Woman of Fire.

Review #2076: Woman of Fire.

Cast: 

Namkoong Won (Dong-shik), Youn Yuh-jung (Myeong-ja), Jeon Gye-hyeon (Jeong-suk), and Choi Mu-ryong (Detective Jo) Written and Directed by Kim Ki-young (#1596 - The Housemaid)

Review: 

"A carpenter builds homes relying on his talent and insight. A carpenter who is talented in handling wood builds a wooden house; one who’s good with bricks builds a brick house. It’s the same with me. Starting with ‘The Housemaid,’ and going through ‘Woman of Fire’ and ‘Insect Woman,’ the films that saw success were those about demon-like femme fatales who, for their own reasonings, destroy domestic peace. What is success? People flock to theaters because the films are well-made. So my calculation is that I’m proficient in this kind of genre."

I'm sure that those familiar enough with world cinema remember The Housemaid (1960), often called one of the best films made in the 20th century in the country of South Korea. Kim Ki-young directed/wrote/produced the film, but did you know that he returned to the subject matter? Let alone twice? Well, let's start with the basics, the original film involved a family that suffers upheaval with the arrival of a new lady (a femme fatale, if you will) into their domain that has a mutual pact for its climax after attempts to rid the woman's illicit child (miscarriage in the original, abortion in the remakes) prove fruitful. The wraparound aspect of the story is the one big change for this film (well, that, and being in color), which plays around with time for its depiction of the story, where the older film started on a discussion of a newspaper story involving a man falling in love with his maid and this film starting out in a police station with a dead husband and a dead woman. Eleven years after the release of this film (which is also referred to as Hwanyeo), he would direct Woman of Fire '82. It has been argued (and cited by Kim himself in the quote mentioned above) that Insect Woman (1972) touched upon similar themes with the aforementioned Housemaid, and it perhaps seems apt that it had its own similar feature with Beasts of Prey (1985). At any rate, by the time of his untimely death, he was a cult figure among filmgoers that saw a detailing of just who he was a filmmaker with what survived from his output and the directors that took influence from what they saw into their own films; Youn Yuh-jung, who made her debut in this film, cited Kim when accepting an Academy Award in 2021 as a "very genius director". The fact that his 1960 film was remade again in 2010 probably speaks truth to his enduring status more than anything.

This was released in the 1970s, which was actually a troubling time for the film industry in South Korea due to censorship pushes under the military regime that went for censorship and propaganda. It probably won't rank as being better than the original feature for those who find themselves trying to compare, but the fact that it is a lurid way to remake a film without retaining every little aspect probably makes it more of an achievement than what is on the surface. One has to let the film sift on its own without thinking of it as going from points A to B all the time, because it is more dedicated to showing unease in all of the ways that matter in desire. The dark and shadowy angles in the noir-like features of the original film are still fairly present in the colorful look of the manic and depraved feature displayed here that is never starved in hysteria. Namkoong serves as an ideal lead when it comes to being the one male among the disposables that are seen among the certain level of middle-class people that only like to get certain parts of their hands dirty, and this includes the hands that are restless towards pants. Youn is naturally the best part of the film as, well, the title character involving fiery womanhood that is always watchable in part because it isn't merely a film with clear-cut heroes, since that pool is muddled by all the dark desires shown by each of the key three (incidentally, each of them would appear in Insect Woman), as to see coming from people that must live with the memory of what they did and saw in Jeon. As a whole, the 100-minute runtime does prove satisfying in showing why Kim felt the need to look upon the world of domestic invasion through the lens of women from time to time, and it shows the need for understanding just what matters most in treading familiar ground without becoming just another ground to step over. Enjoying the lurid show and looking upon its tricks is what matters most here, which works out pretty well in the long run.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Next up: A normal time in Belgium with Man Bites Dog.

Inchon.

Review #1763: Inchon.

Cast: 

Laurence Olivier (General Douglas MacArthur), Jacqueline Bisset (Barbara Hallsworth), Ben Gazzara (Major Frank Hallsworth), Toshiro Mifune (Saito), Richard Roundtree (Sergeant Augustus Henderson), David Janssen (David Feld), Namkoong Won (Park), Karen Kahn (Lim), and Rex Reed (Longfellow) Directed by Terence Young (#150 - Dr. No, #278 - From Russia with Love, and #335 - Thunderball)

Review: 

In a way, sometimes a movie gets a reputation because of production troubles or bad word-of-mouth (traditional movies, anyway, although ones outside the mainstream can get through that regardless). Inchon was a perfect storm that has never managed to live down its infamy in the four decades that have passed since it was released. The movie is based on the events that occurred during the Battle of Inchon in South Korea, which occurred from September 10-19, 1950 (the city is referred to today as Incheon, as the country changed their Romanization system for names in 2000), with the amphibious assault being led by Douglas MacArthur, Commander in Chief of United Nations Forces; the battle is considered a key point of the Korean War. MacArthur had been the subject of one previous feature with a biopic that was released four years prior that was directed by Joseph Sargent that had Gregory Peck as the general; the next film to detail the battle wouldn't occur for three decades in Operation Chromite (2016). Of course, the sticking point for a film like this is one that doesn't tie to its international cast or its noted director. Instead, it ties down to five words: Special advisor Sun Myung Moon. Well, since this is a movie review, we can't exactly talk about Moon beyond a few short sentences: For one, he was an anti-communist Korean that formed the Unification Church in 1954, and he later proclaimed himself as a Messiah that stoked plenty of followers and just as many critics (he also was a businessman that dealt in news media, such as with The Washington Times), particularly with his conviction for filling false federal income tax returns and conspiracy in 1984. Perhaps it was an act of God that brought all of these circumstances together to make a uniquely amusing time, since the press kit for the film actually claimed that McArthur approved of his portrayal...from the spirit world, as he had died a decade prior. Of course, the other choices that Moon thought about making a movie about involved Jesus and Elvis Presley (all of this is actually correct, I am not joking). Of course, one can't forget about Terence Young in all of this. Sure, this was the second-to-last film in his forty year career, but Young was at the very least a director who in theory could have executed a well done war film, at least since he could handle three James Bond features to worthy reputation, particularly since he was familiar with international co-productions such as Red Sun (1971). Of course, he also stated that Moon putting his name on the credits of the film would be a mistake (along with the Church's idea to actually distribute the film itself, and they settled with fronting the promotional material), and the film ended up having to be shot in both Korea and Rome. The movie was written by Robin Moore and Laird Koenig, while the story was done by Moore and Paul Savage. Moore was known for his writings such as The Green Berets and The French Connection, but he chafed at the demands for a war story that also had to have numerous narratives within a story that probably was too much to handle in a two hour feature.

Technically speaking, this might be a prescient feature in terms of church-funded mega-failures in the vein of Battlefield Earth (2000), but there is a quick distinction between those films: One can actually see that movie on home video. Inchon has never been released on DVD, and the only reason that anyone can even find footage of the film to view (in dubious quality) is because the movie was shown on the Church's former television network (GoodLife Television Network), for which people transferred it onto VHS for bootleg recordings. The original cut of the film was 140 minutes, and this is the version that was shown on television, albeit with certain swear words edited out, but it should be mentioned that the film shown in theaters was only 106 minutes long, which cut out scenes with David Janssen (best known for The Fugitive, who took the movie to work with Olivier), who had died before release.  I'm sure you don't need to know that this is a dramatization of the battle and not actually based entirely in reality, since lighthouses generally do not serve as the be-all end-all to war victories. Besides, the movie can't even have one consistent narrative, since it also has to balance out its parts with MacArthur for scenes spent with Gazzara & Bisset, which manages to mangle any attempt at perspective beyond boredom (at least when it isn't spending time with a barely hearable Janssen and a "no, I'm not joking" Reed for exposition). Somehow, having Roundtree and Mifune as supporting members doesn't help. Gazzara and Bisset seem more bored than anything when it comes to some spiel about romance or rescuing others from danger. At least one can say Olivier tried. At this point in his life, he was taking film roles for money, and this was certainly one of those roles, since he described himself as like a vintage wine that needs to be drank quickly before becoming sour (he wanted to leave enough money for his family); while he was ill for the last decade of his life, he still marched on as an actor without complaint. He did his research when it came to visiting the MacArthur Museum and even visiting a prominent member that had served under the general during the war while also trying to imitate his voice (which apparently sounded like W. C. Fields) and go through plenty of makeup, although he stated that he didn't think he looked like MacArthur or even himself. The clip at the end of the real MacArthur speaking does not exactly help matters; in the end, he moves like a pale ghost and yet manages to be the only presence worth trying to watch, and it isn't even a good performance. The movie has the attitude of trying to be a spectacle epic with dramatic weight, but it has the striking power of a B-movie, pure and simple. It plods along for way too long with narratives far too boring for anybody to care about while having the spiritual depth of a two-inch fountain. If one is going to watch a war movie that borders on propaganda, by God could they do better than this feature when it comes to actual relevance for showing a useful story. You might as well spend an hor looking for articles on the Internet about Incheon than spend two hours with this dramatization. It is an obvious turkey that is best suited for testing if hearing explosions will interrupt two hours of snoozing; it might not be the worst war film or worst of anything (since the Church aspect probably makes this an easy target), but it sure is one for the ages in terms of turkey-dom.

Overall, I give it 2 out of 10 stars.

Next Time: Sometimes, the best way to look at an action star is to look at what happens when they are put into the director's chair. So it's time for On Deadly Ground.