In fact, the storyline is very simple: North Korean fishermen (or veterans) strayed into South Korea's "land" because of a fishing boat engine failure. What happened in South Korea was that they were written over and over again by psychologically traumatized NSA personnel. "Surrender material", it can be said that he was censoring all the time in South Korea. (and later in North Korea), the people in the security bureau want the fishermen to "break out" (give up everything and start over). While the fishermen saw in the "free time" that the people of the "free" country were unhappy, another daughter who was "censored" was indifferent to her father's death (the key here). Because the fishermen insisted on going home, and because of public opinion, the fishermen were finally "released". However, the fishermen who returned to the "motherland" went from one censorship site to another...
On the surface, the director was saying that both the "North and South" had hostile "colored glasses", thinking that the other side would not What kind of "good people" will sincerely "defection", even if it's just an innocent person who just glanced at the other party's territory and stayed for a few hours. That is "spy". After going back, there is endless "surveillance", and even the opportunity to make a living will not be given.
This is generally the case, but it is still a strong Korean-style script of "south and north".
First, after the fisherman explained the "friend"'s "last words", the "friend"'s daughter immediately put down her work and went outside. (The group leader with "mental illness" appeared) Naturally, the meaning of the word "spy" came to the minds of the moviegoers, because the whole movie revolved around "spy". However, this is not to say that the "defectors" still intend to serve the "north" even if they are in south Korea. The "hostility" to the northerners is clear at a glance. And the movie does not shy away from thinking that the South Korean government is spending a lot of money to raise "spies". In reality, I don't think that unit would keep the 'restless' guy who was making trouble with him.
Besides, we haven't seen any other high-ranking officials in this movie except the director with glasses. Moreover, the director's attitude is more like "meeting mud". While preventing the "mental illness" team leader, I was stunned to understand, 'what else can the director do'? And it's not so much that the director's attitude is 'prudent', it's more like "not taking responsibility as the first", because after that, the director told the team leader that he would also be 'reviewed'. And what I don't understand even more is that since the 'terrorists' have infiltrated the metropolitan area, it is necessary to inform the police and other public security organs and ask them to assist. The security bureau "surprisingly" set the fishermen 'free' for three hours. If it were a real 'terrorist', the capital would have been turned over long ago.
In the end, the above is just the director's "imagination". The real subtext: 'I don't want to unify' is the best. If we only use the point of view provided by the film, people in the north will 'divide' the property of the returnees whenever they have the opportunity, while at least some people in the south have a decision of 'distrust' that the "defectors" have. After all, it is 'unification', which is not good for oneself.
Having said that, we are not qualified to think that the "legend" in the movie is just the director's wishful thinking.
View more about The Net reviews
