criterionforum.org

Barmy's easy.

Changeling is the Festival Centerpiece.

Venice International Film Festival 2008

Here are your lineups:

Competition:

"The Wrestler," Darren Aronofsky, U.S.
"The Burning Plain," Guillermo Arriaga, U.S.
"Il Papa di Giovanna," Pupi Avati, Italy
"Birdwatchers," Marco Bechis, Italy
"L'Autre," Patrick Mario Bernard and Pierre Trividic, France
"The Hurt Locker," Kathryn Bigelow, U.S.
"Il Seme Della Discordia," Pappi Corsicato, Italy
"Rachel Getting Married," Jonathan Demme, U.S.
"Teza," Haile Gerima, Ethiopia/Germany/France
"Paper Soldier (Bumaznyi Soldat)," Aleksy German Jr., Russia
"Sut," Semih Kaplanoglu, Turkey/France/Germany
"Achilles and the Tortoise (Akires to Kame)," Takeshi Kitano, Japan
"Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea," Hayao Miyazaki, Japan
"Vegas: Based on a True Story," Amir Naderi, U.S.
"The Sky Crawlers," Oshii Mamoru, Japan
"Un Giorno Perfetto," Ferzan Ozpetek, Italy
"Jerichow," Christian Petzold, Germany
"Inju, la Bete Dans l'Ombre," Barbet Schroeder, France
"Nuit de Chien," Werner Schroeter, France/Germany/Portugal
"Inland (Gabbia)," Tariq Teguia, Algeria/France
"Plastic City (Dangkou)," Yu Lik-wai, Brasil/China/Hong Kong/Japan

Out of competition:

"Puccini e la Fanciulla," Paolo Benvenuti, Italy
"Yuppi Du," Adriano Celantano, Italy
"Burn After Reading," Joel and Ethan Coen, U.S. (opening film)
"35 Rhums," Claire Denis, France/Spain
"Shirin," Abbas Kiarostami, Iran
"Tutto e Musica (1973)," Domenico Modugno, Italy
"Orfeo 9 (1973)," Tito Shipa Jr, Italy
"Les Plages d'Agnes," Agnes Varda, France
"Vinyan," Fabrice du Welz, France/U.K./Belgium
"Encarnacao do Demonio," Jose Mojica Marins, Brazil
"Volare (Nel Blue Dipinto di Blu (1959)," Piero Tellini, Italy

Also, a "new version" of Pasolini's "La Rabbia" is supposed to be screening, but I haven't found any further information about what that actually means.

Here's hoping Petzold is back on track after the rather disappointing Yella. I also can't wait to see the new film from Semih Kaplanoglu, but I have a feeling that won't be for a while now. Not too interested in anything else. Well, at least not yet, that is.

Was most amused to turn on the TV and discover them talking about the "3 giants of Japanese cinema Miyazaki, Kitano and Mamoru" representing Japan at Venice.

Ha ha ha. Not quite sure when the Japanese media started regarding Mamoru Oshii as a "giant of Japanese cinema" although I suspect it was about 5 minutes after the lineup was announced.

Still, it does mean Skycrawlers will show at my local multiplex this weekend. And I can have lots of fun watching people fall asleep, walk out it utter confusion or being forced to drag their screaming bored children out.

Love the guy myself, but he's very much an aquired taste. The trailer and poster so far are of the "Action packed dogfighting anime" type. Oops.

So Jeremy was right after all. Che, Summer Hours and Happy-Go-Lucky are all slated for NYFF.

Very disappointing final list. The majority of the films that look the best were announced far beforehand. Where is Soi Cowboy? The new Lav Diaz? The new Grandieux? The new Garrel? There's only the new Straub and not the last Straub/Huillet.

Additional films:

The Brothers Bloom - Rian Johnson, USA
The Wrestler - Darren Aronofsky, USA
Me and Orson Welles - Richard Linklater, United Kingdom
Slumdog Millionaire - Danny Boyle, United Kingdom
Zack and Miri Make a Porno - Kevin Smith, USA
Che: Part One - Stephen Soderbergh, USA/Spain
Che: Part Two - Stephen Soderbergh, USA/Spain
Inju, la bête dans l'ombre - Barbet Schroeder, France
Synecdoche, New York - Charlie Kaufman, USA
Genova - Michael Winterbottom, UK
Aide-toi le ciel t'aidera - François Dupeyron, France
Un Barrage Contre le Pacifique - Rithy Panh, France/Cambodia/Belgium
Easy Virtue - Stephan Elliott, UK/USA
Is There Anybody There? - John Crowley, UK
Last Stop 174 - Bruno Barreto, Brazil
Management - Stephen Belber, USA
A Woman in Berlin - Max Färberböck, Germany/Poland
A Perfect Day - Ferzan Ozpetek, Italy
Séraphine - Martin Provost, France/Belgium
35 Rhums - Claire Denis, France
The Burning Plain - Guillermo Arriaga, USA
Flash of Genius - Marc Abraham, USA
Faubourg 36 - Christophe Barratier, France

Here's the complete list of films.

I think you just have to accept that Toronto have very mainstream taste. No Soi Cowboy, no Afterschool... Yet they'll screen gibbering nonsense like Better Things, Duchess and, uh, Zach and Miri Make a Porno.

I'm just glad Claire Denis is in there, although there's zero chance of me attending the festival. It puts things in motion for other releases, at least - although with Tartan no more, it still might be a while.

Nothing wrote:I think you just have to accept that Toronto have very mainstream taste. No Soi Cowboy, no Afterschool... Yet they'll screen gibbering nonsense like Better Things, Duchess and, uh, Zach and Miri Make a Porno.

But the thing is, I'm pretty damn sure that those films would have been accepted last year. In previous years, Garrel, Diaz, and Grandieux were always accepted. So why not this year? I think it is becoming apparent that they are becoming more commercial. Why is the Visions programme cut down significantly?

Have they sent out the bills for the second half of the subscriber payments yet?

Nothing wrote:I think you just have to accept that Toronto have very mainstream taste. No Soi Cowboy, no Afterschool... Yet they'll screen gibbering nonsense like Better Things, Duchess and, uh, Zach and Miri Make a Porno.

AFTERSCHOOL - I don't know why it's not in, but SOI COWBOY is the ultimate in poseur filmmaking. Lav's absence is unfortunate alas...

Oedipax wrote:It puts things in motion for other releases, at least - although with Tartan no more, it still might be a while.

Actually, Tartan is not quite dead -- it has been acquired (on both sides of the ocean) by Palisades Media and they are planning to expand the library to 2000 titles.

Afterschoolis playing NYFF though...

Grimfarrow wrote:

Nothing wrote:I think you just have to accept that Toronto have very mainstream taste. No Soi Cowboy, no Afterschool... Yet they'll screen gibbering nonsense like Better Things, Duchess and, uh, Zach and Miri Make a Porno.

AFTERSCHOOL - I don't know why it's not in, but SOI COWBOY is the ultimate in poseur filmmaking. Lav's absence is unfortunate alas...

I haven't seen a Lav Diaz yet, and was planning to see his newest this year, but of course, this is the year where his film is absent.
Soi Cowboy still interests me very much, do you know if it'll be released on DVD somewhere or something soon?

Grimfarrow wrote:SOI COWBOY is the ultimate in poseur filmmaking.

I find this quite interesting coming from someone affiliated with Fortissimo Films. At first glance, the work you support seems more 'valid', giving a voice to 'third world' filmmakers in Thailand and throughout the region. Yet, in reality, this work carries as much potential for bias and duplicity, if not more - the problem being that the only people with the education, the capacity and the connections to work in the film industry in a country like Thailand are members of the wealthy ruling elite. Apichatpong Weerasethakul, for example, studied at a top US film school - how many Thai children get that kind of opportunity?

This wouldn't perhaps be a fatal problem if class hierarchies and prejudices were not so deeply ingrained into Thai culture. Sure, Weerasethakul likes to 'provoke' with erect penises and guitar-playing monks, sitting to the left of General Anupong in much the same way that Rudy Giuliani sits to the left of Mitt Romney. But try and match Weerasethakul's "progressive", essentially nationalist vision to the events taking place on the streets of Bangkok this very week - the bitterness and division as the power elite once again works to undermine a democratically elected government - and you'll find a gulf, an emptiness, a complete failure to engage. Yet P'Joe actually calls himself a "socio-political" filmmaker in his Cannes biography. That is a poseur, imho.

Soi Cowboy, by stark contrast, is a truthful, multi-faceted portrayal of Thailand, capturing, with formal rigour and self-effacing humour, the poverty, materialism, hypocrisy, despotism and elitism that bourgeois Bangkok Thai filmmakers are so unwilling to address. That it took a 'farang' to do this... That the existence of such a film questions the lazy complicity with which we, as Westerners, choose to appraise 'third world' cinema... Questioning, indeed, the subisidy system as a whole, which turns filmmakers into Olympic athletes, monkeys performing for their country, scoring points for their form and their aesthetics whilst placing politics and genuine social criticism on the pyre... Well, so be it.

Nothing wrote:

Grimfarrow wrote:SOI COWBOY is the ultimate in poseur filmmaking.

I find this quite interesting coming from someone affiliated with Fortissimo Films. At first glance, the work you support seems more 'valid', giving a voice to 'third world' filmmakers in Thailand and throughout the region. Yet, in reality, this work carries as much potential for bias and duplicity, if not more - the problem being that the only people with the education, the capacity and the connections to work in the film industry in a country like Thailand are members of the wealthy ruling elite. Apichatpong Weerasethakul, for example, studied at a top US film school - how many Thai children get that kind of opportunity?

This wouldn't perhaps be a fatal problem if class hierarchies and prejudices were not so deeply ingrained into Thai culture. Sure, Weerasethakul likes to 'provoke' with erect penises and guitar-playing monks, sitting to the left of General Anupong in much the same way that Rudy Giuliani sits to the left of Mitt Romney. But try and match Weerasethakul's "progressive", essentially nationalist vision to the events taking place on the streets of Bangkok this very week - the bitterness and division as the power elite once again works to undermine a democratically elected government - and you'll find a gulf, an emptiness, a complete failure to engage. Yet P'Joe actually calls himself a "socio-political" filmmaker in his Cannes biography. That is a poseur, imho.

Soi Cowboy, by stark contrast, is a truthful, multi-faceted portrayal of Thailand, capturing, with formal rigour and self-effacing humour, the poverty, materialism, hypocrisy, despotism and elitism that bourgeois Bangkok Thai filmmakers are so unwilling to address. That it took a 'farang' to do this... That the existence of such a film questions the lazy complicity with which we, as Westerners, choose to appraise 'third world' cinema... Questioning, indeed, the subisidy system as a whole, which turns filmmakers into Olympic athletes, monkeys performing for their country, scoring points for their form and their aesthetics whilst placing politics and genuine social criticism on the pyre... Well, so be it.

Ummm... I'm not affiliated with Fortissimo Films. And I like both populist, "local" films as well as those from so-called "overseas educated" filmmakers. And if you say SOI COWBOY is truthful of Thailand then you obviously haven't lived there NOR speak the language. Plus, calling Apichatpong's films nationalistic when he is fighting every step of the way with the government so that SYNDROMES can be shown without censorship means that you have little understanding of what is going on in Thailand now. And this: "the power elite once again works to undermine a democratically elected government" - wow, how incredibly wrong you are. For your benefit, before you interject, go see CITIZEN JULING. It will help you understand what the hell is going on in Thailand and its government.

But there is a truth in what you say - the Thai film industry would really consider me a sell-out if I liked it. Thankfully for me and for them, I didn't.

Grimfarrow wrote:Ummm... I'm not affiliated with Fortissimo Films.

Not sure I can believe that, but anyways... =P~

Grimfarrow wrote: if you say SOI COWBOY is truthful of Thailand then you obviously haven't lived there NOR speak the language.

I've lived in Thailand, on and off, for over eight years.

The characters in Soi Cowboy are speaking Isaan dialect. Isaan, not Thai, is actually the first language for the majority of Thai citizens - it is the language of the peasants, the working class. Most Bangkok Thais cannot understand this language (nor would they admit to it if they did) and you will not hear Isaan language spoken in Weerasethakul's films, nor in populist Thai cinema - why? Because the Thai media is controlled by the Bangkok elite and serves their agenda with propagandistic vigour.

Grimfarrow wrote: Calling Apichatpong's films nationalistic when he is fighting every step of the way with the government so that SYNDROMES can be shown without censorship means that you have little understanding of what is going on in Thailand now.

Censorship in Thailand is very stringent, as in many other third world countries. Hollywood films are routinely censored (eg. 300, Snakes on a Plane). Blissfully Yours was censored also, and AW raised no objection at that time. God knows what the authorities would make of Soi Cowboy - I doubt it's makers would even submit the film, for reasons of self-preservation.

Syndromes, then, contains a few instances of culturally taboo imagery that Apichatpong would have known very well could not be shown in Thailand before he made the film. The subsequent censorship battle was certainly a publicity coup... It earned column inches and won the sympathy of gullible liberals, raising the commercial prospects for the film outside Thailand (there is practically no audience for the film inside Thailand anyhow). It also served wonderfully to mask the film's inherent reactionary bourgeois nationalism.

I've addressed Syndromes & a Century more thoroughly in another thread but, with regards to the censorship, one has to ask: what is AW actually saying by including these images in the film and fighting this particular battle? A monk playing with a toy aeroplane; a monk playing a guitar. His argument surely being that Thai society should try to be more tolerant, more Westernised. That censorship laws should be relaxed... Arguments not entirely without merit, but very far from radical or even approaching relevant. Indeed, this fits in pefectly within the moderate (read centre-right) Bangkok Thai agenda pushed in the rest of the film: the image of Thailand as a rapidly modernising, essentially progressive society, peopled by sensitive middle-class people pondering relationship issues, a country that could perhaps be improved by modernising itself a little bit more, whilst continuing to integrate it's traditions and idiosyncrasies. This is the can-do image of Thailand that the Bangkok Thai Democrats would like the outside world to see; it is, no doubt, a vision of Thailand that many westerners would like to believe exists.

But this picture is, unfortunately, a lie. It fails entirely to acknowledge that the modernisation and prosperity, which benefits only a tiny minority, has been bought over decades, centuries, with the blood and the bodies of the peasants in a cycle of exploitation. That this wealth and comfort is an illusory island adrift in a sea of subjugation, corruption and pain in a country where the separation between rich and poor is greater than anywhere else in the world. These are problem that cannot be addressed with a band aid (or a childish provocation).

Grimfarrow wrote: And this: "the power elite once again works to undermine a democratically elected government" - wow, how incredibly wrong you are.

Surely you do not dispute that Sundrajev's government, and Thaksin's government before him, were legitimately elected? That the policies of these governments remain popular with the disadvantaged majority (the people of Isaan)?

Are the policies of TRT / PPP dangerous or reactionary? I certainly don't agree with a lot of them and Thaksin's drugs policy was horribly misconceived, but the commitment to actually spending money in the countryside, on infastructure and education, is no bad thing. . Just before he was deposed in '06, rumour has it that Thaksin was planning legislation to outlaw the red light districts... Was this the straw that broke the camel's back?

Is Thaksin corrupt? Given the intrigues of Thai politics and the bias of the judiciary it is impossible to reach a definitive conclusion. The answer, probably, is yes. But the charges they've actually brought against him are really 'business as usual' for Thai politicians - if there was even a shred of evidence to suggest that the grander claims might be true (eg. the notion that the elections were somehow 'bought') then you can have no doubt these would have been pursued in the courts. In other words, he is no more or less corrupt than your average Thai politician.

But why, then, has he been hounded with such precedent-setting vigour? Quite simply, because the courts and the military have been directly ordered to do so, off camera, by the highest authority in the land. Because the traditional ruling elite feels threatened by Thaksin, Sundrajev, TRT and the PPP. Because, as the last three years have shown us, Thailand is only a democracy as long as that democracy serves the interests of the elite. They tried their blunter methods at first - the military coup in 2006. Now that has failed, they are trying to undermine the new government by supporting the anti-democratic activities of the PAD. Honestly, if these paid up PAD goons were genuine protestors, they would be dead on the ground in minutes, just like at Sanam Luong. But the police and the army stand back and let them do their work...

Perhaps the members of the PAD, who believe that, because of their education and their upbringing, their opinions and their votes are more valid than those of their fellow citizens - rather than just pointing their finger at Thaksin, perhaps they should look closer to home, examine some of their own prejudices and ask themselves exactly why the education system in their country is so poor. Why Thailand's state education system pales even in comparison to their neighbour, the Lao People's Democratic Republic, one of the poorest countries in the world. Because this is perhaps Thailand's greatest tragedy: that the ruling classes have so thoroughly succeeded in subjugating their population through mis-education over so many years; that the values of materialism, nationalism, unquestioning obedience and self/family-interest are so deeply ingrained. That, even in the days of revolution, when the peoples of Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia were fighting for their rights and their freedoms, the Thai masses remained firmly under the boot. This is something that I believe is addressed in Soi Cowboy and it is one of the reasons I feel strongly about the film.

Soundbite Summary: Apichatpong Weerasethakul and Ing K may talk the talk, but they sure could do with some auto-criticism. :-k

Point is, I love Joe and I really want to see Soi Cowboy.

I'm in the midst of a busy festival seasons so alas I won't be able to answer at length, but some quick answers:

1) No, I'm not with Fortissimo. I'm a film fest guy.

2) Yes, I know Soi Cowboy is in Isaan. But you obviously haven't seen some local comedies, which are at times in Isaan. And Pi Joei's films are not in Isaan because he doesn't speak it! You are overthinking it.

3) WTF?? SYNDROMES has cultural taboos that he knew he shouldn't have included? What is wrong with a monk playing a friggin' guitar? Or playing with a UFO? Sorry, but that's ludicrous. EVERYONE in the Thai film industry thought it's ridiculous. The censorship board even said that it didn't matter since no one was interested in seeing such a "boring" film. IUf it didn'tmatter, why did they confiscate the prints for well over a year?

And you are completely interpreting SYNDROMES from your own angles. I can tell you that what you "think" he is saying is not at all what he is trying to say. Film is subjective, however, and Pi Joei knows it. He will never say that his interpretation is the "right" one. I think you should apply the same philosophy as well to your "interpretation".

4) We all know Thailand is seriously messed up right now, and frankly no one is clearly in the "right" or "wrong". But Thaksin's govt are the ones who sued people to bankruptcy whenever someone disgarees publicly with him. He bribes villagers with money so that they will vote for him. It's the perils of a democracy - having uneducated and uninformed public voting for people like Thaksin, not knowing that they are undermining their own country with their decision. Even in the last few years, corruption has seeped even deeper into the country due to Thaksin's influence. Not to say it didn't exist before - Thai politics has always been corrupt - but now it's more prevalent ever.

5) I find it funny that somehow Thomas Clay knows more about Thailand than the actual citizen who lived there all their lives. Just because he marries a Thai girl doesn't make him an expert. He has a "reputation" in Bangkok anyhow But you are deluded to think that Soi Cowboy is some deeply powerful commentary on Thailand.

6) I dare you to argue with Ing K. She knows more about this subject than either of us combined.

I just find it funny that all these farangs with their foreign passports seem to know way more about the sociopolitical reality than people who are real citizens. Look - you and Thomas Clay can leave anytime. But people with real families and real livelihoods who don't have another nationality, like Apichatpong, Ing K, Kong Rithdee etc. are somehow criticized as elitists. We happen to have our families and friends there, what about you?

Grimfarrow wrote: you obviously haven't seen some local comedies, which are at times in Isaan.

Yes, the Isaan language is sometimes used in Thai movies for comedy effect, ie. if the character is supposed to be stupid or retarded. I believe this underlines my point...

Grimfarrow wrote:And Pi Joei's films are not in Isaan because he doesn't speak it! You are overthinking it.

That's hardly a good excuse for 3 feature films without a single Isaan character. If, say, a white Bolivian from Santa Cruz persistently denied the existence of indiginous people in his work, I believe accusations of racism would be made... or irrelevence, at the very least. Unfortunately, Thailand's ethnic divisions remain a mystery to most.

Incidentally, AW also excludes western foreigners from his work, despite the vital and extremely visible role they play in the Thai society and economy. Again, entirely indicative of the head-in-the-sand attitude under discussion here.

Grimfarrow wrote: WTF?? SYNDROMES has cultural taboos that he knew he shouldn't have included?

Actually, he can include anything he likes. The scenes were written, shot, edited and included in the international cut of the film. The Thai authorities do not interfere in the writing, production or editing process for a Thai film, which is a far better situation than in many other countries. What AW cannot do (and he would have known this all along) is show these images in Thailand. I'm not saying that is a good thing, but it is honestly a minor, minor hardship compared to the thibulations that your average Thai citizen has to face every day of their lives.

Yes, of course, it seems ridiculous to westerners that these images might be deemed offensive - that's exactly why he chooses to use them. It's a little sub-category that I'd like to call 'Monk porn'. Ing K has made her own contribution. It's very teenage rebellion.

Grimfarrow wrote: You are completely interpreting SYNDROMES from your own angles.

I can only go by what is up there on screen. This being the relationship concerns of an upper-middle class couple and a finale which includes 'the Thai people' coming together for a session of aerobics in a lovingly-tended royal park - which is, of course, exactly how a subsistence farmer starts his or her morning.

Grimfarrow wrote: Thaksin's govt are the ones who sued people to bankruptcy whenever someone disgarees publicly with him.

Sueing an opposition politician for accusations of crimes against humanity is hardly a surprising move (especially when said accusations were designed to impede Thaksin's rightful claim to asylum in the UK).

Grimfarrow wrote: He bribes villagers with money so that they will vote for him.

Like I say, show me the evidence. This is a persistent PAD claim but it is NOT what Thaksin is being tried for in the courts. Yes, money for votes does happen in Thailand, and all major parties have been guilty of this in the past but, despite investigations by the Democrat-led electoral commission, this was not shown to have played a significant factor in the recent election.

Grimfarrow wrote: It's the perils of a democracy - having uneducated and uninformed public voting for people like Thaksin, not knowing that they are undermining their own country with their decision.

And here we come to the crux of it, the underlying view of the Bangkok elite: that the peasants are too 'stupid' to 'know what's good for them'. That the peasants do not have the right to elect a government of their choosing. This becomes even more creepy when you consider the ethnic differences between the elite and the people of Isaan. It makes this a racist attitude, pure and simple, and the root cause of the problems that the country is facing today.

If you actually talked to the working classes, you would find that most are well aware of Thaksin's policies and they truly believe that he is the right person to the lead the country, whatever you or I or Mr. Unmentionable might think about that idea. And if you think that a lack of education is the cause of these opinions, why on earth would the Democrat party, the traditional party of the Bangkok elite, the party that held the reigns of power for far longer than Thaksin or his allies, be the ones to provide a solution? Surely they hold far more responsibility for the state of the nation than Thaksin & co., who have only been in government for a handful of years?

Grimfarrow wrote: I find it funny that somehow Thomas Clay knows more about Thailand than the actual citizen who lived there all their lives.

Another member posted a comment here not so long ago that I think is very appropriate: "The best criticism of any institution usually comes from an outsider who can see things those indoctrinated in the experience cannot."

But, hey... find me an arthouse filmmaker from Isaan and I'll eagerly view their work. Good luck.

Grimfarrow wrote: He has a "reputation" in Bangkok anyhow

Now you're being a tease... =P~ Wouter Barendrecht certainly has a reputation.

Grimfarrow wrote: I just find it funny that all these farangs with their foreign passports seem to know way more about the sociopolitical reality than people who are real citizens. Look - you and Thomas Clay can leave anytime.

More unashamed racism. I guess only the Burmese junta know what is best for their country too. The National Socialist party certainly knew what was best for Germany.

Grimfarrow wrote: I dare you to argue with Ing K. She knows more about this subject than either of us combined.

She's not in the room, unfortunately - but we do have her blog from Toronto (nice to get back on topic). It seems rather indicative of the duplicity and fuzzy-headed thinking previously discussed.

Ing_K wrote: It’s not easy to be a filmmaker in Thailand. Even those who make the same tired transvestite comedies and ‘Asian’ horror movies (or better yet, tranny horror action comedies) with studio backing do not have it easy, if only because they are condemned to repeat themselves forever.

The horror... It's not easy to be a subsistance farmer, either. Or an Isaan child abducted into sex slavery whilst the police take a pay off to do nothing.

Ing_K wrote: We all must contend with the government film censorship board, which doesn’t permit us to peer into the national soul too deeply, or even at all.

This is simply untrue, a play for sympathy and attention. Thai filmmakers can peer whereever the hell they like - but they have to go through a Censor Board when it comes to a Thai release. Nothing unusual about that. Given the percentage of the population that would be interested in seeing their films anyhow, it's not like they are being denied an audience.

Ing_K wrote: There is so much I could say about it, yet so much I can’t say.

Yes, true, there are certain things one 'cannot say' in Thailand. The only way to change this is if Thai people start saying them anyway. I'm not sensing that degree of courage from this blog.

Ing_K wrote:our ‘leading man’, Kraisak Choonhavan, a hugely sympathetic oddball activist politician who has spent years fighting in the senate and the courts against the government’s human rights abuses in the Muslim-majority South. In the film, he was still a senator, chair of the Senate House Committee on Foreign Affairs. He is now an opposition member of parliament.

Choonhavan is a member of the opposition Democrat party with a strong anti-Thaksin agenda. It has traditionally been in the interest of the Democrats to court voters in the southern states - this is the only way to increase the significance of their voting percentage.

Ing_K wrote: We always look happy here in the Land of Smiles, but the past ten years have been intense. Some 2,500 of us, including little kids, have died during the Thaksin Shinawatra government-declared War on Drugs in officially sanctioned extra-judicial killings.

I'm not about to defend Thaksin's horrible misconceived drugs policy. It is undoubtably the largest stain on his career - but to focus on this and use this to paint Thaksin as the sole "bad guy", to present his comeuppance at the hands of the traditional elite as some kind of cleansing act that will deliver the country from evil, is to miss the wood for the trees. The fact remains that if Thaksin were to stand in a general election tomorrow he would win an overriding majority; until the elite begin to engage with the genuine grievances and struggles of the working class the division and the conflict will continue.

Ing_K wrote: In the three Deep South provinces bordering Malaysia, over 3,000 people, both Muslims and Buddhists, have died in what is known gently here as the ‘Southern Unrest’.

Last time I checked, Thaksin was not a muslim terrorist. The unrest continued under the military junta after the coup.

Ing_K wrote: And as I write this, thousands of people, including my very brave 70 year old aunt, are stoically protesting in the streets around Government House, under constant threat of violence from pro-government thugs.

Less than five months into Sundrajev's democratically-elected government, this tiny group of wealthy opposition supporters decided that it was time that the primeminister should resign, entirely against the wishes of the electorate. Their aim, since they now realise that their beloved Democrat party can no longer win an election, is a return to military dictatorship. Under orders from PAD supporters within the elite, the police and the army have entirely failed to do their job and halt what has now become a clearly illegal protest. If the PAD were protesting against the true powers that be in Thailand this sit-in would not last an hour, let alone three months.

Ing_K wrote: once Thailand’s richest man until the courts froze his assets pending massive corruption cases

Politically motivated and extremely run-of-the-milll corruption cases for which there is very little real evidence. But don't let this hinder the Thaksin scapegoating...

Ing_K wrote: a mild-mannered classical pianist and filmmaker, an expat American in Bangkok who turned out to have been a child pornographer on the FBI’s ten most-wanted list. But that’s another story.

Ah yes, those duplicitous, pervert farangs. Always worth a mention.

Ing_K wrote:I realised suddenly that while I had lost enough to be relatively free (or as some would say, insane)...

Lost what exactly? So her monk-porn film was banned in Thailand, screenings were raided by the police, etc. Sounds like good publicity to me. And, since the funding for art cinema in Thailand comes from Europe thanks to generous co-production treaties, neither she nor P'Joe or any of the others can blame Thaksin for a lack of funds. Honestly, if a western filmmaker displayed anything approaching this level of self-pity they would be cruicified.

And just one quote from Rithdee's interview, which I simply can't ignore.

Ing_K wrote: It touches me that she sounds like a kind of Don Quixote, a person guided by her idealism. In many ways, her actions reflect the Thai belief in the pillars of chart, sart and kasat - nation, religion, monarchy.

Those are, indeed, the values of a true political radical.

Did you write that article contrasting the reaction to TROPICAL MALADY between Bangkokites and the countryfolks? I forgot the author's name - I just remember that the whole article was littered with Thai words - italicized. I read about 3 pages before throwing it in the garbage.

Or you're Tom Waller. Either way it explains a lot.

And this is the most ludicrous statement I've seen yet: "Incidentally, Apichatpong also excludes western foreigners from his work, despite the vital and extremely visible role they play in the Thai society and economy."

I simply am in a different camp from you. Call me an "elitist Thai" if you'd like, but I'd rather be an elitist Thai rather than an elitist farang. After all, this isn't your country.