Okja - Corporations vs Farmers

The overlaying themes in Bong Joon-ho’s 2017 Okja are capitalism, consumerism and social class.

In Okja (2017), Bong Joon-ho articulates themes of social class and capitalism through film form, particularly mise en scène, cinematography, and costume design. The rural mountains and the Mirando Corporation function as a binary opposition, constructed through contrasting visual codes. The mountains are vibrant, saturated, and enriched, a colour palette that symbolises purity, innocence, and authenticity. Their lack of materialism represents an ideological alternative to capitalist consumerism, suggesting a lifestyle defined by love, community, and natural happiness rather than the pursuit of wealth and status. Costume reinforces this ideological positioning: Mija’s attire is functional, simple, and earthy, directly aligning her with her working-class background. The iconography of her clothing, modest and inexpensive, reflects a subsistence lifestyle within rural Korea. Lighting is also significant, as the farm relies entirely on naturalistic diegetic light, which conveys ecological authenticity and aligns the environment with eco-friendly values. The mise en scène of the farm, modest in scale and devoid of industrial iconography, functions as a visual metaphor for honesty and moral integrity, encouraging audiences to idealise rural life and even reconsider their own complicity in consumer culture. From an eco-critical perspective, the farm setting symbolises harmony between humans, animals, and the natural world, directly opposing the exploitation of nature under capitalist production. This ideological coding subtly critiques the exploitation of working-class families by corporate structures, while reinforcing that Mija’s bond with Okja is rooted in companionship rather than commodification.

By contrast, the Mirando Corporation headquarters embodies capitalist hegemony through mise en scène and architectural iconography. The skyscraper signifies dominance, its towering presence operating as a metaphor for the power of the ruling class over the working class. The aesthetic design is deliberately sterile, minimalistic, and unwelcoming, emphasised by the use of high key, non-diegetic lighting which removes shadows and ambiguity. This cinematographic choice symbolises the corporate façade of transparency and honesty, while simultaneously connoting the manipulative spectacle of false advertising. The interiors are stripped of individuality, reflecting alienation and the dehumanising nature of corporate space, which may prompt audiences to distrust corporate branding and its supposedly “humanitarian” image. Costume again reinforces ideological contrasts: Lucy Mirando’s baby pink attire carries connotations of innocence and vulnerability within colour theory; however, in the hyper corporate mise en scène, the pastel hue becomes uncanny, its artificiality foregrounding the performative nature of her persona. Finally, the reflective surfaces of the building function as a visual metaphor for consumer capitalism itself, an illusory façade of benevolence that conceals systemic exploitation. From an eco-critical lens, this suggests how corporations disguise environmental destruction with marketing strategies that promote “greenwashing,” leaving audiences to question the ethics of global consumer culture.