[비즈한국] The movie 'Humint', released ahead of the 2026 Lunar New Year holiday, was a blockbuster with a production budget of 23 billion won. Expectations were high, considering it was directed by Ryu Seung-wan and starred Jo In-sung, Park Jung-min, Park Hae-joon, and Shin Se-kyung. Many other films chose to avoid competing with 'Humint' upon release. 'The Man Who Lives with the King' was also released early. However, 'Humint' not only fell behind 'The Man Who Lives with the King', which had less than half the production budget, but it was also pulled from theaters without even reaching 2 million viewers, let alone its break-even point of 4 million. This happened just 49 days after its release. Ultimately, it went straight to Netflix. Yet, as soon as it was released on Netflix, it topped the global charts. It is inevitable to wonder if Netflix is gaining an unfair profit.
How should we view the situation where a major Korean film moves to a global OTT platform shortly after its theatrical release?
The 'Humint' case has become a point of controversy as the legalization of a 'holdback' system is being pushed as a way to save the struggling film industry. A holdback mandates that a film cannot be released on other platforms, such as OTT, for a certain period after its theatrical run. The bill currently pending in the National Assembly stipulates a six-month holdback period, but 'Humint' headed to Netflix in less than 50 days. France originally stipulated a 36-month grace period, but this was later changed to 15 months for Netflix and 17 months for other OTT services, provided that they invest 4% in French cinema.
In fact, it is logical for a film that fails to attract a large audience in theaters to seek alternative revenue streams. However, there is an open secret regarding 'Humint'. The reason 'Humint' went straight to Netflix was because the box office performance of 'The Man Who Lives with the King' was so overwhelming. This is where South Korea and France differ. France limits the number of screens a single movie can occupy to a maximum of 20-30%. If Korea had such a screen quota policy, 'Humint' might have remained in theaters longer.
'The Man Who Lives with the King' started with 1,658 screens and went on to monopolize up to 2,170. This is possible due to an exhibition practice that concentrates screenings on hit movies. Regardless of the artistic quality of 'The Man Who Lives with the King', the phenomenon of one film over-monopolizing screens cannot be considered desirable, as it harms cinematic diversity.
In a situation where there is no limit on the number of screens per film, other movies are forced to avoid release dates occupied by box-office hits, which inevitably narrows the audience's choices. This leads to a crowding of releases during certain periods and causes good films to be relatively undervalued. Furthermore, this trend increases the likelihood that a film will fail to even reach its break-even point, regardless of its artistic merit, due to the industry's skew.
On the other hand, looking at its Netflix success, it is worth considering whether 'Humint' was really a film that required such a massive production budget. If the production budget had been lower, it might have actually crossed the break-even point in theaters. It could have been a decent film if the budget had been scaled appropriately to its target audience, in line with its retro-noir concept. Netflix has essentially proven this, as it is, by nature, a platform for genre-fiction enthusiasts.
'Project Y', starring Jeon Jong-seo and Han So-hee, can be seen in the same light. This film was released on January 21, drew a mere 140,000 viewers, and was pulled from theaters almost immediately. However, it hit No. 1 after being released on Netflix. Like 'Humint', this film is a genre piece, making it less differentiated from other OTT content. There is little reason to go out of one's way to watch it in a movie theater. Moreover, the content is not particularly appealing to its main demographic, which is women. The film 'Humint' also had many aspects—such as its perspective on women, direction, and plot settings—that could make viewers uncomfortable.
'Project Y' would have received more attention if it had been produced for OTT from the start rather than for theaters. Reducing production costs and diversifying platforms could have helped in preserving or increasing profits. If a holdback system were to force such movies to stay in theaters for more than six months, it would not only prevent revenue diversification but also encroach on the screen time of other films.
In short, demand varies depending on the genre or nature of the film. Can we say that just because a film doesn't attract an audience in theaters, it is a complete failure or lacks artistic quality? It is important for any content to try to cater to the audience that chooses it. It is clear that we are no longer in a media environment where all revenue must be generated from theaters as in the past. It is time for the Korean film industry to operate its business models more efficiently in response to these environmental changes. Films should be planned and produced at an appropriate scale relative to their potential revenue, and a screen cap system should be implemented so that theater screens are not excessively concentrated on a single work.
The author, Kim Heon-sik, has been exploring and traversing the landscape of popular culture phenomena since his 20s, driven by the hope that there is a way to make the world a better place through culture. He continues to follow this path in the 21st century, an era of artificial intelligence and quantum computing, with that same belief.