Affiliation:
1. Jaecheol Kim – Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea
Abstract
Cet essai vise à étudier les thrillers financiers coréens produits à la fin des années 2010, en particulier Default (Kook-hee Choi, 2018) et Black Money (Ji-yeong Jeong, 2019). Ces deux films ont dévoilé le visage sombre du capitalisme financier — non seulement en démystifiant les difficultés existantes et les défis causés par la crise du crédit, mais aussi en analysant l’ordre social du monde néolibéral actuel. En Corée, le néolibéralisme s’est développé après la crise financière asiatique de 1997 et il a été justifié par le fonds de sauvetage du FMI reçu par le gouvernement coréen pour échapper au défaut souverain. Les thrillers financiers coréens examinent le capitalisme mondial d’un point de vue nationaliste, et ils developpent un récit anticolonial pour representer la formation sociale néolibérale comme un type de régime colonial. Néanmoins, leurs points de vue ne se limitent pas à une portée nationaliste ; ils dêfinissent la logique d’exploitation actuelle comme une logique distinctive qui s’écarte de celle des anciennes relations coloniales. Ils comprennent l’économie néolibérale comme une gouvernementalité qui peut déplacer la souveraineté nationale, et ils imaginent des contre-conduites potentielles contre elle.
Publisher
University of Toronto Press Inc. (UTPress)
Subject
Visual Arts and Performing Arts
Reference39 articles.
1. This work was supported by the Yonsei University Research Grant of 2021 (grant no. 2021-22-0194).
2. Despite its generic boom, financial thrillers have not drawn much critical attention as a form of cinematic genre. However, there are notable critical works: Keith Clavin discusses two films, Margin Call and Cosmopolis, by contextualizing them with the 2007 credit crisis: see “Narrating Risk: The Financial Thriller Film during the U.S. Recession,” Textual Practice 31.3 (2017): 477–490. Keith B. Wagner’s piece explores films set on Wall Street, such as Wall Street (Oliver Stone, 1987), Boiler Room (Ben Younger, 2000), and Margin Call, in terms of the neo-liberal social order: see “Giving Form to Finance Culture: Neoliberal Denizens in Wall Street (1987), Boiler Room (2000), and Margin Call (2011),” Journal of Film and Video 68.2 (2016): 46–60.
3. Jane Elliott and Gillian Harkins, “Introduction: Genres of Neoliberalism,” Social Text 31.2 (2013): 1–17.
4. A number of scholars have examined the way Korean cinema reacts to the neo-liberal social order. Joseph Jonghyun Jeon, for instance, surveys the interactions between Korean economic crisis and post-IMF cinemas focusing on CGI technologies in “CGI, Algorithm, and Hegemony in Korea’s IMF Cinema,” Representations 126.1 (2014): 85–111. However, his work does not discuss financial thrillers produced in Korean contexts. Wagner analyzes Korean cinema by discussing neo-liberalism in Keith B. Wagner, “Endorsing Upper-Class Refinement or Critiquing Extravagance and Debt? The Rise of Neoliberal Genre Modification in Contemporary South Korean Cinema,” Critical Arts: South-North Cultural and Media Studies 30.1 (2016): 117–138. However, his essay does not discuss the financial thrillers that I discuss in this essay, Default and Black Money.
5. Critical studies have been conducted on this issue. The essay collection Jyotsna Kapur and Keith B. Wagner, eds. Neoliberalism and Global Cinema: Capital, Culture, and Marxist Critique (New York: Routledge, 2011) examines the way world cinemas respond to neo-liberal social order, and essays collected in the third part of the book are about the way neo-liberalism is received, examined, and criticized in Asian films. Sangjoon Lee, ed. Rediscovering Korean Cinema (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2019) offers a partial survey of the way Korean films respond to the neo-liberal economy. For Korean films’ critique of the chaebol-based economy and society’s limited law enforcement regarding chaebols, see Angeliki Katsarou, “Notes on a Korean Scandal: The Blockbuster Social Critique of Veteran,” Situations 11.2 (2018): 41–62.