Kim Soo-hyun’s ‘Real’ rides new wave of infamy amid scandal

Kim Soo-hyun in “Real.” Image: KOFIC via The Korea Herald

In a memorable scene from the 2017 film “Real,” for some time social media meme fodder here, Kim Soo-hyun, dressed in a garish red suit and mask, spins at hyperspeed like a malfunctioning wind-up toy. Glittering, iridescent water cascades across the screen as his enemies inexplicably collapse without him laying a finger on them.

This bizarre sequence epitomizes a film now catching a second wind amid an endless barrage of controversies surrounding its embattled star. As of Tuesday, “Real” — a surrealist noir thriller starring Kim opposite late K-pop star and actor Sulli — ranked second on Netflix’s Top 10 films in South Korea and broke into trending charts on local streaming platforms TVING and Coupang Play, an ironic comeback for a film once written off as among Korean cinema’s greatest disasters.

This renewed interest comes as Kim finds himself mired in allegations that he dated the late actor Kim Sae-ron when she was a minor. With the controversy ongoing, Sulli’s family members have stepped forward with their own grievances. On Friday, they put out a statement to local media seeking answers about troubling aspects of Sulli’s intimate scenes in the film, claiming these sequences weren’t included in the original script and that a body double, though present on set, wasn’t used as planned.

The situation heated up when Lee Jung-seob, the film’s original director who got replaced during production, broke his silence on social media, stating he “had absolutely zero responsibility for how that film turned out.” Kim’s agency, Gold Medalist, has only briefly mentioned that they are “currently looking into the situation.”

A Troubled Production

From its inception, “Real” was a project plagued by complications.

The film drummed up substantial buzz even before hitting screens, reportedly working with an impressive 11.5 billion won ($8.6 million) budget with investment flowing in from China’s Alibaba Pictures. The film marked Kim Soo-hyun’s return after a two-year break following his star-making turns in television hits “My Love from the Star” (2014) and “The Producer” (2015).

The project also turned heads as Sulli’s first major film role after leaving K-pop group f(x) in 2015 to focus on acting. Marketing materials put her participation in intimate scenes front and center, with promotional interviews openly stressing the absence of a body double in certain scenes — a level of emphasis industry watchers found unusual for mainstream Korean cinema. Meanwhile, cameos from big names, including Suzy, Park Seo-jun, and Ahn So-hee further stoked anticipation.

Behind the scenes, however, roadblocks kept popping up. Originally set for simultaneous release in Korea and China, overseas distribution plans fell apart following economic retaliation from the Chinese government against South Korean firms after the deployment of a US missile system here. More troublingly, director Lee Jung-seob was abruptly shown the door mid-production due to alleged “creative differences.” His replacement was Lee Sa-rang (now Lee Ro-be), Kim Soo-hyun’s cousin and now head of his management firm, Gold Medalist. He reportedly had no prior directing experience.

Critical and commercial disaster

The resulting film bombed spectacularly upon release. Critics and audiences panned it, handing it a measly 39 percent rating on multiplex chain CGV’s website and just 4.44 out of 10 from viewers on Naver. The film quickly earned its place as a modern classic of bad movies in contemporary Korean cinema, with clips of its most bewildering action sequences making the rounds on social media as objects of ridicule.

At its core, “Real” stumbles through fundamental narrative confusion. The convoluted plot about a casino owner’s psychological struggle with his doppelganger never comes together into something ordinary viewers can remotely grasp. Visually, the film throws in neon-drenched settings and disorienting camera work that feels more like a skincare commercial than cinema. The action sequences laugh in the face of physics, while the dialogue often bears no relation to the scenes before or after it.

Viewers particularly took issue with the film’s problematic portrayal of women. Many pointed to how female characters appear primarily as decorative elements, with little agency or purpose beyond serving as objects of sexual desire before meeting untimely ends. The explicit scenes, particularly those involving Sulli, kicked up immediate controversy upon release, with public criticism falling as much on the actor as on the production itself.

Sulli in “Real.” Image: KOFIC via The Korea Herald

Broader industry concerns

The rekindled controversy may point to structural issues within Korean cinema regarding actor protections during intimate scenes.

Han Ji-eun, another actor who appeared in “Real,” opened up in a 2018 interview about her significant emotional distress during filming. Despite beating out 4,300 candidates after spotting a casting notice from Kim Soo-hyun himself, Han pointed out she had no one to turn to during difficult scenes. Most of her footage wound up stripped from the final film, leaving primarily her explicit scenes on screen — an experience she described as causing “serious after-effects.”

Unlike the US, where actors’ union guidelines set clear protocols for filming intimate content, South Korea lacks formal industry standards protecting performers.

The country’s main legal framework for film industry regulation, the Promotion of the Motion Pictures and Video Products Act, states in Article 3 that “when concluding contracts with film workers, specific details regarding wages, working hours and other working conditions must be disclosed.” However, the catch-all term “working conditions” doesn’t address the specific concerns of actors performing intimate scenes and often leaves them unknowing of how their footage will be used.

In 2018, then Democratic Party lawmaker In Jae-keun put forward an amendment to specify “matters related to body exposure scenes, including exposed body parts, scene intentions and filming methods” under the clause. This amendment, however, never passed, and the legislation remains in place without these protections.