A South Korean film about a 1974 assassination attempt has ignited a political controversy that is spreading beyond movie theaters, disrupting promotional events, affecting corporate advertising and raising concerns about the safety of its stars. The backlash has now drawn a response from Zhang Yimou, the internationally acclaimed Chinese film director, who argues that artistic expression should not be bound by historical facts.
The dispute surrounding The Assassin(s) illustrates a challenge familiar to Hollywood. A controversy over a movie’s interpretation of history can extend beyond its filmmakers to actors, advertisers and other commercial partners. In South Korea, investment brokerage Kiwoom Securities suspended an advertising campaign featuring one of the film’s leading actors, while its production company withdrew from scheduled appearances at the internationally renowned Busan International Film Festival over safety concerns.
The controversy stems from one of South Korea’s most sensitive political episodes. In 1974, an assassination attempt against then President Park Chung Hee killed his wife, first lady Yuk Young Soo. The film explores the circumstances surrounding the attack, but some conservative groups have accused its creators of distorting history by suggesting that Park or intelligence authorities may have been involved. The filmmakers have denied deliberately misrepresenting historical facts.
The dispute intensified as conservative groups demanded action against the production and its cast. Hive Media Corp., the South Korean film production company behind The Assassin(s), canceled planned festival appearances by director Hur Jin Ho and actors Yoo Haejin, Park Haeil and Lee Minho.
Yoo, one of the film’s leading actors, was also placed under police protection following threats connected to the controversy. Kiwoom Securities subsequently halted an advertising campaign featuring him, demonstrating how public anger directed at a film can affect businesses with no involvement in its production.
The escalating backlash prompted questions about the limits of creative freedom during an Oct. 7 press conference at the 31st Busan International Film Festival.
Zhang Yimou, the Chinese filmmaker behind Red Sorghum and To Live, addressed the issue while serving as president of the festival’s competition jury.
Zhang has built an internationally recognized career depicting China’s turbulent history through cinema, including stories exploring political upheaval and its consequences for ordinary families.
Although Zhang acknowledged that he had not watched The Assassin(s), he said he was aware of the controversy and questioned whether films inspired by historical events should be judged strictly by their factual accuracy.
“Creation is creation,” Zhang said, emphasizing that fictional works do not always need to be based on historical truth.
He explained that filmmaking involves transforming reality into artistic expression rather than merely reproducing documented events.
The distinction becomes particularly complicated when historical events remain subject to competing interpretations.
Zhang argued that even accounts widely accepted as historical truth deserve scrutiny. Cinema, he said, allows events from the distant past to reach contemporary audiences through stories that may be understood differently by each viewer.
Audiences should be free to disagree about a film’s message, he added, because those differences in interpretation are part of what makes cinema compelling.
South Korean filmmaker July Jung, another member of the festival’s competition jury, expressed similar views but drew attention to the pressure that such controversies place on directors.
Jung, known for Next Sohee and A Girl at My Door, has explored difficult social issues through fictional narratives, including stories inspired by actual events.
She explained that even when a film originates from a real incident, the process of adapting it into fiction changes the nature of its characters and storytelling.
A fictional movie should therefore be understood as a creative work rather than a literal reconstruction of reality, she argued.
Yet Jung admitted that the reaction to The Assassin(s) had made her uneasy about her own future projects.
Although she had no involvement in the film, Jung said the intensity of the backlash had left her feeling intimidated as a director.
She acknowledged that witnessing such reactions to cinematic expression had made her question how she should approach similarly sensitive subjects in the future.
Her concerns pointed to consequences that extend beyond canceled promotional appearances and advertising campaigns. The controversy has also raised the possibility that directors may become reluctant to explore politically sensitive history.
Jung nevertheless emphasized that artistic freedom does not absolve filmmakers of responsibility.
Regardless of whether a story begins with actual events, she said, directors must accept responsibility for the fictional worlds they create.
That responsibility includes accepting criticism and recognizing that audiences may respond with disagreement, sympathy or anger.
Jung said she welcomed differing opinions and hoped filmmakers would continue to have opportunities to explore challenging subjects.
The two directors approached the controversy from different perspectives. Zhang emphasized the freedom to reinterpret history, while Jung acknowledged both the creative independence of filmmakers and their responsibility for the stories they tell.
Neither attempted to settle the historical dispute surrounding The Assassin(s). Their comments instead focused on whether a film’s fictional interpretation of real events should determine how its creators are treated.
The events surrounding the movie have demonstrated how quickly a disagreement over historical storytelling can spread into an actor’s professional life, corporate advertising and the promotion of a major film.
The backlash has also exposed a tension that extends across the global entertainment industry. Historical dramas can invite audiences to reconsider established accounts of the past, but the controversies they provoke can reach far beyond the stories appearing on screen.
Jung’s remarks captured the dilemma confronting directors who work with controversial historical material. Creative freedom allows filmmakers to challenge conventional narratives, while public criticism remains an unavoidable part of releasing their work. The growing concern is whether that criticism will discourage filmmakers from exploring difficult chapters of history in the first place.
