탈냉전기 한국에서의 ‘동아시아 영화 연구’ 동향

Abstract

East Asian films began to become the subject of academic research in Korea around 1990 when the transition to the post-Cold War took place. This article is intended to investigate, classify, and comment on East Asian film researches’ trends in post-Cold War Korea. The scope of the study is limited to researches dealing with the relationships between Korean, Chinese and Japanese films. These researches can be named East Asian Film Studies(EAFS).BR After several academic projects dealing with East Asian Films in the mid-2000s, EAFS has submitted various issues and achievements as an interdisciplinary area that has been composed of film studies, Korean studies, Chinese studies, Japanese studies, and cultural studies. It can be largely characterized by two methodologies. One is a comparative film studise, and the other is to explore diverse aspects of relations-impact, overlap, adjacent, and transition.BR These were applied to various aspects of cinematic practices in East Asia with consideration of the social context. It can be classified according to the period when films to be studied are placed: colonial period(-1945), the Cold War period(1945-1991), and the post-Cold War period(1991-).BR Researches on East Asian films during the colonial period mainly focused on the transnational situation that colonialism and World Wars paradoxically opened. Researches on Cold War films focused on the situation of obstruction due to ideological blockade and the inter/transnational flows that nevertheless worked. Specifically, policies, industries, and genres were compared by the nations, and the inter-Asian acceptance, reproduction, and impact of films were analyzed. BR Researches on post-Cold War films noted aspects of various cinematic relationships in East Asia, which have been increasing. Comparative studies have been conducted on historical representations and major film makers. Mutual representation and acceptance of East Asian films, dynamics of the East Asian international film festivals, and the possibility of Asian film markets for Hanryu were also discussed. Criticism of the dynamics of capital, which drives the proliferation of cinematic flows in East Asia, and reflection on the structure of a nation-state that still works strongly were also accompanied.BR EAFS has imagined ‘Cinematic East Asia’ as a ‘field of highly connected experiences through films’. Its sharp criticism of the status quo gives itself the nature of the ‘East Asian Alternative System Theory’. The geopolitical tension in East Asia, which has increased since the mid-2010s, paradoxically strengthens the effectiveness of EAFS, because its ability as anti-geopolitical practices is being requested.