Public vs Private

Diffrient (2005) said that in many cases, soldiers are seen as a collective, not as individuals. That concept can be applied to events too in terms of treating the event with detachment as a part of history or with compassion as a part of the lives of peoples. In the movie, Marines that Never Returned, this distinction between public and private affairs is repeatedly brought to our attention.

The war crosses the boundary between being political and historical or personal several times: first when Young Hui and her mother get caught in the crossfire and her mother dies and the little girl’s live crosses into the battlefield inhabited by soldiers who are tools used by political powers; second, when Private Goo’s discovers his sister’s corpse during the first battle; and third, when one of the two new marines brings up the 1950 war, which he is alluding to in a broader historical sense but it irrevocably personal for another marine whose hyung had died in the war. These instances were not supposed to be personal but it does become personal and that seems to be the point. You cannot keep them separate as people are affected – not civilians or populations but people. Human beings. Diffrient also notes how South Korean war movies are more personal, using characters who are families, orphans teachers etc rather than only soldiers, which also brings the events back to a personal level, reminding us of how the normal people suffer too and how intricately their lives are intertwined with an event.

Furthermore, Yi Tae-Jun makes the post liberation turmoil and uncertainty amongst the South Korean public apparent and how this personal aftermath is put aside for political machinations – the USSR, the US and China are all trying to get a political stronghold in the new South Korea and the US army is spreading good offers for Japanese people still in S. Korea though they knew how much anger that sparked amongst the public. The help came with a price, turning from conventional Santa Claus to a darker version (Diffrient, 2005). They offer conditional help, taking what they want in return for the help provided to South Korea. The scene in Lucky Club is a further extension of this while also showing the private emotions, specifically the social divide amongst the saeksis who don’t wish to consort with the Korean marines and the marines who are angered by the preference for ‘foreign goods.’ It feels like a combination of Kim and Hyon’s feelings from Yi’s story. Kim celebrates the soldiers who fought abroad and Hyon wants recognition for those who faced opposition at home, like the marines in the club, and also dealt with the mental struggles e.g. the marines trying to understand the point of the war and the battle they, specifically, are fighting.

The director does not hold back on showing the realities of war and the effect on the marines, painting them from heroic patriots to adventure seekers who provide comedic relief. This real and rough portrayal breaks away from the nationalistic patriotic filters that have been discussed before. This is partially why I hesitate to link it to what Park described as national literature when realism operates in it, “representing the individual lives of the Korean people as they pertained to the institutional problems specific to Korean society” (Park, 2006, 171). I don’t want to link it to the national aspect since from the description of nationalism, this movie wouldn’t be very nationalistic but can’t nationalism be reinterpreted as something that is true to the people who make up the nation?

Sister and his Brothers

For me, the most interesting aspect of The Marines Who Never Return was the character of Sister, and the way his identity and relationship to others was depicted. Obviously, in a film so concerned with masculinity and masculine sexuality, the most central insult is to depreciate a man’s ability to fully act as a man. Strangely enough, however, this nickname is given by Yong-hui. All of the nicknames are granted by this little girl, though they end up defining the characters to the very end. Sister, though, spends most of his time on screen trying to redeem himself, to win back the title of man that was only (officially) taken away from him by a child. Of course, it is he that ends up saving Yong-hui from orphanhood, and we assume they at least will have a happy ending.

What is the effect of the power dynamics between Sister and his “siblings”, let along his eventual daughter? He is the one who we know has a woman waiting for him, and he steps into a parental role. Is it emasculating, then, to be a family man? Perhaps it is the simple act of relying on/loving anyone other than oneself that designates femininity. If so, all ‘true men’ are self-loving, self-sufficient, etc. Certainly, this makes it easier for soldiers who out of necessity must forget the humanity of others during combat. However, this type of masculinity would also preclude any future for the society, as an inability to form a relationship and consequently a family unit would mean a lack of procreation and the kind of “living death” we saw in Driscoll’s essay. The women in this film are either prepubescent and asexualized, or hypersexualized and prostituted- both literally and politically- for the sake of the wartime climate. If the brothel women are too feminized to be mothers and the men are too masculine to be fathers, doesn’t that make Sister the only viable survivor, genetically speaking? This suggests a kind of gender teamwork or fluidity that is surprising considering the overall message of the film. It’s all very interesting!

The Marines Who Never Returned

   Due to the relatively small time difference between the shooting of the film and the real life war itself (~ 10 years), The Marines Who Never Returned was very realistic in respect to the war setting. I believe that some of the props used, like the large war vehicles, were genuine vehicles used during the war. There were also real explosions that were used to make the film. Clearly, director Lee Man-hee was determined to represent the war realistically through his point of view. Therefore, it is understandable how the Korean soldiers are portrayed in a positive light. They are seen as compassionate and emotional, for they are portrayed as victims of the devastation of war. Throughout the film, none of the Korean solders appeared to be glory seeking by fighting the war. Instead, they appear to detest it, whereas the opposing forces are displayed as the destructive and selfish bodies. At the beginning of the film, in the images of the soldiers you are unable to see their individual faces, instead they all appear the same. The song in the background is the men all singing together, they are united as one.

   One particular character that stood out to me, and i’m sure to the rest of the class, was Yong-hui. She was introduced into the film as an orphan; we all saw her witness the death of her mother. This startling introduction showed us how young Yong-hui was dramatically shook by the war, like many other Koreans. She represents Korea, for she was once carefree and joyous. Then the war took her innocence as it also did Korea’s. She also represents the future Korea and the traumatic turmoil that all Koreans went through, and continued to endure when the war ended but the scarring memories remained. 

Propaganda in The Marines who Never Returned

In ’Military Enlightenment’ for the Masses: Genre and Cultural Inter-mixing in South Korea’s Golden Age War Films, Diffrient notes that “[Lee] stands out among his peers for his humanistic approach to the Korean War movie, a genre commonly perceived to be a propagandistic vehicle for extolling the virtues of the political status quo.” (23) While many can understand this statement by considering the major role and significance of the rescued little girl, Yong-hui, in highlighting the compassion of the Korean soldiers, I think that it can also be understood by looking at the brief portrayals of the enemy in the movie and that although humanistic, it still holds aspects of propaganda. I found that within the first few scenes of the movie, an image of the enemy had already been created, one that portrayed them as sneaky, cowardly, and intensely cruel. In the first scene, the Korean soldiers are fighting a hidden enemy, we never actually see the opposing soldiers but only have the suspenseful music and sporadic flying bullets to let us know that they are there. In contrast, the Korean soldiers are shown as brave, there is a shot of the solitary, courageous Korean soldier who goes into the open to throw grenades, provoking the enemy. As well as this, the Korean soldiers are shown as strategic whereas the others are foolish, an example of this is the scene where one soldier takes off his helmet and holds it up as a target, outsmarting the enemy shooting at him. This opening scene is also when Yong-hui is rescued and when the soldiers stumble into the room full of dead, hanging, and piled up bodies. Both of these invoke the compassion of the soldiers, first in demanding a ceasefire to get the girl, and then in the shots of the soldiers crying, or close to crying, while looking at the bodies.  These highlight the humanistic aspects of the movie, but the propagandistic aspects cannot be looked over.

The Marines Who Never Returned

The movie The Marines Who Never Returned is a Korean War movie produced in the 1960s. It has a clear theme of love and compassion among soldiers and patriotism. The film seems to suggest a unity in one nation, where soldiers had to protect its citizens. This is mostly clear with the appearance of Young-hui. When Young-hui’s mother is killed by enemy soldiers, the marine troop rescues the little girl and brings her with them. She builds strong relationships with every soldiers in the troop, and she also acts as a narrator in the film.

Even though a sense of compassion and unity is built in the movie, I also felt that there was also hatred within one big nation. The Korean population used to be one unified body until the North and the South became divided. The divide was much more profound because different members in one family were being divided. For example, there was a soldier whose brother was part of the North Korean troop, while he was part of the South Korean troop. 

Personally, while watching The Marines Who Never Return, I was immediately drawn to the character Yong-hui. Yong-hui was a young girl who lost her mother during a fight between the South and North Koreans. She was adopted into the group of marines who named her, and affectionately called her their mascot. She wore the uniform as the men did, and also performed salutes. Though she was young, and a girl, she was quickly loved by all the men in the group, and they secretly took her along the route that the men were travelling. She also was the narrator of the film.
Diffrient discusses how Yong-hui has a dual representation as both the civilians of the Korean war - the men, women, and children caught in the middle of the destruction - or (by extension of the previous), as a representation of the Korean nation caught between the external superpowers (being Russia and the United States).
I agree with this statement. Yong-hui was completely identified with both sides of the superpowers, and her innocent nature allowed for her to be a sympathizer not of the Russians or the North Koreans, but of Private Choe, whose brother was a North Korean sympathizer. By portraying the South's point of view, and having the Southern men take Young-hui in, the director is not creating a film that supports the North. Even more so, by not having her directly agree with the North, but demonstrate that they are all of the same people, she becomes caught in the middle. While Yong-hui may have lost her biological family, she still remains 'Korean' at heart, and tries to bring together to military men who are divided due to the conflict. She then embodies what used to be the Korean nation.

the marines who never returned

The director of the movie, the marines who never returned, takes a humanistic approach in depicting the marine soldiers who fought at the war against the Chinese by displaying their instinct and friendship amidst the disastrous battlefield.

The depiction of the destructive battles of the 6.25 war(Korean War) is first shown in the poster of the movie where all the soldiers’ facial expressions seem to be nervous and in an unstable state. As seen from the movie, the war resulted in massive dislocation and societal damage.

These successive wars led to overall infrastructure destruction, displacement of citizens, high casualties and suffering, as well as economic and social disintegration. In order to address these large-scale dislocation issues and social trauma, numerous movies were filmed not only during the post-war period, but also continued for several decades following, depicting the dislocated lives of the Korean people. Counter to the Korean film industry’s expected disappearance of during this period of post-war trauma, directors became eager to capture the horrendous economic, social, and political traumas of the time, resulting in startling cultural productivity. Even with mere black and white display, the emotional appeal with the directors realism humanistic approach, shows the descriptive and meticulous individual character depiction. Each the characters’ individual stories show the victory in the war only made them realize the cruelty of the war and the dying of their comrades(among 42 soldiers only two survive..), and unstable psychic interiority.