2.23 million tickets, cancelled events: The Assassin(s) row widens

Zhang Yimou, president of the Busan International Film Festival's competition jury, stepped into the dispute over Hur Jin-ho's "The Assassin(s)" on October 7, questioning what counts as historical truth as the Korean thriller faces a defamation complaint, political pressure and cancelled festival appearances. His intervention brought an international voice to a fight that has moved well beyond the cinema screen. ^[1][2][3]

Zhang said he had not seen the film. He was not offering a verdict on its account of the 1974 shooting that killed South Korean first lady Yuk Young-soo. Instead, he challenged the premise that history supplies filmmakers with a single, settled script: history "is also written by people", he said, and historical truth is itself sometimes "a question mark". ^[1]

Fellow juror July Jung, director of "Next Sohee", then spoke after the moderator proposed moving on because some jury members were unfamiliar with the controversy. Although it was not her film, Jung said, "my heart feels so cold as a filmmaker". She also insisted that filmmakers bear responsibility for the worlds they create. ^[1]

That combination matters. Zhang defended the space to imagine. Jung described the cost of working in that space, without asking for immunity from criticism. Neither settled the historical argument. Both addressed a more immediate issue: whether disagreement with a film should become pressure on the people who made it.

The dispute remains live. Former People Power Party Seoul city councilor Lee Jong-bae has filed a defamation complaint against Hur, his producer and two writers. The film's Busan appearances were cancelled on safety grounds. Yet by October 4, it had sold 2.23 million tickets in Korean cinemas. Pressure has curtailed its public events, not its audience. ^[2][3]

A jury president draws a line

At the press conference, Zhang cited an old Chinese saying that creative work "originates from life, yet transcends life". Creators respect other creators' visions, he said, and differing answers can be "precisely where cinema's fascination lies". ^[1]

His qualification deserves to stay attached to his remarks: he had noticed the controversy but had not watched the film. This was a defence of artistic interpretation, not an endorsement of Hur's specific choices. It cannot serve as evidence for or against any theory about the shooting.

Jung's contribution was more personal. She said she had to speak because she, too, had made films drawn from real events. She acknowledged that a film's treatment of a story can hurt people and that wounded reactions can follow. But immediate reactions after a screening also made her wonder, "what should we do next time?" ^[1]

She concluded that filmmakers "bear all the responsibility within it, because it is a world we created". That is not a demand to place cinema above scrutiny. It is an argument for keeping scrutiny directed at the work and the choices behind it, rather than making the next film too frightening to attempt. ^[1]

The setting gave the exchange weight. Busan opened its 31st edition on October 6 and is screening 246 films, its largest programme since 2019. Zhang chairs a seven-member jury judging a competition of 13 titles. The festival runs through October 15. ^[1][5]

The jury's comments are not a formal ruling by the festival on the controversy. But the row has now entered the public proceedings of an international institution whose own guests had already withdrawn from the film's planned events. A dispute over one Korean thriller has become a test of how a festival protects room for argument. ^[1][3][5]

The shooting and the cinematic hypothesis

The historical event at the centre is specific. On August 15, 1974, during Liberation Day celebrations at the National Theater, Mun Se-gwang opened fire and killed Yuk Young-soo, wife of then-President Park Chung-hee. Mun was a 22-year-old ethnic Korean resident of Japan with pro-North Korean ties. He was arrested at the scene and executed that December. ^[2][3]

The official investigation identified Mun as the lone attacker and concluded that he acted on Pyongyang's orders through Chongryon. Hur's thriller leaves the question of who was behind the attack open. Its detractors argue that the unresolved ending points towards Park or his government. That is their interpretation, not an established finding about the attack. ^[1][2][3]

The film opened in Korean cinemas on September 23, following its premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival. It passed 1 million admissions in four days. ^[2]

On September 28, producer Hive Media set out its defence: "Nowhere in the film is any specific individual defined as being behind the incident, and the film's hypotheses and dramatic settings are not presented as historical fact." ^[2]

Hur followed in a September 30 YouTube interview, calling the story a "cinematic hypothesis" built around questions left by the investigation. He said interpreting it as naming Park was "illogical". He also described the toll on the production: "The actors and staff worked so hard on this, but I never expected it to be belittled like this." ^[4]

His explanation went beyond the identity of a culprit. "Don't people seek facts that benefit them, regardless of which side they are on?" Hur said. "I wanted to raise questions about this, even though I don't know what the truth is." ^[4]

A fictional hypothesis does not overturn an official finding. Equally, an official finding does not make every fictional departure a police matter. The important distinction is between asserting an accusation as fact and inviting an audience to consider uncertainty. Hur and his producer say they did the latter. Their opponents say the implication is damaging regardless. ^[2][4]

From disagreement to personal pressure

Lee Jong-bae's complaint asks Seoul police to investigate Hur, Hive Media chief executive Kim Won-kuk and writers Kwon Ki-jun and Lee Ji-min for defamation. It argues that the plural title invites viewers to suspect a second culprit besides Mun. The complaint is a request for an investigation, not a finding of wrongdoing. ^[2][4]

People Power Party lawmakers also tried to summon Hur to the annual parliamentary audit. The Democratic Party blocked that move on creative freedom grounds. Lawmaker Yoo Young Ha, described as a close aide to former President Park Geun-hye, called the film an "immoral act that hurts the bereaved and betrays history". Party leader Jang Dong-hyeok shared a boycott post. ^[2][3][4]

The pressure has reached people who acted in the film or recommended it. Cast accounts received abusive comments. Actresses Kim Go-eun and Lee Young-ae were targeted after handwritten recommendations, and critic Lee Dong-jin after a video review. A YouTube film reviewer with 4.17 million subscribers removed a video about the film. ^[2]

A right-wing civic group led by Kim Sang Jin obtained police permits for daily protests outside actor Yoo Hae-jin's home. The group said it would continue until he agreed to appear in "right-wing films". His agency, VAST Entertainment, said on October 5 that it was gathering posts and evidence to protect his rights and safety. ^[4]

That demand makes the distinction plain. It is not an argument about a scene, an ending or the historical record. It seeks to dictate an actor's future work by bringing pressure to his home.

On October 4, the Directors Guild of Korea said the dispute had crossed that boundary: "What we are facing now is not criticism or condemnation of a film, but attacks on individuals that have crossed the line." The guild said hostility was targeting participants' daily lives and livelihoods and had reached demands that such a film never be made again. ^[2]

The statement named nobody. It accepted that creators can be criticised but said criticism must not destroy their personal lives and livelihoods. It drew support from 19 Korean film industry organisations spanning production, directing, cinematography, writing, distribution, exhibition, festivals, education and labour. ^[2][4]

Defending that boundary does not require liking the film. Director Park Chan-wook praised it at a September 26 audience discussion, but the case against personal intimidation would be just as strong had he disliked it. A film's quality and its makers' right to work are separate questions. ^[2]

Full cinemas, cancelled appearances

The practical effects were visible before Zhang spoke. Actor Lee Min-ho, who plays a reporter investigating the case, withdrew from a Busan talk session on October 1 without giving a reason. On October 2, Hive Media said the film's team would skip the festival because of safety concerns for audiences and guests. Hur and the lead actors had been expected at the October 6 opening ceremony. A planned free public screening was also called off. ^[3][5]

Meanwhile, the film led the Korean box office over October 2-4, selling 412,012 tickets from 1,129 screens. Its weekend gross was KRW4.07 billion, about $3 million, taking its total to KRW21.9 billion, about $16.3 million, by October 4. Those figures establish commercial success. They do not establish why each viewer bought a ticket. ^[2]

The contrast is the sharpest measure of the dispute so far: hundreds of thousands of people could watch the film that weekend, while its makers could not proceed with their planned festival appearances. Box-office strength is no substitute for being able to meet an audience safely. ^[2][3]

The next test is abroad. "The Assassin(s)" is scheduled to open the 37th Singapore International Film Festival on October 21, with Hur attending alongside Shim Eun-kyung and Park Sung-hoon. The People Power Party has drafted a letter asking the festival to remove it as the opener. ^[2][3][4]

Before that, Busan continues through October 15 with Zhang's jury at work and the controversy unresolved. Police action on the complaint, any renewed parliamentary summons and Singapore's opening programme are the concrete decisions to watch. Zhang has defended the room in which filmmakers imagine. The next question is whether Hur and his cast can safely enter it.