Climax of Chilsu and Mansu: Frustrations Released to No Fruition

In Chilsu and Mansu, the climax of the film spans approximately 18 minutes, allowing only a few minutes after Man-su’s suicide for the denouement to take place. The frustrations of the working class, depicted through the struggles of Chil-su and Man-su, accumulate throughout the first 87 minutes of the film, until this frustration is physically realized when Man-su channels it through his screams atop the billboard. The short denouement allows the viewer to leave the film still taunted by the shouts of the workers (“I have something to tell you!”) — shouts that are completely silenced (both literally and symbolically) by the end of the film.

Park’s use of situational irony depicts workers of low position in society physically elevated above society during the climax. Their position on top of the billboard acts as a threat to social order, both in the immediate sense (as the police assume they are threatening to commit suicide) and in the broader, metaphorical sense (they are venturing out of their social position, at the bottom of the societal hierarchy). 

Through dramatic irony, the police and the citizens on the ground misunderstand the workers’ intentions. The viewer has access to the words and emotions of both groups, which increases the audience’s frustration at the misunderstandings that arise on both sides, particularly the authorities’ misinterpretation of the workers’ actions. Thus, the viewer’s sympathy lies with the workers.

Near the end of the climax, dramatic non-diegetic music mutes all diegetic sound in the scene. Chil-su and Man-su are shown to gesture and shout frantically, but the sounds that are suggested by their actions are unable to be heard by the viewer. Chil-su and Man-su cannot even communicate to the viewer by this point, and a sense of total futility and impending doom pervades the scene. Vanquished of all hope at being able to communicate with society, Man-su jumps off of the building. His moment of committing suicide is caught in a still frame, with all sound in the film muted, which demonstrates the ultimate futility of his death.

A Humorous Approach To A Sensitive Issue

                 A Humorous Approach To A Sensitive Issue                   Frank Chang

Chilsu and Mansu, although shot by the same director, was presented in a very different way than A Single Spark. Right from the beginning, the tone of the film was set to be light and humorous. For instance, the establishing scene, despite the siren and public drill that was happening in the background, found Chilsu fallen asleep in a bus seat. To me this was an important scene. Here it set up the time period in a Korean historical context in which the film was set in. Moreover, the sirens and the uncomfortably empty streets in downtown Seoul introduced the invisible tension in the society which could potentially explain the overreaction of the crowd and police at the end of the film. And yet, the camera was spinning and rotating as if it was mimicking the mind of an audience wondering what was going on. Personally, this prompted for curiosity.  Director Park also chose to introduce his main character, Chilsu, as the only person oblivious enough to be still sleeping in a bus. This introduced humour. This complicated mixture of sensations, to me, was the underlying core throughout the entire film and was readily established from the start. 

 In the first half of the film, the comedy side of the mixture was predominant. For instance, the camera in the arcade room was shot and edited from Chilsu’s perspective seeing his own imagination driving in a nice car with Jina in his arms. And he repeatedly crashed from his mental distractions. If I didn’t know better, I would have taken this film as simply a classic romantic comedy with little to no serious themes or messages underneath. But the underlying tension was still there. An example would be when Chilsu confronted his old boss saying that he had his rights. This kind of confrontation was a mini version of what was happening in the society at that time.

The latter half of the film was marked by Mansu’s remembrance of his dream of working abroad rejected because of his tie to his long term prisoner father. The dramatics in the exogenous sound track really made the transition obvious. The climax with Chilsu and Mansu mistakenly taken as suicidal labour workers fighting for their rights was a fuller portrayal of the establishing scene. The society tension was revealed to its full extend as the police quickly and mistakenly came to the conclusion that they were labour protestors. The struggle and oppression of labour people in the bottom of the society was portrayed using primarily the camera angles- crowds looking up at them confused, the two looking down at the city as if they were finally atop, and the topographic shot from the air showing, yet, everything seemed so small and insignificant. Meanwhile, the interactions between the officials and Chilsu and Mansu still did not leave out the humour.

Overall, to me this film portrayed tension in the society related to labour movements and protests through the characters of Chilsu and Mansu in a humorous approach. However, I’m still not sure if the underlying message of the film was to simply reflect what happened in that time of Korean history or the film had a stand and perhaps criticisms toward the society issues?

[Chilsu and Mansu] individual vs. society

Park dealt about social issues in his films such as “A Single Park” and “Chilsu and Mansu”, and his films gave us a message of hope and the need to fight for change. In “Chilsu and Mansu”, both main protagonists go through difficult times affected by their family issues. They don’t have stable jobs and they have no vision for their future. Chilsu is a very optimistic character who does not seem as desperate as Mansu, but he keeps on dreaming of going to Miami as an escape from his cruel reality. Chilsu’s worst problems were depicted to be caused by his family issues: since his sister sold herself to American soldiers, she has never contacted her family, and his father is just alcoholic.  In Mansu’s case, he does not even attempt to have dream, he is hopeless due to his father’s history of being a communist. Thus, both men’s troubling family issues adequately relate them to a larger social problem and the film directs us to see their failures as a result of the society’s problems. This ironic link between individual problems and social weakness is well emphasized in the last part of the film. After they complete their work on the billboard for a Western liquor drink, they climb up the billboard and express their frustration by shouting out to the world. But people misunderstand their intentions and think that they are political activists who publically want to commit suicide by jumping off the billboard. Chilsu and Mansu try to explain their situations but their individual voices get drowned because society has already dissolved them into a set definition. When Chilsu raises his soju bottle, the people below automatically label it as a firebomb. Also, when the policemen find out about what happened with Mansu’s father, they just simplify him into a shadow of his father. Throughout the film, we are frequently introduced to Chilsu’s imagination of himself living a good rich life with a beautiful woman, but this is ironic in the sense that he does not actually imagine himself rebelling against his society. Furthermore, Mansu is portrayed as an intelligent working-man but he has no hope for revolutionary change.  Thus, society is not an entity that everyone must fight against. Rather, the individual arouses the extension of social/political issues within society.

Suicide on the Social Ladder

     While watching Chilsu and Mansu the recurring mention and use of rope struck me as an important symbol within the context of the movie. Ropes are initially what build the foundation for Chilsu and Mansu's brotherly connection as Mansu agrees to work with Chilsu seeing as Chilsu has alleged experience “on ropes,” which is soon proven to be a lie. Ropes are the staple feature on which Mansu and Chilsu make their poor but honest living. The shots we, the viewers, see of Mansu working on ropes convey the comfort, familiarity and freedom Mansu feels when on the ropes. Mansu goes about his work with ease, balancing himself off the edge of a roof and lowing himself into his make shift bench to begin painting using his trusty ropes. Chilsu, although obvious fearful during his first time on ropes, adapts quickly and begins to exhibit the same ease as Mansu. Ropes then, being ancient tools, can be interpreted as symbolic of Chilsu and Mansu's resourcefulness in a world that modernized and left them behind.

      I disagree with Kim Kyung Hyun's interpretation of the American features in the movie and the masculinization of the main protagonists, especially in regards to the final scene. Although it is true that Chilsu and Mansu are emasculated by their poverty in the globalized society, largely influenced by American culture, they still find a way to place themselves above western influence, even if only figuratively, to vent their frustrations of society. I believe director Park meant to criticize American influence not elevate it, as Kim seems to state when he argues that the nude woman on the billboard “invites the desire of the colonized male gaze and further distracts the two painters from their realities” (148). Using their limited tools and symbolic ropes Chilsu and Mansu create this image of the colonial woman, yet leave it unfinished. They climb the billboard and, quite literally, place themselves above the power and influence of the western culture, depicted on the billboard, when venting their frustration. This, I would argue is director Park's attempt to critique the extent of western influence over that of traditional Korean practices, represented by the frustrated Chilsu and Mansu.

      Returning to the potential symbolism of the ropes, Mansu's final scene left me with many unanswered questions. Although two ropes are tied from the top of the billboard to the ground Mansu ignores them and heads straight for the ladder. Once Mansu has finally found his voice to critique society he does not take the ropes, symbolic of his masculinity as they are his means of making a living, back down and share his frustration with his growing audience. Why? Now that Mansu has found his voice are we, the viewers, meant to see his jump from the metal ladder as his failed attempt to fit the current society's vision of masculinity? Especially seeing as the metal ladder, in stark contrast with the two ropes, is symbols of contemporary tools and modernity. Is this Director Park's critique of a society which leaves no room for traditional forms of masculinity? 

 

Source Cited:

Kim, Kyung Hyun. "Male Crisis in the Early Films of Park Kwang-su." The Remasculinization of  Korean Cinema. 137-161.

The film Chilsu and Mansu is was filmed by Park Kwangsu in 1980s, and depicts the hopes and aspiration of Youth in late 1980s in South Korea.  The sentence that youth in late 1980s (Chilsu and Mansu) wanted to say was ‘you don’t understand, you should be you and stay at where you are, and I should be I and stay where I am’. At the end of the film, there was a misunderstanding between Chilsu, Mansu and others. Chilsu and Mansu were paiting at the top of the building and just yelled towards the society, but people who were down thought they are trying to commit the suicide. Also, there was another misunderstanding between polices and Chilsu, Mansu.  They thought Chilsu and Mansu are demonstrating towards the labor union, and they even brought the owner of the company. If people understood what Chilsu and Mansu were doing, and listened about what they were saying, Chilsu and Mansu’s whine at the top of the building would not have been cause a big problem. At the end of the film, Mansu fell off from the ladder. I think Mansu was bored about the fact that people think, they should be same as the others, and others should be same as them.

The film, Chilsu and Mansu portrays the miscommunication between the society and citizens. Chilsu and Mansu were saying that ‘no one cares what we do’, they said that why do I have to be myself in this stupid society. However, at the end of the film, people said that ‘we are one, we will help you, just come down’. Even the police said ‘I will cooperate you’ but were they really helpful? Mansu’s death at the end of the film shows that the ‘cooperation’ was only happened with the speech. Unfortunately, misunderstanding between oneself and the other is occurring in these days. Some people consider a ‘joke’ as a political issues such as posting one’s complain on the SNS became big issues, and that person were asked to appear in court. 

Good communication makes for healthy relationships!

     There were many moments where I was wondering if a scene was highly critical in its seriousness or if I was supposed to laugh or feel sad. The experience of watching the movie was a very awkward one for me and I don’t know if it is because of the cultural differences or if it was meant to be that way. In any case, I like to think that the director made this movie to show awkwardness and ridiculousness. I also like to think that these aspects of the movie made it more real. It’s not all dark and depressing but it’s not always funny, it’s weird most of the time. But hey, what is life if it isn’t weird; being awkward or witnessing something awkward is part of everyone’s everyday life.

     The climax of the ridicule is obviously towards the end, when Chilsu and Mansu are on top of the building wondering why they’ve become such a big deal. I mean... all they were doing was say what was on their mind. What’s the big deal? It doesn’t hurt anyone. I feel like that’s exactly what Park was trying to make the audience feel, look how ridiculous this situation is, look how weirdly the events are unfolding all because some painters are screaming from the top of a building. The first question that popped in my mind was, the people who initially noticed Chilsu and Mansu up there, could they even hear them? When there were hundreds of people on the roof of the building, they still could barely hear anything. All they could do was watch them, and the most the duo was doing was to sit down, lie down or stand up. For us, to hear what both parties were saying only added to the comedic aspect of the scene when nothing they were saying actually worked towards a functional dialog, it was just two parties assuming things based on their individual position/situation.

One side is asking a question, the other side is just like “whaaat?”

And it just goes exponentially wrong from then on, and on, and on.

Where’s Jules when you need him.

     Personally, if I didn’t have my glasses and I was on the street level, I wouldn’t be able to see anything up there. I’d probably just see this crowd of people looking up, look up myself and wonder what the big deal is. Park uses the bystander effect and stretches it out until everyone in audience realizes how stupid and ridiculous the situation actually is. It makes us think “well ok.. if we make such a big deal every time some random people are expressing their opinion, we will be going nowhere fast.” The laughs coming from us while watching the movie is proof of the idiocy. 

It never ends well when communication is obstructed.

Side note: Bob Marley track! Most confusing "bar" fight ever. Chilsu's classic dreamy sequences.

The Importance of Long Shots in "Chilsu and Mansu"

     This film was made in 1988 based on the Taiwanese short story. In the film, two protagonists, Chilsu and Mansu are depicted as low class billboard painters. Both of the characters are shunned by the society. To be part of the society, Chilsu lies about his status and Mansu uses different dialect when answering the phone. This film demonstrates the gap between the society and two protagonists.

     The audience can see that the Director Park uses many long shots in this particular film. These long shots often use high and low angles. For example, Park uses long shot when Chilsu is trying to tell Mansu that he is meeting Jina after the phone call. Mansu is at the top of the apartment relying on the rope and Chilsu is on the ground. They cannot hear each other due to the distance. Another example is the climax. Director Park constantly uses high and low angles to show the distance between Chilsu and Mansu and the rest of society. Chilsu and Mansu are at the top of billboard and the rest of society is at the bottom. Again, they cannot understand each other. In addition, “long shots are used to juxtapose Chilsu and Mansu with a gigantic white Western female” (Kim 148).  By using this long shot, the Director Park depicted the parallel line between the “colonized male and colonial female” (Kim 148). This parallel line never diverges in this film.

     It was very interesting to see the use of camera angles to articulate certain circumstances. I believe that the gap between the two protagonists is not only shown through narrative but also from the camera angles. I am curious if Director Park used long shots, low and high angles purposely to frame Chilsu and Mansu’s position in the society, the observer rather than the participant. Furthermore, I wonder if Mansu’s suicide can be seen as his effort to be part of the society, the participant. Overall, I think this is a pessimistic film because it tells the audience that it is very hard to be part of the society as an outsider. It creates a problem when outsiders speak up their opinions.  

- Soo Min