Comparing Korean and American Cinema - A Weird Window

Continuing on from when I did Chinese and American films, now let’s compare another country from only a few hundred kilometres from China, South Korea. It and China may be close, but they are remarkably different in many ways in their style of filmmaking, especially when compared with American cinema.

South Korea has of course had a lot of American influence over the years due to military occupation and the outsourcing of American industry to South Korean metropolitan areas. So the cinema of South Korea is going to be more similar to American films than Chinese films area. But there are still some key differences in how the films are structured and designed.

And again, there has to be some ground rules…

- There are all South Korean films, as for obvious reasons, there aren’t a lot of North Korean film that I can access (aside from Polgasari, but I don’t care about that one)

- These are all movies that I have actually seen and were free online or on Netflix

- I am not doing movies by Korean-American directors, as they received filmmaking education in America (sorry, Minari and Driveways)

- I couldn’t find any Park Chan-Wook films online for free or without getting a VPN, so sorry about missing out on that really significant part of South Korean film history.

Alright, moving onto the South Korean movie you were probably already thinking of when you clicked on this thing…

Parasite (기생충) – Directed by Bong Joon-Ho

Not counting Snowpiercer, this is the first South Korean film in the Korean language that I ever saw. And I bloody loved it. In fact, I even reviewed it on this blog before, waaaay back.

I think what struck me the most when I watched Parasite was that it wasn’t some arty or overly weird foreign film that I had come to expect at this point (looking at you, every French movie ever made). It was actually very grounded and focused on the story, as well as being very clear.

I hesitate to call it a Western-style movie, however. I think that if this story of two different social classes coming into conflict with one another was told by an American director, there would be a voiceover narration and a more obvious thematic depth, with the intent being to attract the audience with showy performances and a political message to get noticed.

Parasite’s key intent is entertainment, not preaching to the audience. It’s either tuned to the handle of furious tension or hilarity, engaging the audience through sheer charisma rather than trying to tell them what to think. Unlike an American film exploring a social issue (like say, Green Book), the momentum of the film doesn’t slow down to explain to the audience what’s happening. It wants you to just watch and cheer it on.

This attitude of wanting an audience absorbed rather that simply listening is also reflected in the beautiful cinematography. Again in contrast to American films, rather than use traditional American shot structure and lighting, it always uses ludicrously wide shots as to make the audience feel as small as the characters on screen feel.

Parasite also actually frames the action on screen almost like a comic panel, with a character being shot from between two walls in the centre of the screen, for instance. Comparing it to American films, most simply light the shot beautifully or frame the characters in static positions, with only a few like Unbreakable really trying to absorb the audience in the action with shot structure rather than just dazzle them with pretty imagery.

Overall, I think that Parasite is a very non-American film in a lot of ways, as it departs significantly with what American films strive to do. They seek to imprint on the audience by merely talking to them like a motivational speaker, but Parasite leaps like an acrobatic comedian and will sear into the mind as a whole rather than just a message, or a theme.

Moving on to one of the best action films I’ve ever seen…

Train to Busan (부산행) – Directed by Yeon Sang-ho

This movie is f*cking awesome. That’s my intro.

So before I utterly lose myself in praising this movie, I should get to my comparison. Train to Busan is definitely more of a Western/American movie than Parasite, mainly because it adheres to the Westernized tropes of its specific genre (disaster/zombie) more than Parasite, which is more of a psychological drama. But it definitely differs in a few manners, and you can easily tell where an American director would differ in how they handle scenes.

The things in Train to Busan which are clearly the most American-inspired are the story’s themes, in particular with the lead theme of father-child relationships. It’s a lot like every Roland Emmerich disaster setup, where a distant dad proves his love for his child by rising up against the wrath of nature. On top of that, there’s a clear human antagonist who’s an arrogant businessman, another key couple who enters the mix to help the main characters, and a self-sacrificing weirdo.

But what differs – and in fact, makes the film better – Train to Busan from those Western disaster counterparts is that it feels so kinetic. It knows that the audience doesn’t want to waste time with slow character-building moments, and so always puts character development in the context of situational stress. This makes the audience feel submerged with the characters, as they feel as stressed and determined as the characters feel. An American film would have moments where the characters hunker down and have a long conversation, but Train to Busan uses actions, not words.

That kineticism is reflected in the brilliant action, with the zombies running and crawling over each other to get at human flesh. They are animals, not a lumbering obstacle to avoid or a natural disaster. The camera and the characters, both human and zombie, move like racing cars, making the audience feel as tired and as stressed as they are. But it never feels ludicrous or over-CGIed like most American films when they try this approach, because the director focuses on stunts and blood over CGI. It makes it feel so much more organic that a big CGI fest.

Anyway, I highly recommend Train to Busan if you want a disaster movie to break from the tropes set by Roland Emmerich and many other American directors who simply don’t know how to make ‘em anymore.

Moving onto another action-horror, this one which I liked a little less…

The Host (괴물) – Directed by Bong Joon-Ho

I know I’m cheating a bit by using the same director twice, but I figure that because the two movies are so tonally and premise-wise different, it counts for now.

Quentin Tarantino actually named this movie one of his 20 favourite movies from the years of 1992-2012, and I understand why, as it is so unique and different from every other monster movie ever made. But I don’t really agree that it’s that good, especially compared to Bong Joon-Ho’s other films like Parasite and Snowpiercer.

I also think that it certainly feels not exactly like a more Western film in general than Parasite, but more like a Western film from 2006. Specifically, it feels like an episode from the first two seasons of Supernatural, which also came out around 2006 (interestingly, Supernatural never got a Korean release, according to IMDb).

As someone who lived through the 2000’s, the style of that era feels almost like coming home after a solid day at work. It feels familiar, and I would recognize it anywhere. And that feeling permeates this movie, from the very X-Files/Supernatural setup to the TV-style action to the CGI and even the quality of the image.

The Host starts a lot like an episode of any sci-fi show, with a mysterious incident with potentially horrifying future setup, before introducing the main characters. We spend 5 minutes learning their ideals and how they act, before we’re thrust into the action. There’s ebbs and flows until a big climax where everything falls over, just like Supernatural.

When it comes to the action and the way it’s shot, it also feels more distinctly Western than something like Snowpiercer which uses smooth fluid movement and gore to its full potential. It cuts away from the action when there’s a close-up of the CGI monster (which looks very plastic, by the way), and the stuntwork is limited to maybe running down a steep hill. This may be due to budget limitations, but it’s like a gift-wrapped treat to fans of those American sci-fi shows like The X-Files or Supernatural, of low-budget stories told with a lot of action.

What differs The Host from those American counterparts on television is, similar to Parasite, the less obvious way it handles its themes. The whole film can be seen as a Cold War parable, or specifically how the U.S.’s carelessness leads to chaos for the rest of the world. It never stops to spell out the themes of the movie, or use specific language to make it obvious. Instead, it prefers to use allusions to Cold War imagery and motifs (like “Agent Yellow”, the poison to kill the monster), making it seem a little more like a text you’d read in English class where you’d have to understand the cultural context.

It gives this movie a bit more interest than it already had, as at its core, it’s a basic American-style monster movie with slightly better character development. I don’t think it’s amazing, but I can still recommend it as a strong throwback to those mid-2000’s TV shows that I grew up with, along with a bit of Cold-War allegory.

What I cannot recommend is the next movie on this list…

Inchon (인천) – Directed by Terence Young

Now I know what you’re thinking – “Terence isn’t a South Korean name!” – but I can explain. This is a movie funded by a South Korean cult which took executive control away from the British director to give to South Korean preachers, to produce South Korean war propaganda.

So Inchon is inherently South Korean. And my god, I hated it.

Inchon is actually on the Wikipedia list of the worst films ever made. It won 4 Golden Raspberry Awards including Worst Film, and has since been regarded as the worst war movie ever made, as well as the worst movie starring (amazingly) Sir Laurence Olivier. It’s so bad that it has never seen an official DVD release – I only saw it because someone uploaded the TV version of it to YouTube for free, and I had a morbid curiosity which this writing gave me opportunity to indulge.

I found it to be one of the most boring films I’ve ever seen. It feels like an episode of M.A.S.H. with all of the laughter and action cut out, with all life sucked out in favour of evil Communism and American Jingoism. It doesn’t even seem like a characterful South Korean film, but more like a 70’s American TV show edited by the ghost of a patriotic Confederate General.

It’s definitely the most Western-feeling film out of the five here, and I should explain why in the context of its production. Inchon was made by the South Korean Unification Church headed by Sun Myung Moon, an organisation who in Year 10 we could write a science psychology report about (I was the only one who didn’t, and also the only one who got an A+ - werewolf boys forever).

According to J. Gordon Melton, Moon “attempted to project his ideas into all areas of American society” via Inchon[1], and had also considered making films about Elvis or Jesus to try and further cement those ideals. Basically, he was making propaganda depicting anti-communist, pro-Unification and “heroism” ideals to spread his religious ideals around the world. But it really didn’t work (in fact, he doesn’t mention Inchon in his biography at all[2]).

That would explain why the action and style of the film is so reminiscent of things like M.A.S.H. or The Green Berets, as Moon was trying to appeal to the base expectations of an American audience’s perspective of war films. You could cut scenes from this movie into some random 80’s action film and not change a thing.

This kind of religious-message-directed filmmaking isn’t just restricted to Korean cults, however. Americans had been doing this kind of thing for years prior, with such notable examples as the Christian-funded Reefer Madness, or later down the track with the Scientology-inspired Battlefield Earth. Both movies were made with the intent of spreading the message of a hardcore religious group or cult onto the rest of the world like Inchon (both films also coincidentally appear on the Wiki list for the worst films of all time, so you can see how that approach typically goes).

I really can’t go into a lot more detail about Inchon, because its clearly so enthralled to American styles of filmmaking. In fact, I’m not even sure if it counts. But I can say that some weirdly specific contexts of filmmaking can be shared between countries, such as funding by cults for the intent of spreading religious dogma. It’s what will inevitably unite our world before the zombie apocalypse.

Onto the final film here…

Burning (버닝) – Directed by Lee Chang-Dong

Let’s end with a movie where Glen from The Walking Dead may or may not be a rampant serial killer.

Despite being one of the most consistently praised movies of the decade, I surprisingly didn’t like Burning. Regardless of that, this movie was directed by South Korea’s former Minister of Culture, who is very outspoken against the conservative political situation in his country. So there’s clearly going to be a sense of political setting and context which needs to be factored in when watching Burning.

Similarly to Parasite, there’s a clear sense of class struggle permeating throughout the movie and the tension between the characters. What’s not so similar to Parasite and more reminiscent of American filmmaking is the tendency for showy lines which underline the central themes/motifs of the film (like Steven Yean talking about how burning things is what gives his heart a sound of bass, and fulfils him).

American films do this all the time, both great films from the likes of Pixar or The Dark Knight, to really awful ones like The Devil All the Time or After Earth. It’s not necessarily better or worse if you choose not to do this, it’s just whether or not it’s needed or if the situation is unclear. Foreign films do this less, as they tend to be more visually focused than narratively focused Hollywood films.

Burning’s narrative is also focused much more on character development than themes and pleasing the audience. Characters tend less to discuss their issues and more physically act out how they feel, whether that be dancing or maliciously laughing. It feels very lifelike, as the characters act like real people who have basic human desires without all of the frills that come with being a noble character or relating to a theme. This is an area where Hollywood style feels a bit less appropriate than South Korean style.

What I feel is the worst part of this movie is also the most Hollywood-esque – a ludicrously slow burn. Many American films drag heavily by relying too much on establishing shots, or slow delivery of dialogue, or by being so obvious that the audience is begging for the movie to get to the point. I don’t mind slow-burn movies, but Burning feels like a Hollywood movie which is clearly thinking that it’s a lot more important than it actually is (see Drive/The Snowman/London Has Fallen etc.). That ends up making it the second-most Hollywood-esque film out of the ones here, with the exception of Inchon.

In conclusion, South Korean cinema is a bristling and unique industry bursting with different vision both inspired by and yet rising above Hollywood. It has a lot derived from American cinema due to American's presence in Korea over time, but also a lot which allows it to stand out on its own. It's an industry for which I'm excited to see what comes next.

Here’s some that I couldn’t find that I recommend that you watch regardless;

- The Handmaiden

- Oldboy

- I Saw the Devil

- The Wailing

- Mother

- Okja

- Pulgasari (Ironic)

Leave any inquiries in the comments below.

[1] Melton, J. Gordon (1992). Encyclopedic Handbook of Cults in America. Routledge. p. 298. [2] Moon, Sun Myung (2009). As a Peace-Loving Global Citizen. Gimm-Young Publishers.