王者制造

这是一部以真实人物及事件为原型的虚构故事，除了更改人名及强化戏剧冲突，基本上复制了历史原貌，金大中，韩国历史上口碑最好的总统，没有之一，号称“亚洲的曼德拉”，是真正的民主斗士，虽然最后因为儿子贪污给他的名节蒙了些灰，但他也是仅有能够善终的卸任总统（刚卸任的文在寅有待观察），毕竟韩国总统是全世界风险最高的职业。 政治题材的电影最考验表演的含金量，李善均的影子军师有更多的情绪起伏，表演上拥有更多空间，但薛景求真正做到了以静制动，足够沉稳的气场让台词都充满了感染力，浑身是戏，不得不爱！任何时期的政治成功都需要道术合一，金大中的道只有通过严昌禄的术才能登上历史舞台，最后的二元分立也是影片阐明的矛盾所在！ 电影照进现实，也正是金大中执政时期建立了韩国电影的分级制度，才让创作的自由度得以最大释放，也就有了现在的亚洲之光。继续期待！

手段和大义!一体同胞到两相分离 两败俱伤的局面，一个丢了理想，一个暂时没达成目标!但是唯一我觉得比较反感的是 似乎把徐太昌表现得太无所不能了!失去了他，好像一败涂地，没了诡诈的手段必然失败，诡诈的手段必然成功一般!所以我觉得甚至徐太昌应该活着 活着看到金范志成功当选，亲眼所见坚持自我正义的金范志虽然暂时失败，但是最终成功! 同时我还觉得本片可以通过徐太昌只能通过依附在各色主公身边才能发挥才智!以此表现所谓资本主义的假民主!只是一个理想主义者需要通过这种民主走上一条不死不休的不归路!我觉得叙事重点应该放在面临二者分裂之后民主失利，让徐太昌多一些自我怀疑的时刻吧！前面多做一些二人理念不同关系破裂的铺垫和金范志这种纯粹的理想主义者也得利用不择手段的假民主!以此反思社会环境和制度! 片中最喜欢的部分就是二人分裂时刻对国民的阐述!最佳导演实至名归，在很多地方镜头拍摄还是有所新意的，比如楼梯和李韩尚的谈判、部长被开除透过门的镜头一进一出两个空间很有层次!这些镜头把空间感利用起来了!还有全片的用光，对影子这个身份的光线造型，有巧思的!

徐昌大，一个为所欲为的男人，翻手为云覆手为雨，像一盏阿拉丁神灯，满足一切争权者的欲望。 这个世界从我们年幼起就开始教我们循规蹈矩、诚实诚信、与人为善，但规则永远是给遵守规则的人制定的，社会经验会告诉我们“人善被人欺”的道理，破坏规则的人反而可以获得既得利益。所以徐昌大在一开场就对被偷鸡蛋的村民说，如果想改变现状，就要用恶毒的方法，不然就要做一辈子善良的冤大头。天平的两端，一边是良心，一边是利益。 我个人是喜欢看这种题材的电影，符合现实。世界本不公平，好人总得不到好报，对付坏人就应该用坏人的办法，以其人之道还其人之身。在法律的红线内，不择手段达到目的，最好一招制敌。最近火爆的《黑暗荣耀》不也如此？解决了一切障碍，但合情合理且不脏手。当然，也可以一直秉承善良宽容之心生活下去，无非是道阻且长，但目的地还是会达到的。

电影里的金云范不明白一个道理，改变世界，是需要有话语权有实权的人才能做到的。大权在握之前，那些主张只能被称为“理想”，一个能否实现都是未知数的口号。

Released in January 2022 just weeks before the presidential election in South Korea, writer-director Byun Sung-hyun’s fourth directorial effort, Kingmaker, is as much a character drama as it is a political film.

It is 1961, Seo Chang-dae (Lee Sun-kyun), a local pharmacist who fled the North, meets Kim Woon-bum (Sol Kyung-gu), an eloquent small-time politician who has lost four elections in seven years. Immediately, Seo sees that they share not only ideals but also troubles: when the ruling Republicans label them as “commies”, little does it matter to the people how the two want to help the nation.

Although slightly concerned about Seo’s lack of hesitancy to play dirty, Kim accepts Seo to be a part of his campaign staff – partly because he needs someone like him, partly because Seo too seems dedicated to his country. Given his Northern background and, to say the least, questionable strategies, Seo has to operate out of sight, earning himself the nickname “The Shadow” – a recurring visual motif in cinematographer Jo Hyeong-rae’s composition of light and shadow.

With the help of Seo’s dubious stratagems, the idealistic and upright Kim finally starts climbing up the political ladder, ultimately running for the top job. Thus begins the electoral battle between New Democrat candidate Kim and Seo versus the incumbent Republican president Park (Kim Jong-soo) and his goons. The first two acts of the film oscillate between backroom political manoeuvres to petty electoral bribes of rubber shoes and flour. The third act and the real battle, however, become apparent when Seo and Kim eventually try to answer that age-old question: “does the end justify the means?”.

Having tried his hand at a variety of material from the 2012 romantic sex comedy Whatcha Wearin’? to the 2017 crime thriller The Merciless, Byun’s grasp of genre cinema receives further validation with this adequately favourable political/historical drama. Byun’s second-time collaborator Jo Hyeong-rae’s rich camerawork switches seamlessly between black-and-white newsreel-like footage to colour scenes (although the overserving of zoom-in extreme close-ups can feel a bit distracting at times). The success of the film is also attributable to the taut editing of motivated, smooth transitions and the score that captures the subtle and the grandiose moments equally well.

The “based on real-life events” aspect of it certainly adds more to the film. The audience, especially local viewers, can easily see through the thinly-veiled characters. Moreover, similar political systems help to bridge the gap and avoid alienating audiences abroad. The fact that the online audience of this year’s Far East Film Festival in Udine, Italy, chose Kingmaker for the MYMovies Award speaks to how the Korean-specific context does not constitute a barrier in understanding and appreciation. (Also, for viewers who’ve seen George Clooney’s 2011 feature, The Ides of March, Kingmaker will seem relatively familiar.)

Kingmaker is a story of crushed idealism but of a slightly different, nuanced kind. It is not a story of someone who learns political skulduggery, for that is granted at the very beginning: our kingmaker’s lack of qualms playing dirty is what opens the door of politics for him. Instead, it is partly concerned with what follows after, with the room where it happens, with how the sausage gets made.

Although political and historical in subject matter, Byun and co-screenwriter Kim Min-soo ultimately chose the relationship between the two male leads as the film’s primary focus. As such, its success depends largely on the charisma and chemistry between them. Rest assured, Kingmaker comes stacked with a heavyweight cast. Veteran Sol Kyung-gu shows his range once again by successfully transforming from a boisterous gangster in Byun’s breakout hit, The Merciless, to a contemplative politician. Known internationally for his role in the 2019 sensation Parasite, Lee Sun-kyun brings the Machiavellian Seo to life in a powerfully memorable way. The two actors’ interaction alone is thoroughly enjoyable and breathes life into the abstract ethical concerns of the movie.

However, it is also here that the film betrays its flaw. Same as the Cannes-premiered The Merciless, Kingmaker is also essentially a story of male bonding. It’s a man’s world where the women are relegated to the background, reduced from character to prop. While Kim’s wife (Bae Jong-ok) receives only a few lines of dialogue, Seo’s wife and child are barely present in the story.

In Kingmaker, Byun knew better than to try and offer ready solutions to historical controversy or philosophical concerns. His next project, Kill Bok-soon, is set to be a Netflix-distributed action thriller, once again featuring Sol Kyung-gu and Cannes winner Jeon Do-yeon (Secret Sunshine) as a single mother/hitwoman. Hopefully, in this instance, Byun will tell an equally good or even better story and give a more balanced representation.

Originally published on View of the Arts.

正如金云范和许昌大一样，一个是阳光一个是影子，一个用他的善良去感染每个愿意追随他的人，一个用他的计谋去帮助每个用肮脏手段对付金云范的小人对手，两者互为表里。正如赵本山在《一代宗师》里提及的，一个门派，既要有面子也要有里子。

这里我要纠正一个说法，那就是说金是理想主义者，而许是现实主义者。那就错了，二者都是理想主义者，都想创造一个民主的世界。但是两人选择的方式不同，金用他的理想信念去影响身边的人，希望用正大光明的手段去改变这个世界，正如影片末尾，金愿意相信他的邻居是善良的，送他鸡蛋并且给他道歉。相反，许不相信他是善良的，既然他已经偷了鸡蛋，如果你还给他道歉，他只会越加猖狂，所以他提到了开头的那个计谋，把系好红绳的鸡放到他家去。影片至此，完成了首尾呼应，让人看了不由得十分感慨。我不能评价这两种方式哪种是正确的的，但是正如这世界是辩证的是阴阳构成的，有阴必有阳，有阳必有阴，互相对抗却又互相支撑，缺一不可。

最后我想提及下影片留给我们的一个问题，许昌大究竟有没有去实施爆炸，如果没有那究竟是谁？其实问题很简单，许没有，因为这会给他和金云范的关系带来破灭，并不符合他的利益，他最后说是他干的，其实是对金不相信他的一种失望和愤懑，以及金说只想利用他的一种报复（因为许是高傲的，他想被承认他所作的一切是有用的有意义的）。那么会是李会长他们嘛？也不可能，不然不可能是一开始知道发生爆炸的那种反应，而且他们也知道这么做只会让金云范的选举更上一层楼。所以真相只是最离谱的那个但也恰恰是最真实的那个，就是金的侄子引起的爆炸。或许说夸张的事实总是引的人难以接受吧。

写到这，我其实是觉得蛮遗憾也觉得可笑的，遗憾是因为这么个偶然事件，居然成了二者友情破裂的导火线，在总统选举临门一脚的时候，就差那么一点点，就那么一点点啊，失败了！也觉得蛮可笑的，明明双方都合作那么久，却还是不信任，或者说金不信任许，而许也对金的智商没有基本盘的了解嘛。真的好笑

这部电影有趣地从“造王者”和“王者”的角度展现了朴正熙军统期间，金大中在通过补选当选议员后发生的一系列明面上及暗地里的执政党与在野党之间政治斗争，以及在这过程中“造王者”与“王者”之间惺惺相惜却又因各自的政治正义执着而渐行渐远的现实，不失添加了几分人性的味道。我真的特别喜欢看政治题材的电影，尤其韩国电影，是真的敢拍！

但是想提个小问题，也是对电影中极度不解的情节设置（也可能是真实历史中发生的），即金云范被狡猾的记者故意设陷阱问题，提前透露了其欲取消针对北韩的国民预备役部队，而执政当局中央情报局则利用这点，开始煽动北韩威胁。药剂师（即造王者）在内部会议上公开提出惯常伎俩put on a show，遭到其他幕僚甚至金云范本人的不齿。

要表演的话，还不如去马戏团。

此时金云范已经慢慢摒弃这枚毒棋，把药剂师留在国内。没想到此时正好有爆炸案发生，也正好切中药剂师算盘，当他正准备发文强词抨击中央情报局的滥用权力制造恐怖时，就被中央情报局反将一军抓捕监禁，理由是新民党在自导自演制造恐怖！我的问题是，在大众对于中央情报局滥用权力制造恐怖的形象已经有所认知的前提印象下，中央情报局为什么敢在这个节骨眼把该形象反扣在新民党？这样难道不是会更加加深公众对于当局肆无忌惮打压政治对手的反感吗？公众为什么会突然相信中央情报局的说辞，转而认为新民党才是在自导自演制造恐怖？着实有些牵强。

最后加上首尾呼应的小故事：有个农夫发现自己家的母鸡每次下蛋后，鸡蛋都不翼而飞。在某个夜里发现是邻居偷的鸡蛋，而第二天他向村长告状后，没有任何事情发生，因为村长是邻居的亲戚。药剂师给出了他的解决办法，“让农夫今晚回去把一根红绳系在母鸡脚上，并且在夜里把鸡放到邻居家的槽里，第二天让全村人看到，邻居现在不仅偷鸡蛋，还开始偷鸡了。这样村长也保不了他了”。而在若干年后，当药剂师向金云范讲述这个故事，问到如果是他，他会怎么做时。

“我会在第二天把新鲜的鸡蛋送给邻居，”金云范答道，“以此来表示我误会邻居的歉意，如果他有良心，他会改过自新。”

“那如果他没有良心呢？”

“那我想，我就会来找你吧” （笑）