped the threat or if he’s just imagining it. The film closes with him staring into the distance, questioning his own reality. It’s a chilling reminder of how memory and morality can blur, leaving the audience to grapple with the unsettling question of whether justice was truly served.

I watched 'Memoir of a Murderer' late one rainy night and the ending left me sitting on my couch for a long time, staring at the credits. On the surface the finale plays like a thriller’s catharsis: the older man with Alzheimer's, haunted by his past as a killer, squares off against the young murderer who has been terrorizing those around him. There’s a physical confrontation where the older man forces the truth into the open and neutralizes the immediate threat, and in that moment the movie seems to give him a kind of grim redemption — he protects the woman and child he’s come to care about, even if his memory is slipping away. But what really made my skin crawl was the way the film refuses to give you clean closure. Because the protagonist is unreliable — his memories are fraying, and his old confessions as a serial killer still stain him — every act of heroism is shadowed by the possibility that he’s also the monster. The final scenes fold memory into present action: we see him writing or dealing with his memoirs, trying to fix a narrative about himself, but then there’s destruction and erasure too. The physical ending (the killing of the young murderer, the rescue, the fallout) is straightforward enough; the emotional ending is ambiguous. Is he a repentant protector finally doing the right thing, or does his presence simply continue a cycle of violence that he can no longer fully remember? When I rewatch it, I notice little choices the director makes to deepen that ambiguity — close-ups of an object he keeps, repeated words he can’t anchor, and the way the camera sometimes lingers on faces instead of actions. Those moments suggest the film’s thesis: memory forms identity, but when memory dissolves, identity becomes a battlefield. So the ending isn’t just about who lives or dies, it’s about whether a person who cannot trust their own memories can ever be trusted by others — or by themselves. It left me feeling uneasy but oddly protective of him, like someone watching a person you care about lose pieces of themselves and trying to decide whether to forgive the parts you don’t understand.

I’ve always been fascinated by 'Memoir of a Murderer', and while it’s gripping, it’s not based on a true story. The novel is a work of fiction, crafted to explore the psychological depth of a serial killer grappling with memory loss. What makes it so compelling is how it mirrors real-life fears about identity and morality. The author draws inspiration from true crime elements, like the meticulous planning of murders and the cat-and-mouse game with law enforcement, but the characters and events are entirely fictional. It’s a chilling reminder of how fiction can feel so real, especially when it taps into universal anxieties.

If you’ve ever watched the movie and felt a chill thinking it might be real, you’re not alone — the film is written and shot to feel uncomfortably plausible. Still, no: 'Memoir of a Murderer' (the 2017 Korean film) is not based on a true story. It’s adapted from a 2013 novel by Kim Young-ha, often translated as 'Murderer's Memory' or rendered in English-language listings as 'Memoir of a Murderer'. The movie was directed by Won Shin-yun and stars Sol Kyung-gu and Kim Nam-gil, and both book and film are fictional psychological thrillers that explore memory, guilt, and the horror of losing yourself to dementia. I watched the film late one night and then picked up the novel because I was curious how the narrator’s interior life from the book translated to the screen. The novel leans hard into the unreliable narrator — first-person internal monologue, fragmented memories — whereas the film externalizes that confusion with visual tricks, flashbacks, and a tight focus on the protagonist’s deteriorating mind. People sometimes assume it’s true because the depiction of Alzheimer’s and the moral grayness of the protagonist feel raw and lived-in, but that authenticity is the strength of the writer’s imagination, not a report of actual events. If you like context, it helps to think of 'Memoir of a Murderer' alongside films like 'Memento' or dark Korean thrillers such as 'I Saw the Devil' — they all toy with memory, revenge, and moral ambiguity. The biggest takeaway is that the core story (a former killer with Alzheimer’s suspecting a copycat and struggling to remember) is fictional. That said, the themes are grounded in real human experience — memory loss, the regret of past sins, the fear of losing identity — which is why it hits so hard for many viewers. For a fuller experience, read Kim Young-ha’s book after watching the film: the book’s voice gives you richer internal detail and slightly different beats, while the movie sharpens the suspense with a handful of changed scenes and a more cinematic ending. I still find myself thinking about certain images weeks later, so whether you watch or read first, be ready for a story that lingers in a very human way.

The story of 'Memoir of a Murderer' struck me as deeply personal and raw, almost like it was pulled from the shadows of someone’s darkest thoughts. I think it was inspired by the complexities of memory and guilt, especially how they intertwine in the mind of someone who’s done terrible things. The protagonist’s struggle with dementia adds this haunting layer—imagine forgetting your crimes but still feeling the weight of them. It’s not just about the act of killing; it’s about how the past clings to you, even when your mind starts to unravel. The author seems to explore how morality blurs when memory fails, and that’s what makes it so gripping.

In 'Memoir of a Murderer', the psychology of the killer is portrayed through his internal monologues and fragmented memories. The story dives deep into his mind, showing how he justifies his actions by believing he’s eliminating evil from the world. His perspective is chilling because he doesn’t see himself as a monster but as someone carrying out a necessary duty. The narrative blurs the line between right and wrong, making you question morality itself. What’s fascinating is how his past trauma shapes his present actions, revealing a cycle of violence that’s hard to break. The film doesn’t glorify his deeds but forces you to understand the complexity of his psyche, making it a gripping exploration of human darkness.

I got pulled into this one on a slow, rainy afternoon and felt the two versions like cousins who grew up in different countries. Reading 'Memoirs of a Murderer' gave me a slow-burn, interior ride — a lot of the book lives inside the protagonist's head, so you spend pages swimming in doubt, memory lapses, and guilt. The novel can luxuriate in ambiguity: is the narrator reliable? Which memories are real and which are self-protective lies? That internal haze creates a moral fog that makes every small detail feel heavy. The film version, 'Memoir of a Murderer', has to work visually and within a tighter runtime, so it externalizes a lot of those inward battles. Scenes that were paragraphs of internal conflict in the book become close-ups, flashbacks, or tense confrontations. The result is a sharper focus on plot momentum — more visible stakes, clearer timelines, and often a more cinematic emotional payoff. Characters get compressed, some subplots trimmed or reshaped, and the villain/ally dynamics are framed to read on screen. I also noticed the film leans into sensory things — music, lighting, actor expressions — turning psychological suspense into visceral moments. Both versions are satisfying, just in different ways: one asks you to sit with uncertainty; the other grabs you by the throat and makes you feel it now. If you love slow, gnawing introspection, linger with the book. If you want the tension amplified and the relationships dramatized, the movie delivers that punch, too.

In 'Memoir of a Murderer', the main suspects revolve around a retired serial killer named Kim Byeong-su, who is now suffering from Alzheimer’s. The story takes a twist when he starts suspecting a local taxi driver, Tae-joo, of being a new serial killer. Kim’s fragmented memories and paranoia make him question his own past actions while trying to piece together the truth about Tae-joo. The tension builds as Kim’s daughter, Eun-hee, becomes a potential target, adding a personal stake to his investigation. The narrative cleverly blurs the lines between victim and perpetrator, making it hard to trust anyone, including Kim himself. The film adaptation of this novel amplifies these suspicions with its gritty visuals and haunting performances, leaving viewers guessing until the very end.

In 'Memoir of a Murderer', the key themes revolve around guilt, memory, and redemption. The protagonist, a former serial killer with Alzheimer’s, struggles to piece together his past while trying to protect his daughter from a new killer. The narrative delves into the fragility of memory, questioning whether forgetting one’s sins can be a form of absolution or a curse. The tension between his violent past and his desire for a peaceful present creates a haunting exploration of identity and morality. The memoir also examines the nature of evil, blurring the lines between perpetrator and victim. As the protagonist’s memories fade, so does his certainty about his own actions, forcing readers to confront uncomfortable questions about justice and forgiveness. The relationship with his daughter adds a layer of emotional depth, highlighting the possibility of change and the enduring impact of love. The story is a gripping meditation on the human capacity for both destruction and redemption.

I still get a chill thinking about the way 'Memoirs of a Murderer' plays with memory — it’s like someone handed me a jigsaw puzzle with half the pieces blurred and asked me to trust the picture I’m building. For me, the central theme is memory itself: not just as a plot device (the unreliable recall, the creeping gaps) but as a moral battleground. The narrator’s mind becomes the stage for truth and self-deception, and the book forces you to ask whether a life narrated by a failing memory can be trusted. I read parts of it late at night on the bus, under the warm yellow of the reading lamp, and the fragmented sentences felt like someone whispering confessions through fogged glass. Beyond memory, the book dives deep into moral ambiguity and the slipperiness of conscience. The protagonist isn’t a cartoon villain; they’re human in a way that makes me squirm — capable of reflection, guilt, and self-justification at once. That creates a tension between empathy and revulsion. You find yourself rationalizing their thoughts while recoiling from their actions, which is exactly the unsettling effect the author aims for. Another theme that hooked me was identity: who are we when our past is unreliable? When names, faces, and motives blur, identity becomes less about facts and more about the stories we tell ourselves to keep living. There are other layers worth lingering on. Justice versus revenge turns up often — the book questions formal justice systems while exploring personal retribution and its corrosive cost. Aging and decline, especially when memory slips, are treated with quiet cruelty; the physical and mental deterioration strip away social masks and force raw honesty. The narrative style itself is a theme: confession as catharsis, the intimacy of first-person narration, and the artful use of gaps to make the reader complicit. If you like cross-references, you’ll see echoes of works that play with unreliable narrators and moral complexity, like 'Confessions' or certain noir memoirs, where truth is less a fact and more an argument. Reading it felt like having a dark conversation with someone I both pitied and feared, and that lingering discomfort is exactly why the book kept my thoughts occupied for days.