The Grand Narrative

The Poor Branding of Kim Tae-Hee?

Posted in Korean Advertisements, Korean Media, Korean Movies, Korean Music by James Turnbull on May 16, 2008

(Source)

Even geeks like myself need breaks in between more serious posts, and I find it very refreshing just posting about something I simply like without having to intellectually justify its inclusion in the blog in some way. So, without any further ado, let me present yet another commercial of Kim Tae-hee’s (김태희) that I’ve taken a liking to. And don’t worry, for ultimately I do manage to put some spin on it despite myself (no pun intended):

(Originally found here. If you’re into that sort of thing, here are some animated GIFs of the commercial too)

Regular readers may think I have a bit of a fixation with Kim Tae-hee these days (see here and here), but it’s not like I’m not spoilt for choice for commercials with attractive women in them. Actually I’ve only ever liked hers in particular because of the music in them, and despite what I say in a moment about the producers of her commercials, they certainly do know how to choose music that sticks in people’s heads. That for this most recent commercial is taken from this song by Jewelry (쥬얼리):

And again, beyond knowing that they look good in skimpy santa outfits, I know little about and don’t have any strong feelings about Jewelry either. But although the song is clearly a copy…well, I’m sorry, but no matter how unsophisticated I sound saying this, I simply love it. Seriously, although I’m not going to pretend that the video doesn’t aid in the enjoyment of the song, their voices really aren’t half bad.

And there a lesser (and wiser) geek would have left this post. But Kim Tae-hee’s most recent commercial got me thinking, as the image she projects there for Cyon is somewhat at odds with the “messy-looking” commericals she did for Olympus that I saw back in April. I admit that these photos from those commercials are quite endearing, and I’m beginning to have second thoughts about what I said of ”news” that claimed that consumers were (conveniently) reacting to the commercials exactly as advertisers intended, but still, even if I was wrong, those commercials in turn were quite unlike the alternatively virginal and then sexually-alluring commercials she did for Jinro soju last year. And even if you only consider her commercials for Olympus (here is one more I wrote about, and some images and videos of all of them) there’s still no consistency with the image of her presented to consumers. In short, there’s no Kim Tae-hee “brand” to speak of.

(Source)

It probably is too much for me find parallels with that to what I’ve written about the abortive success of the Korean Wave, or even to the Korean entertainment industry as a whole, which I know so little about (although please be my guest in the comments section if you have no such inhibitions yourself). But I can ask if this is a bad thing or not, and on the basis of Go So-young’s (고소영) experiences, I think it is. As I write in that biography of her, branding takes time and, once established, it can be disastrous for an actor to attempt to do something radically different. I wouldn’t write that about, say, British actors, but in Korea actors’ reputations and images are linked to their drama and movie characters much more than would ever be the case in the West (see here, here and here). In Go So-young’s case, her mistake was suddenly appearing in a slapstick comedy and then taking on the role of an innocent and navie woman in a drama, both after seven years of successfully cultivating an elegant, sophisticated and upper-class image in a series of clothing, cosmetics and apartment commercials. Not to be outdone for lack of consistency though, Kim Tae-Hee has even started appearing in commercials for the latter too:

(Originally found here)

Having said all that, I don’t want to become known in the Korean blogosphere for saying that all actors should be typecast in the same sorts of roles all their lives. Although years ago GQ magazine persuasively argued that Tom Cruise should only play “all-American” roles, he would be an exception, and actually I do think that the best actors are those that are able to pull off any role convincingly. On that basis, I personally think that South Korean actor Hwang Jung-min (황정민), unfortunately little known overseas, is the best actor I’ve ever seen. I haven’t seen as many movies of his that I’d like, but the skill with which he plays both an adulturous lawyer in A Good Lawyer’s Wife (바람난 가족, 2003) and then a bumbling simpleton in You are my Sunshine (너는내 운명, 2006) is simply amazing.

Points to ponder as you listen to “One More Time” again when no-one can see or hear you…even my two-year old is singing it now!

add to del.icio.us :: Add to Blinkslist :: add to furl :: Digg it :: add to ma.gnolia :: Stumble It! :: add to simpy :: seed the vine :: :: :: TailRank :: post to facebook

3 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. gordsellar said, on May 17, 2008 at 12:54 am

    Of course, there’s a difference between saying that Korean audiences tend to respond to stars in such a way that typecasting them makes good strategic business sense, and saying that this is a “good thing.” The fact you’re saying the former and not the latter is sufficiently clear in your post!

    I think the big difference is that performers who have real, actual talent can do a variety of roles — Moon Sori is another example. Hold up Oasis beside A Good Lawyer’s Wife and the difference is mind-blowing. I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a bad performance by Sori. (But I haven’t seen everything she’s been in.)

    Someone famous for their cute face or shapely backside of course can only be typecast; they’re not even really good at the sorts of roles they play, but they’re good enough since most strongly typecast films are pablum anyway.

    (Funnily enough, I can say that with affection. SF films are generally brain pap, and full of typecast actors, and Indian films are invariably formulaic and derivative, yet for both genres I have a very soft spot . Most Indian actors are stuck in one role for their whole careers, or at least until age pushes them into a new kind of role (like “tough young guy” to “stern, conservative father”). A friend told me Shahrukh Khan is one of the few who successfully transitioned from being typecast as a hoodlum or gangster to being typecast as a heartthrob.)

  2. James Turnbull said, on May 17, 2008 at 1:31 pm

    Gord,

    it is? I confess I was a little dissatisfied with what I wrote, not knowing what my point was exactly, and you made it for me! Thanks.

    I didn’t know who Moon So-ri was until I saw A Good Lawyer’s Wife, and although I know she has a good reputation that’s the only movie of hers I’ve seen of hers so far. Bewitching Attraction was definitely high on my list of movies to see though, and I had no idea she was in Oasis. I wonder, if you hadn’t had told me and I’d finally seen the movie, would I have realised it was her? After all, I’m one of those people who watched all of Being John Malkovich without realising that either Cameron Diaz or John Cusack were in it!

  3. [...] *Nathan at Korea Beat has found someone trying to escape from his regular job. *Grand Narrative waxes deeply about the marketing of my favorite Korean actress. [...]


Leave a Reply