Pages

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Spotlight | Ghost in the Machine: Apichatpong Weerasethakul’s Letter to Cinema








by Mark Peranson and Kong Rithdee

http://cinema-scope.com/wordpress/web-archive-2/issue-43/spotlight-ghost-in-the-machine-apichatpong-weerasethakul%E2%80%99s-letter-to-cinema/



CINEMA SCOPE: Let’s begin by contextualizing Uncle Boonmee within the multi-platform Primitive project. The project seemed to be moving you in a more explicitly political direction. Even if in Uncle Boonmee, one can—and I do—argue that the politics is always there in the background, that the communists are always in the jungle, so to speak, on the primary level you’re retreating to deal with themes such as reincarnation and death. Why did the film take this shape?

APICHATPONG WEERASETHAKUL: I’d never made a film in the northeast before, which is what the Primitive project is all about the on the one hand—the remembrance and the memory of the landscape I grew up with and the films I remember, and also the political landscape. Primitive is more of a memory of the region, Nabua, where I shot the installation films, and about how this area deals with the burden of memory. I travelled, and went to many cities in the region, and ended up in this village where I shot Uncle Boonmee. In Uncle Boonmee I wanted to present another angle on the region to give a more whole portrait.

The idea for the film began when I got a little book from a monk from my hometown, about this guy who could remember his many past lives; he died a while ago and I never got the chance to meet him. I got the book before I made Tropical Malady, and always wanted to make a film from it but I didn’t know how. I really need to have a personal connection to whatever I make, so eventually Boonmee became myself also. I put a lot of references to my own life in, so instead of an adaptation, it became something “inspired by.”

SCOPE: The character of Boonmee clearly echoes your father, who died of kidney failure and underwent dialysis, and you’ve said that certain scenes, such as the dining room and the bedroom scenes, are simulations of your father’s environment as he was dying. But what specifically about Boonmee is you?

APICHATPONG: It’s mostly a memory of when I grew up, and my childhood—not the region itself, but home, home in a more general sense. Mostly old TV in the ‘70s, shot on 16mm, and one-baht comic books that have a different landscape—the landscape of ghosts that coexist very well with the living. I was fascinated by that and tried to put some of that in. More than my other films, Uncle Boonmee is very much about cinema, that’s also why it’s personal. If you care to look, each reel of the film has a different style—acting style, lighting style, or cinematic references—but most of them reflect movies. I think that when you make a film about recollection and death, you have to consider that cinema is also dying—at least this kind of old cinema that nobody makes anymore.

SCOPE: Are you talking about Thai cinema or cinema in general?

APICHATPONG: Thai cinema, yes, but I think Uncle Boonmee will be one of the last films that will be shot on film, as everything is moving to the Red or Sony or whatever, so it’s a tribute, and a lamentation, in a way, for celluloid. The first reel is really like my way of filming: you see the animal in the forest, a long take with the kidney dialysis, and the driving scene. And the second reel is very much like old cinema with stiff acting, no camera movement, and a very classical stage, like Thai TV drama, with monsters and ghosts. The third reel becomes like a documentary, shot in the exteriors on the tamarind farm—and also French, in a way, this kind of relaxing film. The fourth reel, with the princess and the catfish, is a costume drama, a Thai cinema of the past. So even though there is a continuity, the time reference always shifts…The fifth reel is the jungle, but it’s not the same jungle as Tropical Malady because it’s a cinema jungle—a day-for-night drama that we shot with a blue filter, like very old films. You put this old actor into a cinema jungle, and the cave refers to those old adventure novels or comic books. (In the scene with the ghost we also used a mirror, another allusion to the cinema of the past.) And the sixth reel, in the hotel, the time is slowed down, the time has become seemingly documentary. Again it’s like my films, with the long takes, but at the same time in the end when it splits, when you see the doubles of the two characters, Jen and Tong, I wanted to suggest the idea of time disruption, that the movie isn’t dealing with one reality, there are multiple planes…

SCOPE: You mean you don’t know what time it is that you’ve been experiencing all along…

APICHATPONG: Yes, and you don’t know if the reality is in the karaoke bar or in the hotel room. And it suggests other multiple realities that you could be watching, and what you’ve seen before, the reels before could be a dream…So Jen comments that when you die you have a book at the funeral, and where is the book, it’s missing—well, there’s no book, we have a movie! Roong, the girl from Blissfully Yours who shows up in the last reel, says just make something up about this guy. It’s like me, I just make something up!

SCOPE: So six reels are the six reincarnations of cinema in a way?

APICHATPONG: Maybe, yeah. And the girl reunites with the monk and implies that even in one life you have another life, you change your identity…Also, when you look at old cinema the actors never grow old, but in reality they are dead, so cinema is a preservation in spirit of these people who have since passed.

SCOPE: The last reel returns again to your kind of cinema, with the reappearance of characters from Blissfully Yours and Syndromes, perhaps, the kind of cinema that as you say is seen in the first reel, so it closes the circle, and makes it more of a whole than your other films. But to return to politics, a subject which is perhaps inescapable in the current context, people have been trying to interpret Uncle Boonmee politically—what do the monkeys represent, for example. How much is intended to symbolize something, or relate the film to the current situation?

APICHATPONG: If people want to interpret that politically, well, that’s there. That’s one of my intentions. When I see the film I think about my experience over the past two years, and especially the installation—in the original script, for example, there was no photo montage of soldiers from Nabua, but that came in the editing, in post, though that dialogue about the future and people who disappear, that was already there as a voiceover.

SCOPE: Exactly the same voiceover appears in the dual-screen video in the PrimitiveUncle Boonmee suddenly the entirety of the installation flashed before my eyes; it was reborn on the spot. The scene with LED lights in the field worked in somewhat the same way. installation, doesn’t it? When it appeared in

APICHATPONG: Yes, exactly. But I’m not lying: this was my real dream. I remember I woke up and wrote about this dream, about going to this future and having this time machine that people can use to see into their past, that their bodies can be a projector. And I put the photo montage in because I wanted to make my voice and Boonmee’s merge. I always say that film is like a diary, and I want to remember this village, and to have some part of the region that I experienced—playing with these kids, making fiction together—in this diary. The conflict that happened in Nabua [that began in 1965 and lasted two decades] echoes and resonates up to the moment, to the problems we’re having now in Thailand. And it also links with the reincarnation and influence of other cinema on me, especially Chris Marker and Antonioni. At first we thought it might be too obvious or too shallow to include the photos, but what the hell, it’s something I love and want to remember.

SCOPE: When you were starting to edit the film I asked you if it was political and you said, “No, not at all…”

APICHATPONG: Maybe the context, the current situation, makes it look this way, but you can link it if you want. Originally half of the script was voiceover, with people talking and commenting on the image—making fun of the image—but then we scrapped that and wanted to introduce more abstraction, maybe to mimic the inner workings of the mind.

SCOPE: All of your films in a way are incomplete, because it seems that you leave plenty of space for viewers to bring their own selves to the film, and also to put the pieces of the film together. Is this structure important to you? This incompleteness? And it’s interesting here because you actually have something that exists apart from the feature that completes it, namely, the Primitive project.

APICHATPONG: Right, right, like another life for the film…I think I agree about leaving it open, but also it’s the same way that much literature leaves things open, and you can say it has a life of its own…I believe that cinema has its own life. So especially when you are editing you have to let the film tell you what to do. You have to be open and not keep things just for the sake of the script, but for the freedom of the audience.

SCOPE: How is the finished film different from the script?

APICHATPONG: Aside from the voiceover, it’s almost the same. We shot more of the princess—scenes where the princess was going to deliver her baby—because I wanted to talk about this idea of the future of hybridization between humans and animals, which I do with the monkey ghost who mates and then he cannot come back to the regular world. So in these scenes the princess is anxious about her baby, whether it will have the scales of the catfish or whether it will be human.

SCOPE: At the press conference it was surprising for me to hear you refer to Thailand as “a violent country…one that is ruled by mafias.” Are you conscious of the fact that you exist as a kind of national filmmaker? Is this something that you want to be, or is it something that has been thrust upon you?

APICHATPONG: I don’t mind it! For me it’s not a burden, for me…it’s my film, I don’t know what to say. And without Thailand…I live there, the country propels my movie-making, my expression. Even though it’s shitty, it has something…People tell me, it sounds terrible, you cannot talk about certain things, maybe so. But for me Thailand also has many beautiful things. You can also survive in this shitty land in your own way. I think that more and more in Thailand we will see something like Eastern European movies in the ‘60s and ‘70s with a lot of symbolism, not directly attacking the establishment. I’m happy to witness and to be part of that.

SCOPE: And I heard that you don’t care about showing this film in Thailand.

APICHATPONG: This film I don’t.

SCOPE: Why not?

APICHATPONG: I want to show it to people who like my films and can identify with them, but the process of getting a theatre, and advertising a full release, is so tiring…Maybe we’ll show it on one or two screens.

SCOPE: Then there is the monk scene in Uncle Boonmee, and already people from Thailand have been talking about why you included a monk again. In terms of narrative maybe it’s a necessity, but did you do it out of spite, in reaction to the problems you experienced with the authorities regarding Syndromes?

APICHATPONG: I wanted him to present the idea about having more than one identity in the same life. I cannot lie, including it is partly due to the reaction to Syndromes, but it’s also about the reincarnation of the previous character from the film. But you see so much extreme behaviour from the monks. And I just want to say that a monk is a human being. In Thailand people think that a monk or a doctor is another thing entirely, but they aren’t.

SCOPE: When reading the Austrian Filmmuseum book on your work, it struck me that there are very different ways of writing about your films, the Western way versus the more Eastern way, say. What are your thoughts about those articles that interpret your films as part of a European or international art film scene, as opposed to in relation to Thai film?

APICHATPONG: I appreciate that, I really do. I really like it and enjoy the interpretations. My film life really started in Chicago, so you cannot really divide my filmmaking into east or west—there are many references. It helps me and it’s interesting to see, as it confirms the idea that cinema has its own life. I think it’s a success when people have many angles to approach what you do in one work. Of course I’ve read things that don’t make sense, and that’s fascinating too, but I shouldn’t say what they are! Maybe from you? It’s also interesting that when I show my films in Thailand, Thais have a different level of understanding that we cannot translate. So in certain scenes in Thailand people laugh…At the same time some people don’t get what I’m trying to say, both Thais and foreigners. But many people in the West honestly try to understand, and are more open, as there is a deep root of cinema culture, especially here in France. So I am not sure if in Thailand it is more accessible…In Thailand, maybe they are more narrow-minded, and have a fixed idea of what cinema is.

SCOPE: I heard that over the course of researching the film you stopped believing in reincarnation.

APICHATPONG: I haven’t stopped believing, but I would say I have doubts. Researching and making the film, I found many people who claimed that they could remember their past lives, and there is no reason for them to lie. When I went back to my hometown I saw lots of changes. The culture is disappearing and I want to capture that, but at the same time there is something that we cannot change, which is our beliefs, that are rooted in the Cambodian Khmer, which is animist—we believe in the transmigration of the soul, in the circle of life, animal, human, and plant migration, swapping bodies. Thais are like chameleons, we adapt to many things, but the belief in spirits and ghosts cannot be changed easily. But the more I think about it after making the movie, the more I want proof. When you really tackle it and make a film you ask yourself questions. So that’s why I say reincarnation is possible, but science isn’t at the point where it can be proved.

SCOPE: Wait, can you even prove reincarnation scientifically?

APICHATPONG: Yes. I believe in the future we will be able to. To prove that it’s the working of the mind or it exists in reality, I don’t know. But science will have another step of revolution, you know, and I heard that the next one will be about anti-gravity matter, and after that I think we will know more about the mind…

SCOPE: Maybe you can rephrase it another way—you say reincarnation but maybe you are also talking about parallel universes, like in quantum physics…

APICHATPONG: Right, right…Buddhism and the idea of reincarnation is interesting—because Buddha said he has a past life, but he doesn’t ask us to believe in it ourselves. Usually in science you have an apparatus to measure things, but in the Buddhist way the body is the apparatus, the machine to do that, and it’s up to the individual to measure. And that’s one of the ways to meditate I think. So I think I need to meditate more to get proof, like David Lynch!

SCOPE: In all of your films there are references to Buddhism. But to me your films also have this scientific quality. You like the word “object,” from the first title, Mysterious Object at Noon. In Tropical Malady when the monk is telling the story he uses the word “object.” The gorilla in Uncle Boonmee is not Thai at all, either, it’s a primate, the origin of the species, of mankind. How do you reconcile this with your Buddhism, or how much is your intention in bringing in this scientific element?

APICHATPONG: Maybe science is the wrong word. Maybe it’s the idea of transformation. In the movie, with this six-reel idea of transforming time. Or maybe you can refer to a scientific nature, because science is everywhere and we don’t see it—there are moving particles in this table, nothing is solid.

SCOPE: Both here and in Tropical Malady you’re also dealing with nature, and man’s place in the world, and how we need to reconcile our relationship with nature.

APICHATPONG: Nature for me is an addiction—I like the image, the green, the sound…But it’s a very delicate balance of how not to repeat what you’ve done before, so I try not to use the jungle too much and present it in a different way. The jungle in the film is something foreign, with the heavy sound design, but it used to be our home. Which is why when we go back to the jungle or the cave, it’s like the characters and the audience going back to their roots. That’s why at one point in the cave there’s a shot where you see the drawings on the wall. Some people were there, in the past…you’re going back to origins, when you drew on the walls, and did a shadow play, a primitive form of cinema.

SCOPE: And also, not to be too obvious, Plato’s cave.

APICHATPONG: Yeah, but the more I explain, the more the movie loses its mystery so I think I should stop!

SCOPE: Is there a mystery behind the film that they watch on TV on the farm? And the song at the end? Can you talk about those?

APICHATPONG: It’s called The Last Moment (2008). I’m close to the director, Yuthlert Sippapak, which is the first reason I chose it. I tried to find a movie that I could get free of copyright, honestly. In that film there’s one moment that’s a direct parallel to the action in Uncle Boonmee: the main character can’t sleep so someone tells him to take a sleeping pill. But we ended up using another scene, where the main character escapes to an island because she’s dying, and prefers to die in a beautiful house there. There’s something that I like in that scene. And also to take a soundtrack from one movie and put it on top of my film gives the movie another life. The song [“Acrophobia” by Penguin Villa] is something I cannot explain. I like the beat, but I don’t care about the meaning. It’s some kind of love song where the girl is high up and he asks her to come down…But it’s the mood and the feeling that matters to me.

SCOPE: Can you talk about the film’s sound design?

3EAPICHATPONG: I really pay attention to the dails of the sound. I’m some kind of a fanatic. This is my first film to have very heavy dialogue, very dramatic, so I was quite confused how to mix it, how to make the dialogue present like in a conventional film. And we did mix the conventional way and then we screened it…but the last day of the mixing I changed the whole thing, and brought the ambience up. And Rit (Akritchalerm Kayalanamitr), the sound guy, was going crazy, because it changed everything. You know, I have to screen my films to know what’s missing, and what was missing from the film was nature. So we boosted up the ambient sounds. When you talk about reincarnation and the transmigration of souls between animal, plant, and human, you need to have the audience aware of the other lives in this universe, such as insects or birds. It’s not so much changing the sound itself but the levels…and we changed them in every reel.

SCOPE: The sound design really makes you conscious of these other spirits. For example, I thought that in the dinner scenes the mosquitoes were the souls of the dead communists coming back to pester Boonmee.

APICHATPONG: Thank you!

SCOPE: It’s never made clear what Boonmee’s past lives are. Or whether they are past lives or dreams, or even the future…

APICHATPONG: Yeah, he could be anyone. Because the last time we hear him he talks about the dream of the future, other things could be dreams too.

SCOPE: In one way the film is about how death and life are everywhere, coexisting. That’s why I mentioned the cave because there is the shot of this small pool in the cave with small fish swimming—even in this completely dark and desolate place there’s life.

APICHATPONG: Yes, it’s a place where you don’t imagine there is life, but there is.

SCOPE: Do you think about death a lot? Are you conscious of your own mortality?

APICHATPONG: Not really. I think about death in a more conceptual way, about the idea, and reincarnation, but not about mine. You?

SCOPE: I think it’s an issue that you think about the older and older you get. I asked because there’s sickness in your movies everywhere.

APICHATPONG: Maybe it has to do with growing up in a hospital. I like the idea of having a physical sickness and needing to have it cured, because it’s the same idea of having darkness and lightness, or silence and noise at the same time. When you experience a sickness you become aware of life, and of well-being.

SCOPE: You mentioned that you meditate. But are you religious in the sense of going to the temple?

APICHATPONG: No way!

SCOPE: Is it just in terms of religion as personal belief, with you trying to make contact to the spiritual realm…

APICHATPONG: I think it means more to me in a psychological or scientific way. Thai people, sometimes we pray before we go to bed. For me the praying is to help me sleep, so this kind of thing is more of a chemical balance to adjust your body. I don’t go to temple—I think of praying as fun, a rest for the mind. I just read a book about this. I forget the author, but he said that we take a bath every day to clean our bodies, but we never shower our minds. Meditation is one of the ways to clean our mind as well.

SCOPE: Where’s the UFO from A Letter to Uncle Boonmee? Why is it not in the movie?

APICHATPONG: It’s still in the village. It’s so big we can’t move it! We decided that it would be too obvious to put it in the movie. Because you know the film is about imagination, so if I put this UFO in you might think, “What kind of machine is Boonmee travelling in?”

SCOPE: Do you see the feature and the short as related in any specific way? It’s interesting that the short is all camera movement, while the feature is static.

APICHATPONG: No, they are different. The short was made long before and is more of a sketch for the feature. The two aren’t really related, it’s more about me trying to think about Boonmee when I was in that village, but we shot the feature in a different place, in Khon Khen, and then in Bangkok for the hotel and temple. The installation is very different because it’s shot on video, and spontaneous. Shooting in this way you can go to many locations, but for a feature you have to plan things.

SCOPE: When you’re working for a gallery or cinema do you feel that you’re a different artist, or working for different audiences? How does it impact on what you’re making and how you make it?

APICHATPONG: In a way, yes. But the working process sometimes overlaps, as sometimes I have the same crew and use the same equipment. But I’m aware of the different ways that people will see it. I always have thought that when you see an installation it’s like two animals sizing each other up—you walk in the space, the work is more active, you are judging it like another animal. In the cinema the audience is super-passive, like a zombie. As a director you hypnotize the audience. So that becomes conscious to me when I am making a movie. But that also means that cinema is inferior in a way, in terms of activeness of self, but it also has a strength. When you are a zombie your mind works harder, instead of walking in a space where you exert yourself physically. The power of cinema is extreme, and for this film I try to bring this power to the audience as much as I can. I will keep making both films and installations because they echo each other, and this project, it has many forms, and for me it fits very well with the theme of reincarnation of multiple lives—Uncle Boonmee is another life form.



Published in Cinemascope, issue 43

The babelry of politic-speak

In the monsoon of uneasy politics, linguistic acrobats from both sides perform their somersaults on TV and Facebook. Meanwhile, guerrilla pop-culture and visual ploys are out in force, covert or otherwise, in a time of social paranoia in which people - at least some people - prefer the numb comfort of forgetting, to the pungent truth of remembering. They are looking for the eternal sunshine of the spotless mind. Spotless? In your third-layered dream maybe.

Beneath the state and red rhetoric - is it "tightening the area" or "a crackdown"?; is it "a crackdown" or "a massacre" - words and visuals offer deeper reading of the ongoing war to capture space, literal or psychological. Euphemisms are as prevalent as vitriol: snipers = phantoms, harmony = oblivion, love = limbo, oblivion + limbo = unity, and so on. Also on the streets around the clash sites, we're witnessing Bangkok's golden age of incidental performance art and semantic puppetry.

The Ratchaprasong signpost was defaced, removed, cleaned and reinstalled. Even guarded. The connotation of the intersection's name has also been pondered and dissected, proving how language is the ultimate form of power and mind control.

This was after Sombat Boon-ngam-anong publicly tied a red sash around the signpost, attempting art from non-art and politicising what's characteristically non-political. He was promptly arrested. Now every Sunday, the red supporters gather to show force and stage plays to remind people of what happened two monthths back right in front of Gaysorn Plaza. It' never be as well-attended as the Silom oh-yes-we-can grand sale, but never mind.

On the skywalk between Siam and the former Central World, someone spray-painted outlines of dead bodies on the floor, like police procedure at murder sites. If the perpertrators had done it with greater skill and covered wider areas - perhaps enlisting the help of graffiti artists - it could have worked as an underground art piece with the subversive intent worthy of Guy Fawkes. A few days later I checked again and the red outlines had been cleaned and even repainted. Now a guard is positioned day and night at the BTS pillar where the paint was sprayed. Is he part of the installation art, too?

Then I wonder if readers of English news could grasp the social and cultural meanings buried in all the Thai terms that have signified the gravity - and folly - of our current woes. The idiocy of krachab puen tee ("tightening the area"), which has spawned a number of ribald jokes I would rather not repeat; or salim, a phraseology given by the red to the multi-coloured shirt, so dubbed after a colourful Thai dessert; or the fact that abhisit means "privilege", a word that, not only because of the current situation, carries a darker shade of meaning in itself; or the gross exaggeration preferred by Thaksin Shinawatra and how he manages to make the utterance of "sincere" the insincerest utterance of all.

Politicising language is necessary in media-heavy politics, from Bush ("war on terror") to Hamas ("freedom fighters") to Obama ("hope") to Netanyahu ("settlement") to Abhisit ("reconciliation"). As our PM was named one of the Best Users of Thai Language by the Ministry of Culture this week, the subversive camp, deprived of legitimate channels, reels out the stickers and Facebook logo: chan hen khon tai - "I see dead people", borrowing from a movie catchphrase. It's a bit coarse (compared to, say, the red outlines on the skywalk) but strategically, for the underdogs it may be even more necessary.

This week, the rabid criminalisation of language has gone to the imbecilic extreme. This time the sinned word is "father", or poh. In May, actor Pongpat Wachirabanjong gave an (overly) sentimental speech about how we should love our father and protect the land. Now a country singer has filed a lese majeste lawsuit against him for denigrating the word "father", which in this case referred to His Majesty the King. But wasn't Pongpat exalting the King in his speech? Compounding the mess was the spokesman of the yellow shirts, who came out gallantly to attack the police for siding with the reds in scandalising the Royal Family. To be frank, the logic of this nonsense eludes me.

We're stuck in a time when political subterfuge is masked as linguistic cartwheeling, or vice versa. This shows the richness of the Thai language, sure, and the Thai imagination for stretching the meanings of simple vocabulary and gestures. What's next: Mother? Granddaughter? Red Bull? Yellow Lizard? Smiling Cat? =^.^=? ^*@@-;?

Because he is exemplary in both Thai and English, maybe we should consult the PM.


Published: 24/07/2010 in The Bangkok Post

Friday, July 2, 2010

The power of football

Eyes wide and limpid watching the geometric splendour of Spain's passing and the public dysfunction of the French, we realised that for a month football has been the joy and agony of the world.

It has been a philosophy and entertainment, a simple game that breeds (sometimes simplistic) metaphors. It has been a distraction for politicians and prime ministers -- ours and others' -- a ploy to play the populist and connect to the masses. It has been a pageant of men in nice hair (the Uruguayans and the Argentines, for instance). It has been a televised casino for the wayward citizens of honourable countries, like ours, and an excuse for morally dubious mischief, like when a Dutch porn star vowed to perform mass oral sex if Holland win tomorrow. Go, Wesley Sneijder!

It has been an advertisement for Africa, waka waka, vuvuzelas, Jacob Zuma, shantytown spirits and the shamanistic power of a German octopus.

Actually, Paul the octopus (he has a Wikipedia page now) is more inspiring than most English and Italian players; bookies in Thailand based their odds on what Paul predicted. It also inspired culinary jokes the night the Germans lost: calamari Paul, tokayaki Paul, or simply, fried Paul. This one is from a Malaysian friend: Paul sits in a coffee-shop in Kepong with a hand phone in each tentacle.

Football is covertly politicised, even romanticised, at least in the jumbled mind of commentators. Speculation ran wild when North Korea were thrashed by Portugal: will Dear Leader boot the squad to a hard-labour camp on the Russian border? Will a Socialist country, historically an athletic superpower in the Olympics, ever win a team sport like football? Apart from England, no other country with a monarchy has ever won the World Cup, though tomorrow it will be the first time two kingdoms contest in a final.When Spain played Honduras, the talk of post-colonial retribution, however remote given the slick Spanish squad, became a delicious fantasy for many.

When Ghana, formerly a shipping port of African slaves to the New World, played the US in the quarter-finals, the insinuation was left hush-hush. Too bad, or is it fortunately?, France wasn't drawn into the same group as Algeria.

Football has the power to help us imagine everything to be all right if a match is won (or just drawn, as in the case of New Zealand). When Gyan Asamoah of Ghana stepped up to take the penalty kick that would have sent an African nation to the semi-finals for the first time in history, he carried the entire continent on his shoulders, the Sisyphian weight of his people long lost to the dark room of history and long yearning for the dawn of glory. Africa will rise if Africa wins. Poverty eradicated and dictators ousted, political and historical woes would retreat, momentarily forgotten, or even be solved, mind you, simply if a football match is won. This belief, like all beliefs, is bordering on hallucination, but it's this hallucinatory power of football that makes it so loved and watched and debated. So perhaps the UN should be organising the quadrennial World Cup, not the Fifa.

Iran didn't make it to this World Cup, but there's an Iranian film that captures football's power to inspire collective imagination and a sense of nationhood. Offside, by Jafar Panahi (the film was released here three years ago), is not about the ever-contestable offside rules, but about an Iranian girl who disguises herself as a boy and tries to sneak into a World Cup qualifying match in Teheran (Iran used to forbid women from entering stadiums.)

She is arrested, along with about 10 more girls who do the same. While being transported back to the police station, the match ends with Iran's victory, meaning the country will go to the World Cup, and the street erupts into an impromptu celebration. Fantasy takes over reality, and every crime, every misery, every prejudice, everything, is temporarily suspended in the void of national euphoria.

Football, or what people believe what football is, transcends all divides with such supernatural force, even if only temporarily.

The Abhisit government has allotted a massive budget to the Prawase/Anand-led National Reconciliation Committee, but one wonders if the money would have been more productively spent on pushing the Thai squad to the World Cup, so all our problems would end and we'd love our nation more than we love Central World.What's the difference! As things stand, reconciliation is as hallucinatory as the nation-building power of football.

Thursday, July 1, 2010

One month on: A brief reflection




Please watch the video "Noise"


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8xKrIJa4mc&feature=player_embedded

Is everything back to normal? What's the definition of normalcy anyway? One month after the May 19 incident, all is smooth on the surface -- perhaps we have even forgotten -- but underneath the carpet the cracks are real.

When we walk the street we hear chatters of joy but listen carefully, maybe the noise, the cacophony, the recalcitrant nightmare, are still audible, faint and unreal and pushed to the background. I found some footage from the Bangkok Post's multimedia department and put together this clip, as an afterthought.


http://www.bangkokpost.com/blogs/index.php/2010/06/28/one-month-on-a-brief-reflection?blog=69

OF MONKEY GHOSTS AND MEN



A strange Siamese creature has made history by winning the top prize at Cannes Film Festival. The Palme d'Or winner talks to Real.Time about the present and past lives of movies and men

The film is about a dying uncle, Boonmee. It's also about a lovelorn princess and her encounter with an erotic catfish. Then it's about a lost buffalo, monkey ghosts, a swarm of bees and their sweet honeycombs, dead communism, photography, immigrants of the land and of the soul, and of course, it's about the possibility of past and future lives. With your eyes wide open it's also a dream alchemy that fuses into the memory of a place where time and space fold into each other like the soft petals of an eccentric flower, or like proof of quantum physics, or why not? both.

We've heard adulation and perhaps scepticism, and we'll keep hearing more when the man returns next week. But it's a heart-quickening fact that Apichatpong Weerasethakul has made history against all odds by becoming the first Thai to win the Cannes Film Festival's Palme d'Or, the world's most prestigious film award, with his subtly comical, deeply meditative Loong Boonmee Raluek Chat (Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives).

It has been hinted at before, but now the latest film _ and the award _ has etched the reputation of the Siamese auteur into the pantheon of modern masters. Amid the atmosphere of witch-hunting, let's for once play cheerleader: Apichatpong is without a doubt one of the most original filmmakers at work in the world today.

It would be inconsiderate of me to spell out the details of the film before it is screened to Thai audiences (hopefully it will be). But my conversation with Apichatpong in Cannes on the morning before the award was announced should help put the whole brouhaha into perspective, especially about the strange, gentle beast of Uncle Boonmee, as well as the director's thought processes.

To recap, Uncle Boonmee is part of a multi-platform project called Primitive, which includes installation, video, short films and now a full-length feature. The conceptual essence, Apichatpong says, is to record his memory of the Northeast, the region where he grew up and with which he feels a soulful bond.

As part of Primitive, Apichatpong shot two short films, A Letter to Uncle Boonmee, a wistful diary about soldiers and a spaceship in the square of an Isan village; and Phantom, a phantasmagorical video in which a group of Isan teenagers kick a fireball around and eventually burn down a movie screen.

But the genesis of Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives came from a book written by a monk who records the story of the old man who claims to have recalled his previous incarnations.

``Primitive is more a memory of the region, what I felt when I travelled and found this village [Nabua in Nakhon Phanom],'' said Apichatpong. ``Uncle Boonmee is another component. Originally the film would be a biography of this guy who recalls his past lives. But I realised I couldn't do it. I need to have a personal connection in whatever I work with, so Boonmee became myself. Our voices merge. Instead of adapting the book, it became just an inspiration.''

Uncle Boonmee swirls in my head because it touches on many levels at once; you can approach it philosophically, politically, even scientifically, or you can just watch it as a child's fantasy, a rural tale about strange creatures and sentimental ghosts. In its genome, the movie is a meta-thesis on cinema and its power to create illusion; and how the idea of reincarnation doesn't apply only to humans, but also to the art form that thrives on deja vu and paralleled dimensions of past and present. Apichatpong understands that after more than a century and so much technological advance, cinema has arrived at a critical moment: it has to reflect upon itself and go inward in order to go outward and find its own rebirth after a long, unquantifiable death.

``When you watch a film, it's something that's already happened. It already has a past life,'' he said. ``Uncle Boonmee is really about cinema to me. [I was inspired] by old television shows that were shot on 16mm camera, as well as by one-baht Thai graphic novels that show a different landscape of ghosts. I'm fascinated by that and try to put it in the movie.

``Uncle Boonmee has six reels [that are combined to become a 115-minute movie]. Each reel has a different acting style, lighting and reference on cinema. When you make a film about recollection and death, you realise that cinema is also facing death. Uncle Boonmee is one of the last pictures shot on film _ now everybody shoots digital. It's my own little lamentation, this thing about dividing the six reels into six styles. In the first reel, it's my kind of film when you see long takes of animals and people driving. The second reel is like old cinema with stiff acting and classical staging, then it's a documentary style in the third reel. The fourth reel is a costume drama... [and so on].''

The intimation of past and future lives has been integral in Apichatpong's films, though largely in the structural composition that teases with the textual nature of cinema and the physical quality of film _ as when Tropical Malady is violently bifurcated at mid-point. Apichatpong's talent is in how he treats the subject. Without sensationalising or exoticising, he achieves a form of gentle folk tale that's nevertheless rich with mindful deliberation. Uncle Boonmee is a film about sickness and death, but it's bubbling with life, even in the darkest cave or loneliest jungle. You could even say the treatment of life in the film has a science-fiction quality, in a vernacular, unadorned fashion.

``I don't read science fiction, but I love science-fiction elements,'' he said. ``Uncle Boonmee is a film about transformation, about objects and people that transform or hybridise. You can explain with scientific belief that nothing exists, nothing is really solid and everything is just a moving particle.

``I believe in reincarnation, but the more I think of it in movie terms, I just want more proof,'' added the director. ``Scientifically, I think that in the future we'll be able to prove reincarnation. Science has its own steps of evolution; I think it's about anti-gravity matter now, and after that it'll be about how to read the mind. In science you have an apparatus to measure things, in the Buddhist way the body is the apparatus. It's up to each individual what to measure, and that's why we meditate. Perhaps I'll find proof through meditation.''

What's more, if parallel dimensions and the recurring phenomena of life and history are what he's after, the symbolism that's going to be hotly debated when the film is screened in Bangkok is its political interpretation. The film, as well as the short films that came before, allude to the communist fighting in the Northeast as part of a bitter memory _ the past lives that nobody wants to recall in full voice.

In one of the key scenes, Boonmee talks about his dream in which he travels with a time machine to the future where the authority has the power to make people disappear, and the film transforms itself, however briefly, into a political commentary in its own elliptical, hypnotic, and deadpan way.

Apichatpong doesn't elaborate on this, but he believes that the political context of the moment will drive people to link what's happening with the film. ``It does comment [on politics]. If people want to interpret it that way, it's part of my intention,'' he said.

That is, if the film is eventually shown to a Thai audience _ the audience that the filmmaker believes possesses the cultural DNA required to fully understand his films, but which, ironically, sometimes complains that his films are impenetrable.

``Thai people should understand it because most of us believe in reincarnation, right?'' said Apichatpong. ``Thai people have a different level of understanding that we cannot translate [to the non-Thai audience]. They laugh at the point where foreign audience doesn't _ because the joke is a Thai thing.

``But again, I think for many people in the West will try to understand something [which they don't initially] and are more open because there's a deep root of cinema culture. They think more, even though they don't understand everything. For them there's no right or wrong. Meanwhile in Thailand, we tend to have a fixed idea of what a movie is.''

When the recently-wrapped Cannes Film Festival began, nobody dared believe that a small Thai film would prevail over 18 other competitors, including some heavyweights in arthouse cinema. Now that it has, perhaps we should not hold on to our fixed idea of what cinema is, but to what cinema can be. If reincarnation is real, then Uncle Boonmee is suggesting that it starts now.


The writer wishes to thank Mark Peranson who co-conducted the interview.

Published in The Bangkok Post, 28/5/2010

http://www.bangkokpost.com/entertainment/movie/37872/of-monkey-ghosts-and-men