Twenty Years of Korean History, One Trick at a Time

Though his directing career dates back to 1962, it wasn't until the mid-1980s that Im Kwon-taek began to receive international recognition as one of Korea's true masters of cinema. Popular on the festival circuit, films such as Gilsoddeum (1986), The Surrogate Mother (1987), and his greatest achievement , Seopyeonje (1993) received critical praise (plus a few awards), but rarely found their way to these shores. Im's breakthrough in the States would come in 2000 with the release of Chunhyang, followed by 2002's Chihwaseon – two very good films, but certainly not his best. Prior to Chunhyang, Im wrote and directed his 96th film, Chang (aka Downfall), a flawed but earnest melodrama from 1997 that tackles Korean history from the rise of industrialism in the 70s to the economic slump of the 90s, as viewed from the underworld of brothels and prostitutes. The film begins during the great modernization period under the Park Chung Hee regime – a time, as we learn, when women were mostly forced, or coerced into prostitution. Such is the case with teenaged orphan Young-eun (Shin Eun-kyung), who mistakenly believes she is being hired simply to sell soda in exchange for room and board. Raped by the brothel owners, and threatened with physical violence if she runs, Young-eun is quickly transformed from an innocent teen full of terror and disgust to just another savvy, desensitized professional working the narrow, crowded street. The sudden shift is a bit disconcerting, though it's a far cry from the misogynistic fantasies dreamed up by Kim Ki-duk in films like Bad Guy or Samaria. Like the "hostess films" that were popular in the 70s, Chang chronicles Young-eun's many vicissitudes, including several aborted attempts at marriage, and a brief stint as a brothel owner herself. It also follows her long-term friendship with Gil-young, a kind, selfless man she no doubt truly loves, but can never be with. If the film offered nothing more than this, it would be easy to dismiss it as just another formulaic melodrama, but fortunately Im brings much more to the proceedings. Key events in Korea's history during the film's twenty years period – including the assassination of President Park, the military coup that led to the rise of President Chun Doo-hwan, and the 1988 Olympics – appear on cheap televisions located in the brothels. The women are indifferent to these events, and most don't even bother paying attention, yet not out of apathy. As societal outsiders their role is limited to generating capital with their bodies, and paying back a seemingly never-ending debt to the brother owners. Political and social changes are meaningless to them, unless of course it affects their trade (as the introduction of AIDS will, late in the film.) Economic swings, however, are mirrored in their industry – during the peak years we learn that the demand for prostitutes was at a record high, and that there were 400,000 brothels, and over one million women working in them. It would be wrong to consider Chang progressive in its views. In fact in some ways it is downright regressive – in both it's method of storytelling, as well as its conceit of representing Korea's tumultuous history through the commodification of women. Its sexual explicitness is anything but erotic, and at times feels vaguely exploitative. Yet even with these flaws, Chang finds Im in top form as a director, and it is visually one of his most fascinating films. Shot primarily in tight, cramped spaces, Chang is the aesthetic opposite of Seopyeonje, which emphasizes the vastness of the landscape, and often maintains a distance from its characters. Here Im often crowds his frame, placing characters simultaneously in fore- and background, and making great use of deep focus. (The film requires several viewings just to catch everything.) His compositions are nothing short of masterly (see above, bottom picture), and his framing is strangely reminiscent of Fassbinder's. The use of cutaway walls allows for epic tracking shots through the brothels, and the end result is chillingly powerful. The few scenes shot outside the city draw sharp distinctions in light – the almost blinding rays of the sun versus the dim, artificially colored glow of the brothels. Im also utilizes several visual motifs that are repeated throughout the film – an extremely nice touch. Though closer in tone to his early genre films than to his masterpieces of the 80s and 90s, Chang is still worth seeking out for the visuals, as well as a remarkable lead performance by Shin Eun-kyung. A subtitled Korean-released DVD, which looks great, is available here.

Comments

[john]

So right here at the end of you erudite appraisal of this Asian director I plop the reason I've never been able to get into Asian film of any type. I've seen enough to venture the following sweeping generalization: to my Ameri-caucasian eyes and ears, Asians cannot act. They either resemble blocks of wood or, more often, overact to embarrassing extremes. There. I've said my piece. Feel free to take me down a peg, mock my ignorance, or merely wonder what in hell I'm talking about.

[Filmbrain]

John --

I think I fall into the last category -- wondering what the hell you are talking about.

I guess without hearing a list of Asian films you have seen, or some examples of either wood blocks or overactors, I can't really comment.

Have you seen any films with Choi Min-sik, Hideko Takamine, or even Tadanobu Asano? What about Maggie Cheung, Andy Lao, or Moon So-ri?

[nkw88]

Just as Orson Welles's TOUCH OF EVIL was almost the last film of the 1950s US films noirs, Chang was the last film, or an anachronistic film, of the hostess/prostitute film genre, which partially influenced the poor reception and the underestimation of this film in 1997. Hostess/prostitute films were a main genre of Korean film industry in the 1980s and declined from the early 1990s when the new generation appeared and slowly replaced old generation and old custom of filmmaking. In the early 1990s, the Park-Chun style military control, which repressed the right of express of Korean filmmakers, also declined with the democratization in Korean society.

Like John Ford retrospected the history of the Western genre with his last films THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE, HOW WEST WAS WON and CHEYENNE'S AUTUMN, Im Kwon Taek retrospected and synthesized the genre of hostess/prostitute film with CHANG. Until this film, Shin Eun Kyung's persona was a tomboy. It was her first role of a grown up woman, a more feminine character than other characters that she took before. But her neutral and boyish image has been still strong, which led her into a smash hit gangster comedy, MY WIFE IS A GANGSTER series.

One thing that I found problematic in your review is:

"The film begins during the great modernization period under the Park Chung Hee regime – a time, as we learn, when women were mostly forced, or coerced into prostitution."

I didn't consider all American women of the Westerns to be prostitutes when I watched John Ford's STAGE COACH. Many women left their home town and got jobs in other cities or areas. They became factory workers, peddlers, waitress, and so on. Of course, some fell into prostitution. But not all of them. I suggest that you revise this sentence less offensively, if possible. I don't want unnecessary misunderstandings to ruin your sincere review of this film.

If you need more information of Korean women in Park Chung Hee era, DANGEROUS WOMEN, edited by Choi Jung Moo, is helpful. There are lots of episodes and cases of how Korean women chose their lives or jobs in this book.

If you have any chance, you may enjoy Im Kwon Taek's another great hostess film, TICKET (1985).

[Filmbrain]

nkw --

I certainly didn't mean to imply that most women were prostitutes under the Park regime, but that most prostitutes at that time were forced or coerced into it (a line that comes from the film itself). At the end of the film, the old storeowner complains that women today do it simply out of a desire for money -- a sharp contrast to the way things used to be.

I see how my sentence can be misconstrued -- sorry about that.

[nkw88]

filmbrain

I know you did not mean it. If you got the sentence from the film, quotation might have clarified the contrast between the past and the present, and the point of the old storeowner.

Anyway, my recommendation of another Im's hostesss film is TICKET. Im's hostess/prostitute films can be compared with Mizoguchi's geisha films - THE OSAKA ELEGY, SISTERS OF GION, and STREET OF SHAME.

[Adam Hartzell]

Filmbrain,

Nice review of a film sitting in my pile of 'To Be Watched'. Your review has me placing it up higher in my pile.

btw, Korean Cinema has recently revisited the 'Hostess Film' in the form of a 'Host Film', the first film directed by an out Gay director, Leesong Hee-il's NO REGRETS, which was released this weekend. A review of it should be up soon at Koreanfilm.org.

Cheers,
Adam

[ed]

nkw, i really appreciate your comparisons of im to john ford and mizoguchi. your web presence is thus far about the only one that consistently removes the veil of exoticism ("only in korea" etc.) that still plagues the perception of korean films even as they become more popular.

to john's "asians cannot act" comment: while there are in every culture always people who try to make a living without the necessary talents to match, i suggest you also consider the idea of how "non-asians can act" is formulated in your media literacy. any degree of approximating reality through acting or various arts, are all stylizations of different philosophies, attitudes, conventions accumulated over time, etc. with regard to what constitutes reality. almodovar's actors will be too shrill and hysterical for david lynch's world, or even tarkovsky's, bresson's, but may find themselves at a sirkian or john waters cocktail party. similarly, "asians" consist of many diverse cultures, regional & national cinemas, various phases, trends, & cultural waves throughout history -- in which you can find many styles and approach to acting.

before this gets any longer, i've found it interesting that stanislavski is most well and alive among a few korean actors even today, as well as 1930s/40s chinese actors.

[mike]

don't know much about Im Kwon-taek but i have been watching a lot of Korean films lately and for the most part I am simply amazed how good they are. I just finished watching Taegukgi and it is simply one of the best war movies I have ever seen, American or otherwise. It's a shame that more people don't watch these hidden asian treasures. I guess that's one of the remaining holdouts of our imperialist nature.

[skip]

John you obviously haven't watched any quality Asian films. Take Filmbrain's list and give it a try, I'm sure you'll change your mind.

[skip]

John you obviously haven't watched any quality Asian films. Take Filmbrain's list and give it a try, I'm sure you'll change your mind.