From your writeup it seems I will like this film.
FINALLY this is coming to Dallas. I’ll be able to see it next weekend, and now I’m especially happy I held off on watching it via other means. My first Apichatpong in the cinema!
FWIW, you might want to watch some of his previous films first. Imo, this film combines several other interests and approaches of previous films. Personally, I think watching Mysterious Objects at Noon and Tropical Malady might be good “preparation” for this one. (FWIW, I think Syndromes and a Century is, by far, his best film—well, I haven’t seen all of his films, so…)
Mysterious Objects at Noon is his best. Followed closely by Phantoms of Nabua.
I need to and want to see Phantoms.
Mysterious feels more experimental to me—as if AW just starting to work on some of his ideas. These ideas seemed a lot more refined and integrated in Tropical Malady for example.
Phantoms of Nabua
The distribution company put the short online.
Mysterious Objects at Noon predicts his entire career. Everything that came after is in that first feature film.
Oh, I’ve seen many of his films, my favorites being Phantoms of Nabua and Syndromes and a Century. I’d like to rewatch Mysterious Object since it’s been a couple of years, and I still need to see Tropical Malady. But he’s one of my favorite living filmmakers.
I’m sorry but has this been released yet?
It’s been all over the place but it’s just being released in Dallas next weekend. Check your local listings, Berj.
Sounds like Ill have a chance. Thanks. This is one movie Ill regret to miss on the big screen. Let me check.
Duoh. (Note to self: if you don’t like the taste of shoe leather, read posts more carefully. :)
I don’t know if “everything” is in that first feature, but there are ideas that he develops and refines in later films, yes.
its not a film that needs to be overanalyzed, it was never meant to be understood, it was meant to be experienced.
Isn’t every film supposed to be both, Micky?
One doesn’t understand the experience part without the analyzing part.
Maybe I’m just jealous that i didn’t get it. We should all start watching movies together on netflix via xbox parties.
easy, it’s a deeply atmospheric film that attempts to capture the indefinable transition from life to death, and vice versa.
I said it doesn’t need to be overanalyzed, as it is full of life and death, simple truths and fascinating enigmas.
That’s not what I was saying.
You can experience a film all you want. If you don’t have the ability to analyze that film the experience isn’t much different from experiencing a cool breeze on a hot day. It’s just a subjective moment of varying degrees of enjoyment.
Serious film viewership requires a bit more than that.
Serious film viewership requires a bit more than that
hmm, i don’t know. to what end? a film is no less authentic or truthful if you only experience it
as issac davis would say “anything worth knowing cannot be understood w/ the mind”
OVERanalayzed is the word I’m saying!!!
I understood the films themes but I believe first and atmost it was designed to be experienced and it was a very, very special experience.
What I’m saying is that experience isn’t worth all that much if you don’t try to understand it (try being the operative word). Again, I would say there’s a difference between just watching something and your brain working in a direction to being to comprehend it; hell that’s James Benning’s entire point in his late works.
And even beyond that Weerasehtakul is definitively pointing our minds in very specific directions throughout the film. He may well want a beautiful experience, but most definitely he also wants us analyzing what is going on on screen. His films would be complete failures if they weren’t so intellectually engaging and complex.
pfff, obviously you’ve carefully read what I wrote. :)))
sure, besides the films themes there are interesting observations in the film about the past and present of directors home country as well. Ultimately, however-
I’ll keep reposting from now on- it doesn’t need to be OVER-analyzed, as it is FULL of life and death, simple truths and fascinating enigmas.
Who’s the one not reading here?
You can’t just keep saying “overanalyzed” without even providing a word as to what that really means and think it actually has any worth as criticism or general truth about this film. It doesn’t. It’s as meaningless as saying the film doesn’t need to be OVER-experienced.
It’s much more about the direction of cinema and the relationship of this to the human soul then it is about his home country, no? One can read an interview and find out what was about his homeland, but the conversation about film as a reflection of life and the constant death and rebirth of that reflection is something that will fascinate for generations…
as I said earlier, film attempts to capture the indefinable transition from life to death, and vice versa.
and you don’t need interviews(if it was anything about it) to find out about his observations about his country.
For example, Uncle Boonmee confesses that killing the “commies” did not help the nation and was nothing but a “pain in the ass” (an obvious reference to the violence that occurred in Thailand between 1964-65, when the military government unleashed a massive communist purge), while Jen ponders the impact illegal immigration has had on the region.
My point was obviously that the information about his country is self-contained. It says something specific about Thailand but it’s hardly what the film is about.
I said numerous times what the film is about, which is understandable, and what it was meant for.
I doubt director made it so audiences should dissect it piece by piece.
And? Director intention is an oft overrated concept. Dissection is an incredibly important part of film criticism.
I’ve seen this film described as a ‘metaphysical comic book’ that people are taking too seriously. check out this comment:
“Weerasethakul is a frustrating character. Despite being a well-meaning fellow, he is also self-indulgent. Not everyone will share his love for the creepy conventions of comic books and old Thai TV shows. What’s more, when one strips away all the hocus-pocus, Weerasethakul’s story is simply about a man who comes to realize that his illness was brought on by living a false life but now can accept death as he is now more attuned to the unending cycles of nature.
For me, Boonme is only worth watching to catch a glimpse of the natural wonders of Thailand and its vibrant culture. For others, since ‘Uncle Boombe’ has a mystical veneer, its simplistic message is mistaken for something much more profound. As a result, accolades are heaped upon it, including the Palme d’Or. Until the judges stop conning themselves, a teenage sensibility will reign supreme at such venerable film festivals as Cannes, for many years into the future."
^^A teenage sensibility? Well that’s certainly a first.
Finally going to get to see this now that’s it’s out in the US on Blu-ray.
streaming on netflix as well
I like how people think that merely because they call something simplistic it becomes so.
I actually took points from the film to make a conclusion about its message. I didn’t just reject the “veneer” of the film outright and insinuate everyone that likes the film has the mind of a teenager.
When I actually see a criticism of this film that comes from the film itself and not the Cannes jury that voted it Palme d’Or maybe I’ll begin to take those “comments” more seriously.
Archie,i agree wtih some of his points—for example, i’m not convinced it’s a particularly ‘deep’ movie—but his mistake is assuming that it’s not meant to be playful. I’d describe the film as a ‘playful meditation’ on the ideas that you mentioned earlier—the cycle of life and death, reincarnation etc—and agree completely with your analysis.
He just went in to the film with the wrong mindset. I’ve noticed that too many negative reviewers went in expecting to see a Tarkovsky film, when the movie is far more offbeat and playful, and that was completely by design. Joe intended it to be that way. hence the references to old monster films, and yes, even comic books! god forbid! :-)
That;s what is so fascinating about the film. It’s impossible to pin down.