[Limelight] The October 26 Incident: Cold and Melancholic~

Movie 'The Man Standing Next' Director Woo Min-ho

There are two theories regarding the assassination of President Park Chung-hee on October 26: the mastermind theory and the doctor theory. The mastermind theory originated from the announcement by the Joint Investigation Headquarters of the Martial Law Command regarding the October 26 incident, which used the phrase "the mastermind Kim Jae-gyu and his accomplices."

"Kim Jae-gyu not only showed incompetence in the course of his duties and was repeatedly reprimanded by His Excellency the President, but also had his reports and proposals to President Park repeatedly blocked by Deputy Chief of Security Cha. Furthermore, due to his own misconduct, he received a warning letter from His Excellency. Fearing dismissal as part of a major reshuffle of key positions related to the current situation, he harbored delusions of killing the President and the Chief of Security to seize power, and seized the opportunity during the dinner on October 26 to carry out his plan."

Kim Jae-gyu refused to be condemned. He called the October 26 incident the "October 26 Revolution" and argued that its content was pure and clean.

"I was neither morally shameless enough to stand on President Park’s grave and seize power, nor was I obsessed with power or personal gain. (Omitted) I am a revolutionary, a military man. While there is a concern that a soldier who seizes power may become a dictator, would someone who carried out this revolution because of dictatorship create another cause for dictatorship?"

He judged that the oppressive structure of the Yushin regime was strangling liberal democracy. He emphasized that he launched the uprising believing that democracy could not be restored without President Park’s sacrifice. He also claimed that he risked his life to plan the revolution to prevent many sacrifices by the people.

The film The Man Standing Next takes a relatively neutral stance between the two theories. By focusing on the background that made the incident inevitable, it minimizes the potential for political controversy. The narrative style resembles the noir films of director Jean-Pierre Melville, such as Le Samoura? (1967) and Le Cercle Rouge (1969). Rather than focusing on the incident itself, it thoroughly shows the characters’ actions and builds tension. The dry listing of the preparation process creates the atmosphere of the time. Director Woo Min-ho said, "I wanted to give a cold, lonely, yet melancholic feeling."

* The following interview contains many spoilers for the film.

- Kim Gyu-pyeong (played by Lee Byung-hun) is portrayed as having complex reasons for assassinating the President (played by Lee Sung-min). The feelings of crisis and betrayal from not knowing when he might be discarded by the President, involvement of the U.S. government, the Bu-Ma Democratic Uprising and the desire for democratization, and conflicts with the Chief of Security are organically intertwined.

"I included almost all the elements historians mention. I focused more on the human inner world, psychology, and emotions than on the October 26 incident itself. But that doesn’t mean I portrayed the incident carelessly."

- Why did you focus on the character’s inner world?

"Actually, I thought the October 26 incident and the disappearance of Kim Hyung-wook were separate. But then, in 2005, the National Intelligence Service’s 'Past Affairs Truth Commission' investigating the Kim Hyung-wook disappearance revealed a surprising fact: that Lee Sang-ryeol, the French ambassador, under orders from Kim Jae-gyu, instructed two overseas trainees, Shin and Lee, to carry out a murder. Kim Jae-gyu was a figure who had followed former President Park Chung-hee closely. I was curious how absolute loyalty turned into gunfire in just two weeks."

- So you focused on the 40 days leading up to the October 26 incident?

"Yes. I thought there must have been some cause or something that could not be logically explained that changed his mindset. Such emotions cannot be defined by just one or two things. Loyalty, betrayal, respect, love, jealousy, envy, obsession, self-esteem, humiliation?all mixed together. It was truly a whirlwind of emotions."

- How did you hope Kim Gyu-pyeong’s mindset would be received 41 years later?

"In a way, the October 26 incident was a case of one person acting extremely under extreme circumstances. Is it just that person’s problem? I don’t think so. Our society still suffers from terrible events. I think those are not just one person’s problem either. We need a broader approach to properly reflect on the contradictions in our society."

- Some say the director’s political neutrality results in a lack of subjectivity or interpretation in the film...

"From the production stage, I didn’t want to provide a clear answer. I wanted to help the audience find their own answers."

- But many films and dramas have already been made about the October 26 incident. Many people might expect a different approach.

"Most previous films and dramas focused on the incident itself. For example, People at That Time (2004) is a black comedy inspired by the irony of the October 26 incident. The Man Standing Next starts from a different point. It delves into the inner world of Kim Gyu-pyeong. It immerses in showing various emotions and cracks within him. Political messages and such inevitably take a backseat in this process."

- People at That Time faced considerable difficulties, including a temporary screening ban and deletion of three scenes. Did you try to avoid such controversies?

"Of course, there was pressure. Since I never intended to leave a political message from the start, I think that feeling was even stronger."

- Showing 40 days leading up to the incident risks making the narrative plain. For example, in Inside Men, events after Ahn Sang-goo’s (Lee Byung-hun) surrender are reassembled in the latter half as a twist. Since The Man Standing Next deals with a true story, there is less room for such attempts, and even if there were, it could damage the tone. How did you overcome these difficulties?

"We put a lot of effort into the actors’ performances. That is the film’s greatest strength. We avoided flashy glamour and focused on creating a cold atmosphere. The actors performed exactly as intended."

- Documentary-style footage also contributed to the cold atmosphere, right?

"Can you give an example?"

- The scene where Kim Gyu-pyeong looks down on the Bu-Ma Democratic Uprising from a helicopter comes to mind.

"Exactly. I wanted the audience to calmly experience the Bu-Ma Democratic Uprising as if watching a documentary. I wanted to give a chance to glimpse the atmosphere of the era. Also, I wanted to give Kim Gyu-pyeong a new emotion. There was no need to dramatically corner him. Just his face looking down at the protesting students and citizens conveys complex feelings."

- That scene gives the impression that Kim Gyu-pyeong is given the perspective of a person in power.

"Since the camera looks down from above, that’s natural. I actually wanted to cover the Bu-Ma Democratic Uprising in more detail. But the production costs would have been enormous. After calculating, it was beyond what we could handle, so I gave up cleanly (laughs). I focused on the perspective of power and internal expression."

- The film deals with the October 26 incident in earnest after the Bu-Ma Democratic Uprising scene. So the direction of that scene was especially important. Even a slightly emotional expression from Kim Gyu-pyeong could lend weight to the doctor theory. But Lee Byung-hun conveyed complex emotions just with his face.

"In that scene, the U.S. Ambassador to Korea, Deborah Sim (Kim So-jin), Park Yong-gak (Kwak Do-won), and the President’s voice appear in sequence. I reminded Lee Byung-hun of this. I asked him to slightly change his facial expression each time a different voice appeared. I asked him to show confusion but not to overact. It’s tricky to direct actors in such complex psychological scenes. For example, if you tell an actor to blink once, it often looks unnatural on screen. Ultimately, you have to leave it entirely to the actor."

● The U.S. Ambassador says, "Park is finished. Prepare for what’s next. Before we step in." Deborah Sim says, "It’s a dream for Director Park, but probably not for Director Kim." Park Yong-gak says, "Why did we carry out the revolution? Why risk our lives for it?"

- It sounds like a performance only Lee Byung-hun could deliver (laughs).

"Of course. For scenes requiring such delicate acting, the director has no choice but to do another take. Sometimes you have a special feeling but it’s hard to describe in words. The Bu-Ma Democratic Uprising scene was like that. In such situations, the director can only keep saying ‘one more time’ until the desired feeling comes out. Lee Byung-hun understands this very well. We shot that scene several times, and that was at Lee Byung-hun’s voluntary request."

- I heard you asked the actors not to ad-lib...

"I’m not the type to tell people what not to do, so I was worried. But the actors understood well. They seemed to have thoroughly reviewed the script before coming to the set, which made me happy."

- I was surprised by how much Lee Sung-min resembled the President.

"There are actors who act ‘handsome.’ Lee Sung-min acts ‘resemblance.’ He grasped the President’s characteristics well and expressed them, which surprised me too. I don’t think I ever gave him specific acting directions. He prepared solidly and approached the shoot seriously."

- What aspects of Lee Sung-min reminded you of the President?

"While directing The Drug King (2017), I observed his acting and felt he resembled the President. I didn’t hesitate to offer him the role at a drinking party. When he heard who the role was, he was surprised (laughs). He only confirmed that the script had no political color and accepted the role. Even when seeking investment and assembling the staff, I emphasized the lack of political color. Thanks to that, I was able to recruit all the desired actors and staff."

- The Man Standing Next has many similarities in narrative style to Jean-Pierre Melville’s films.

"I brought two masters into my heart (laughs): John le Carr? and Melville. I really like their stories and moods. A cold, lonely, yet melancholic feeling, you might say? I wanted to subtly unfold that style."

- Kim Gyu-pyeong’s props and makeup reminded me a lot of Philippe Gerbier (Lino Ventura) from Le Cercle Rouge.

"Maybe because of the glasses (laughs)? I actually referred more to Jeff (Alain Delon) from Le Samoura?. I thought the trench coat and fedora would bring out the noir feeling well."

- The scene where Kim Gyu-pyeong infiltrates the Gungjeong-dong safe house felt very much like a Melville film. The long take full shot of him going up the stairs to the second floor was impressive.

"I didn’t want to cut off the emotions Lee Byung-hun showed physically. Watching him break into the safe house and pass through the window from the front was suffocating. I wanted to convey that feeling directly to the audience. The storyboard had various shots from bust to close-up, but the full shot was so good that I didn’t shoot the others. That way, I wouldn’t have to worry about editing."

- It seems like a simple scene but carries various meanings.

"Exactly. The so-called number two person struggling in the rain clutching a single bag?that felt like Kim Gyu-pyeong’s reality. Lee Byung-hun had a hard time during filming. I poured more rain than planned (laughs). As we filmed, the heavy rain sounded like Kim Gyu-pyeong’s heartbeat. I thought the more rain, the better the feeling (laughs). I don’t usually enjoy shooting such scenes. Directors like Bong Joon-ho or Na Hong-jin are known for pouring rain. Especially Bong Joon-ho used rain spectacularly in Parasite (laughs)."

- You paid a lot of attention to cinematography and lighting to show the noir character.

"Director of Photography Ko Nak-seon was the lighting director for People at That Time. Maybe that’s why he understood well what kind of feeling I wanted without me saying much. In the Seoul Arts Theater scene, he arranged the lighting himself and captured various sides of Lee Byung-hun. The scene where the lights go out three times, which appears in the trailer, is one of those."

- The cinematography style of The Man Standing Next is very different from People at That Time.

"Almost all shots in People at That Time have smooth camera work. Even the long takes after the October 26 incident in The Man Standing Next are not like that. We focused on obsessive character lighting. We paid a lot of attention to symmetry. I wanted to create a feeling like looking at a portrait painting."

- The script ended with soldiers celebrating the May 16 military coup, with the President, Kim Gyu-pyeong, Park Yong-gak, Kwak Sang-cheon, and Jeon Doo-hyuk (Seo Hyun-woo) blowing out candles on a cake, but this was deleted from the film.

"We shot it in color and even processed it in black and white, but it was cut in editing. It had a grotesque feeling that might be hard for the audience to accept. We plan to include it in the Blu-ray release."

- The film has no weak acting performances; the actors’ chemistry is remarkable. However, the film ends with the actual voices of Jeon Du-hwan and Kim Jae-gyu, which somewhat diminishes the lingering impact.

"I wanted to leave it to the audience to judge why Kim Jae-gyu killed former President Park. I felt a device to recall the real incident was necessary. It’s a double-edged sword. Certainly, the beauty of leaving space is somewhat reduced. I’m considering removing their voices in the Blu-ray version. Instead, if we end with the grotesque candle scene, the film’s flavor would definitely change. Let’s talk again about how that feels then."