I respect him like few of his contemporaries, but his influence will take years to be felt.
And you left the “L” off the end up there.
Oh, yeah.
I know where leaves is voting in the Cronenberg match, oh yeah
Raphaela, if you are looking for disagreement with your assessment, you’re probably on the wrong site since Apichatpong has a pretty devoted fan base here, myself included, although I’m sure there are some, there are always some, that have a contrary opinion.
Yeah, he’s about as good as it gets among working directors.
jesus tap dancing christ, youre right greg, what the phuck am i doing asking if ’’joe’’ is respected on freakin MUBI (what a dufus sitename)
Well, many of us became members of this site before it sounded like a cow and a bee, and Weerasethakul is indeed well respected on here as one of the most original contemporary directors. “Syndromes and a Century” even ranked fourth in our Auteurs Best of the Decade Poll.
Oh, I wasn’t making fun of you for asking, just saying that there have been a lot of conversations about him on the forum in the past, and that they have all been pretty damn positive and often gushing in their praise. Maybe the users have changed since Uncle Boonmee won at Cannes, but respect for Apichatpong among the long timers is very high. I think there have been discussions about almost all of his films in some form here so there is a lot to read about him on the site from those that post here. Not that I have anything against another conversation about his work though…
greg, i was just joking around. and apu, that auteurs list is stellar, mulholland drive is a milestone in film. but let me rephrase my initial post.
what is it that ’’joe’’ offers in his filmmaking (which is not groundbreaking in terms of cinematic approach) that enables him to cut through and trump every other style with his very simple if you will recipe? and how big would you say of an impact is he making around the world?
am i getting across?
I like what I’ve seen from him.
Tropical malady is as well in the Best of the decade poll, taking place 22 eventhough I don’t completely agree with the list.
In response to that question, Weerasethakul combines cinéma vérité style shooting methods with experimental cinema and national mythology, and I think that his adventurous rearrangements make his films a welcome diversification in the contemporary cinematic landscape which is too often defined by repetitions of long-established conventions. Another striking aspect of Weerasethakul’s films is his careful observation of the beauty of nature that constantly clashes with modernity, as if his films were responding to Jean-Marie Straub’s claim: “What the modern movie lacks is beauty, the beauty of moving wind in the trees, the little movement in a beautiful blowing on the blossoms in the trees.” But Weerasethakul’s films are certainly no utopias, and tend to remind us of the countless discrepancies of our age.
I know his films play an influence on me as a young filmmaker, the rest of the world … can’t speak for them.
Anyone who truly cares abotu cinema knows and loves Joe.
Blissfully Yours is just that: pure bliss. But only people who are probably in-the-know, like you said, or artists themselves are aware of “Joe”. He’ll probably never get the invite to Hollywood, and I’m sure he doesn’t want to if it was offered. He needs to stay in Thailand, as it seems that the country could undergo revolution, by what I saw on the news some months ago. Does anyone know what’s happening with that?
Anyone who truly cares abotu cinema knows and loves Joe.
I don’t love Joe. I think he’s the Tarkovsky of his time and place…sacrificing past for present. Give me Tsai Ming Liang any day.
^ Give me all of the above.
If I’m allowed a moment to be a reductionist, then Joe is to Nature what Tsai is to Urban Alienation and what Tarkovsky is to Soul Searching—I’m reaching on that last one, so someone save me… but I certainly think all three are unique and worthwhile and I wouldn’t rank one over the other.
Jerry, I’m not quite sure what you mean by sacrificing past for present, but, to me, there are some significant differences between Tarkovsky and Apichatpong that makes Joe a much more interesting director for my way of thinking. Their handling of nature in relationship to man has a distinctly different feel, but more importantly, the difference between the way each of them project themselves into the films makes for a vast difference in their works.
Just saw Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives. Fucking amazing.
^ Best $12 I’ve spent in a long time.
Damn it, it’s so sad to know that the film will never be released here in Mexico ):
And there will be more Tarkovsky comparisons on the way as there is an exquisite scene shot with a hand-held cam of an expedition to a cave that is positively Stalker-esque.
That helps a lot, thank you. lol just kidding but oh man, how I want to see that film…
Blue, I’m seeing it this thursday in Philly :) where did you go?
and why do they call him Joe?
There are several non-Thai people on the planet that can pronounce his name properly, or at least close to properly. This alone is an astounding testament to the influence of this man. I can not even come close to being able to pronounce a good friend of mine’s name, because it is Thai and has more syllables than my entire family’s names put together.
I will see Joe & his film in a couple of days – cannot wait! :)
@ Patapon,
I saw it here in Honolulu at the Hawaii International Film Festival, which is arguably the best festival for Asian films outside of Asia. “Joe” is his American name. He studied in the States.
@ Grey,
You lucky dog. But I get to see Jia Zhang-ke in person on the 24th, so I can’t complain. :P
A recent discussion regarding the use of “Joe” (the English translation of his nickname that we could use) and why AW needs to be referred to by his given name (Apichatpong) can be found here.
He is certainly very respected and he deserves it, but I don’t think he has been that influential. At least not as influential as someone such as Kiarostami (who himself has moved out of the framework his imitators are currently spending their time in).
I think you can already see his influence on younger East Asian directors.
Yeah, I forgot about that. I’m sure he has been pretty influential on his homeland amongst aspiring filmmakers, maybe in the same way as Lav Diaz who has influenced Raya Martin and John Torres and probably some others in Philippines. I was thinking of major festival regulars when I posted that. My bad.
raphaela
In a time with budgets of hundreds of millions and literaly millions of youtube clips I still find myself discussing his work with many people in the know. This young thai man with his very own ozu-niche type films have garnered countless awards, palmes and what not. Toronto Film Society voted ‘Syndromes and a century’ as the most important film of the decade. Im sensing he’s a very important figure in world cinema right now. Also considering the fact that his movies are very slow and somewhat fulfilling as they play almost like poetry, long shots, and everything that goes against the current state of fast food film. Am i completely off the hook lifting this man to the skies? Don’t really know what im trying to get at, do fill me in