Aimless Bullet - Imagery and Audiences

Aimless bullet or오발탄, directed by Yoo Hyeon-Mok, is a film from 1961 that portrays the city life of a poor family in post-war Korea. Yoo Hyeon-Mok, famous for a cinematic style based on realism, openly conveys the family’s life and ultimate fall in a society torn by the war experience and lack of prosperity. Initially, the film did not become a hit in Korea after it was launched in 1961. The second screening was stopped as result of Park Chung-Hee’s coupe d’etat the same year. It was only, when exported to the US, in 1963 that the film became a recognized piece (KOFA).

 

There is no doubt that the film makes its outmost to portray class differences and conditions for the poor in the most explicit way. Often expressed by contrasting city life and  rural life and differences between rich and poor. During the bank robbery scene we see this clearly, as if they are motivations for Cheol-ho Song’s robbery attempt. After he runs into the bank, the first thing we see is his lover who comes out of the car, dressed in silk and pearls (1), switching to a close-up of the driver staring at her, before the shot is cut in line with the drivers stare to a full-body shot of a poor man lying on a wooden bench (2), before that again is contrasted by a kid throwing soap bubbles in the air (3). The differences are explicitly thrown into the eyes of the viewer. Another example is the somewhat weird portrayal of Mr. Yeong-Ho walking back from work. In the middle of a rural village, on dirt roads, he is walking in a suit, completely foreign to the environment (4,5).

1.

2. 

3.

4.

5. 

With such open realism and negative imagery of Korea, it is not surprising it did not become a hit, rather, to the Korean audience, it must have felt like another reminder of the hard period after the Korean war. In such, it also explains why it was dangerous to the new regime. The imagery and story can be seen as a critique of the old regime and post-war South Korea in general as well as showing communist sentiments. The question then is why did it become a hit in the San Francisco International Film festival? If we can say that this film like many others does not necessarily apply to a certain place or time, it becomes much more apparent. Instead of seeing this film as only relating to Korea in the late 1950’s early 1960’s, the language of film can indeed cross nation and language barriers. In such, the film, for the American audience, can be seen as an example of the same issues in America. On the contrary of what Anderson argues, even though films with print language enforce nationalism, films with and without print language have the ability to cross-national boundaries and apply to all audiences (Williams 3).

 

 

Sources:

KOFA: http://www.koreafilm.org/feature/100_23.asp

Williams, Alan, ed. Film and nationalism. Rutgers University Press, 2002.