{"id":5755,"date":"2023-02-15T11:02:50","date_gmt":"2023-02-15T16:02:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/?p=5755"},"modified":"2023-02-15T11:05:00","modified_gmt":"2023-02-15T16:05:00","slug":"a-cinematic-cold-war-the-us-china-and-diplomacy-at-the-box-office","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/2023\/02\/a-cinematic-cold-war-the-us-china-and-diplomacy-at-the-box-office\/","title":{"rendered":"A Cinematic Cold War: The US, China, and Diplomacy at the Box Office"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Derek Eanes<\/a><\/p>\n

Within the last two years, the release of China\u2019s blockbuster Battle at Lake Changjin<\/em><\/a> duology and the big-budget Hollywood war biopic Devotion<\/em><\/a> indicate a new trend\u2014the re-emergence of the Korean War in the cultural zeitgeist in both countries. Amidst a spike in geopolitical aggression between US and CCP leadership, the domestic entertainment industries within both states have reacted by looking to past confrontations for inspiration. As such, the war\u2019s pop culture renaissance has been subsumed into a newly-reinvigorated propaganda effort to normalize the great power competition to the public via a massively popular medium\u2014cinema.<\/p>\n

The role of films as propaganda is well-documented, but compared to other conflicts, the Korean War is remarkably underrepresented in this respect. What has become known as the \u201cForgotten War\u201d in the US experienced only brief wartime popularity; between 1951 and 1953, 22 Korean War films were released. By contrast, China\u2019s nascent film industry only released one, Battle on Shangganling Mountain<\/em><\/a>, in 1956. The enduring images of the war in America, though, arrived later. The Manchurian Candidate<\/em> (1962)<\/a>, described by Howard Hampton as \u201ca flop-sweat fantasia on political conspiracies, right-wing nut jobs under the secret control of Communist handlers, and state-sponsored brainwashing and assassination as practical tools of realpolitik,\u201d<\/a> positioned China as every McCarthyite\u2019s worst nightmare. 1970 saw the release of Robert Altman\u2019s satirical comedy M*A*S*H<\/em><\/a>; later adapted into an even-more famous television series<\/a>, its depiction of the war through the eyes of an Army medical team was deeply rooted in the cynicism emerging from America\u2019s then-ongoing war in Vietnam. How these films depict China, however, differ wildly\u2014in The Manchurian Candidate<\/em>, they are the architects of the brainwashing project<\/a>, while M*A*S*H<\/em> rarely depicted the Chinese at all\u2014and when it did, it was far more sympathetic<\/a>.<\/p>\n

With 1979 came the headwinds of normalization and a diminished necessity to portray the other as villainous\u2014until the 2010s, when the equation became much different. Where previous party leaders had advocated for measured and uncontroversial statements, under the leadership of Premier Xi Jinping, China has pursued a far more proactive foreign policy than ever before. As a result, in recent years, Chinese officials have become bullish in defending their country\u2019s actions, whether it concerns territorial claims on Taiwan<\/a> Western policy experts would term this as \u2018Wolf Warrior\u2019 diplomacy<\/a>\u2014so named after a wildly successful Chinese action film series. This diplomatic tactic primarily focuses on generating an assertive and aggressive presence to defend Chinese values\u2014just as the protagonists of these films do. The character of Long Feng (portrayed by actor-director Wu Jing, who also stars in The Battle of Lake Changjin<\/em>) is essentially China\u2019s answer to Rambo; that is, as an avatar for a political agenda rather than a well-defined protagonist. Wolf Warrior 2 (2017)<\/a> provides a great example; taking place in an unnamed African country, it sees Long Feng fight to protect Chinese aid workers from \u201cDyon Corps\u201d mercenaries (an allusion to DynCorp, a major western defense contractor). More overtly, it ends on a Chinese passport, emblazoned with a message: “Citizens of the People’s Republic of China. When you encounter danger in a foreign land, do not give up! Please remember, at your back stands a strong motherland.”<\/a> Such quotes are as explicit an endorsement of China\u2019s aggressive international posturing as any outright statement. Nevertheless, the film\u2019s financial and critical success saw it become the highest-grossing non-English film ever and was China\u2019s submission to the 90th<\/sup> Academy Awards\u2014only to be surpassed by 2021\u2019s Battle at Lake Changjin<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Within the last two years, the US and China\u2019s dynamic has again shifted towards confrontation. November 2021 saw President Biden and President Xi meet formally for the first time, and the latter stated that support for Taiwan was like . In August 2022, things reached a climax as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made a state visit to Taiwan<\/a> despite heavy protestation from Chinese officials. In response, China conducted significant military exercises<\/a> that exceeded those of previous crises.\u00a0Amidst these dramatic events comes the release of new Korean War films in China and the US, which purposefully display biased views of the conflict. The Battle at Lake Changjin<\/em> and its sequel, Water Gate Bridge<\/em><\/a>, depict the perspective of Chinese soldiers fighting against US forces at the Chosin Reservoir. In a similar vein, Devotion<\/em> depicts the experience of American naval aviators who participated in the very same battle. Each film\u2019s depiction of their respective belligerents speaks much to their agendas; the Chinese films, for example, exemplify the virtues of the PLA soldier, whereas the Americans are depicted as arrogant, vain, and unmotivated by any patriotic idealism. One only must see the film\u2019s depiction of General Douglas MacArthur<\/a> to understand China\u2019s view of US policy as motivated by vanity and arrogance. Meanwhile, Devotion<\/em> takes a different approach\u2014 while ostensibly a biopic about the first African American naval aviator, it also attempts to show the US military as able to overcome the prejudices of its members and display true valor in the face of an insurmountable foe. In its battle sequences, Chinese soldiers are depicted as they have often been before; a faceless, many-numbered foe whose overwhelming numbers are countered by US aerial superiority.<\/p>\n

If the primary objective of these films was to achieve critical success, then they would pass with flying colors. But they also are pursuing real political utility; to acclimatize the population to the very idea of a hegemonic conflict. Further, they appear to normalize the concept of winning <\/em>any potential war with their adversary\u2014 a dangerous suggestion in a world where nuclear escalation is a legitimate concern. For that reason alone, it\u2019s time to call \u201ccut.\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Derek<\/em>\u00a0is a second-year M.A. candidate at the School of Diplomacy and International Relations at Seton Hall, specializing in Foreign Policy Analysis and International Organizations. An associate editor for the Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations, he achieved a bachelor’s degree at Flagler College, majoring in International Studies with an additional minor in History. He hopes to continue his studies regarding the intersection of international politics with culture.<\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

By Derek Eanes Within the last two years, the release of China\u2019s blockbuster Battle at Lake Changjin duology and the<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5376,"featured_media":5759,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"colormag_page_container_layout":"default_layout","colormag_page_sidebar_layout":"default_layout","_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[342,11,898,883,697,175,552,823,634,641,804,1002,998],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-5755","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-asia","category-china","category-conflict","category-covid-19","category-culture","category-editors-pick","category-military","category-nationalism","category-editorial-blog","category-opinion","category-political","category-propaganda","category-us"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5755","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5376"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=5755"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5755\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":5758,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5755\/revisions\/5758"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/5759"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5755"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5755"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.shu.edu\/journalofdiplomacy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5755"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}