The Awakenning of Korean Cinema

PART I

France, 28 of December of 1894, the Lumiere screen for the first time the images of workers and the cinema start as the social phenomenon that we know now. Few years later, 1903, for the first time a film is released in Korea at the time that the Japanese army is invading the peninsula. By this time, Korea has to be considered as an occupied country what has been influence for the evolution and the development of the cinema.

If we take a look to the Korean cinema history over the last century we can clearly appreciate 2 stages that have Korean War as point of inflexion.

The Beginning of the cinema in Korea was characterized by the Japanese occupation, a very repressive period that much of the time was characterize by a strong censorship. Most of the films created in this time were destroyed. From the over 160 movies of this stage, just few of them survived and are still conserved (Arirang, 1930 or, The turning point of the Youngsters, 1934).

Was in 1935 when Japan start a very repressive politic censorship over Korean films, allowing just dramas and historic but always pro-Japanese. But when Japan start to conquer China (1937), the Korean film industry start to be used for propaganda and it’s during this period that the censorship gets stronger, the Japanese government pretended to eradicate any kind of nationalistic feeling with the prohibition of Korean language movies and forcing the use of Japanese language.

Owing to the geographical situation, Korea has always been the target of many surrounded countries.

Once Japan was defeated during the II World War, the pro-Japanese films that were so frequent during the occupation were replaced for anti-Japanese movies. After the Triumph over Japan, Korea found itself under the guardianship, “protection”, of USA and URSS.

The tension produced with the beginning of the cold War, were the cause of the division of the peninsula in 2 independent states. Both governments were established with a dictatorship, one communist and the other one capitalist, pro- American.

In 1950, Kim Il-sung and North Korean army moved forward to South Korea and this moment fix the beginning of a war that will extend for three years. During this time there was no choice for others films but the propagandistic ones. And, moreover, the production was almost nonexistent, just around 8 movies per year.

Probably the most remarkable film during this period was a documentary about the war, This is Korea!, directed by John Ford. Obviously, this documentary, supported by the US army and the government as well, was shot from a very pro-American point of view.

Korea has gone from the censorship of the Japanese occupation to the one established by the government.

During the war, the film industry was used as a propagandistic instrument, but, by the end of the conflict, the production was completely destroyed. Devastated economically and receiving the economic support of USA, the people started to go to the cinema. Korean movie production went from approximately 8 films per year to more than 100 films a year. But this sector was really re-activated with the industrialization process and the economic development of the country during Park Chung-Hee dictatorship. The importance of the cinema during this period was focused in the necessity of escape.

The government established policies to help the evolution and the enrichment of the industry through the introduction of the quota of screen time and a law that determined a minimum production of 15 films per company per year, keeping the censorship for the perspectives against the government.

The military conflict and the division have been a frequent topic in Korean movies maybe moved by its cultural implications, the sentimental values or just to reaffirm the nationalistic feeling after the war.

North and South over a thin line

This image was broadcasted yesterday in most of the TV news and newspapers all over the world. Last Tuesday North Korea attacked Yeonpyeong Island, located in the Yellow Sea just next to the imaginary frontier line that divides the peninsula since 1953 as a symbol of truce after the Korean War, a war that seems to be just in stand-by period. The military assault from North Korea to South Korea has caused 2 deaths and approximately about 20 wounded. The tension between the two parts has been always present.

Kim Jong-il justifies North Korean attack as a response to South Korean military practical exercise in North Korean territory and did not hesitate to declare that North Korea will attack again if these practices continue, while South Korea assured that the military practice was out of North Korean maritime space.

This conflict situation has released the idea of a possible new war between the two parts. Not much ago, last march a South Korean military ship was sunk and South Korean government accused North Korea, but they have denied their implication in the incident.

Obviously, after these events all the glances have been directed to China as the most conflictive international position because of its international relations with both countries (in fact is almost the only one that has relations with the communist North Korean Government).

Japan, EEUU, Europe and China have condemned the attack; and, China has taken a mediator attitude asking for an effort from both sides to solve the problem.

Naturally, as its unique ally (both politically and commercially), China is the only one that can use its influence to reduce the tension and to make Pyongyang to stop the provocations.

But, do they really want to provoke a war? It seems more an attempt to fortify the strength and reputation of Kim Jong-il successor. There are many opinions about the possible end or disequilibrium when Kim Jong-il son, Kim Jong-un, take the political control of the state after his father dies.

During the last 50 years of tension between both parts, there have been many incidents. A ‘truce’ that seems to be always over a thin line that can disappear whenever. It is a problem that cannot be solve without the intention. The worst part is that people with almost the same historical background and the same language are fighting against themselves. And it does not seem to change.

JSA: Joint Security Area

In 2000, 6 million of Koreans gathered to see this film directed by Park Chan-wook probably moved because of the associations with common situation that Koreans could take of the film such as the background of two young South Korean soldiers sent to DMZ to do the compulsory military service or their loneliness feeling that leads them to develop a close relationship with North Korean soldiers.

The film start with a shooting scene and a bit later the viewer get to know that two North Korean soldiers have been killed, supposedly by a South Korean soldier. Sophie, a Swiss-Korean agent, one of the members of the Swiss team from the Neutral Nation Supervisory Commission, will be the one in charge of the investigation.

The film treats the division of the country in 2, North and South, taking as scenery the frontier line, DMZ.

The conflicting area becomes a witness of the growth of a forbidden friendship between North and South Korean soldiers. The relationship can be interpreted in opposite ways, as a pure feeling or as treason. A proscribed family ties among brothers that can be compared with the division of the country that breaks the most important Confucianism base, ‘the brotherhood’.

The soldiers move during the movie over a thin line between trust and suspicion, protection and damage. That is comparable situation with the actual political tension. The tension in the film is increased with the use of 360º pan, for example when the 4 of them get together, also in the scenes that involve what is called “The Bridge of no return”. This conflicting situation shows at the same time the wish of unification and the difficulty to achieve it.

A great tragic story based on a mixed genre, a political-thriller with comical overtone, which evokes sad feelings about the division of a country, a family; a truncated wish of unification because of the complexity of the situations.

I.M