Friday, February 29, 2008


This is my reply to Matthew Hunt in my blog with some added information:

I didn’t understand ONE AND THREE PANS (1965, Joseph Kosuth) when I saw it in ARTSPACE GERMANY. Fortunately, someone wrote about it and her writing makes me appreciate this work much more than before.

This is what Monnita wrote:

“His work of 'One and Three Pans' appears to echo his other work of "One and Three Chairs" made in the same year. Here, he displayed a photograph of a pan, an actual pan, and a dictionary of the word "pan". The piece distinguishes between the three aspects involved in the perception of a work of art: the visual representation of a thing (the photograph of the pan), its real referent (the actual pan), and its intellectual concept (the dictionary definition). Reality, image, and concept: the three "sides" of a perceived thing. ”

--I haven’t seen anything like ONE AND THREE PANS before—the juxtaposition between “the real thing”, “its representation” and “its concept”. However, the juxtaposition between the real thing and its representation reminds me of many things I like, including:

1.RE-PRESENTATION (2007, Chai Chaiyachit + Chisanucha Kongwailap, A+)

This short film is about a man gaining some knowledge on arts and Thai politics. Since I have no knowledge in these two areas, the film introduces me to some ideas which I find very interesting. This film makes me wonder if “Thai democracy” is the representation of “something essentially undemocratic”.

2.DESIRE (2001, Fred Kelemen, A+)

This is a stage play directed by Fred Kelemen. The videotape of this stage play was shown at Thammasat University Library last year. One interesting thing in this stage play is the difference between “the real thing” and “its projection” (I don’t know if I use the right English word or not.) In this play, Eben hates Abbie whenever Abbie appears as a real person in front of him. But sometimes Abbie appears on some giant screens hanging on the stage. Whenever Abbie appears on the screen and talks to Eben, Eben seems to like her. In conclusion, it seems as if Eben hates Abbie as a real person, but he loves her projection and desires her projection.


There’s one scene I love in this film. It is the scene in which three woman carry a giant photo of a part of the Berlin Wall and place this giant photo next to that exact part of the Berlin Wall. We see two doubling images at the same time, side by side—the real Berlin Wall and its photo. I don’t understand what this scene means, but I love it.

--Talking about Joseph Kosuth reminds me that I have no knowledge at all about conceptual art. As for some concepts or ideas found in films, I think I like some ideas or concepts in the films of Tulapop Saenjaroen. I think you saw one of his films last year—WHEN THE MOVIE LISTENS (2007, A+). The idea of this film is to let each viewer talk anything he/she wants to talk to the film, and the film will listen to us. I just saw his new film several weeks ago. It is called 2008, and lasts about 3 minute. In this film, we saw nothing except some strange sentences in “the ending credit”. At first I misunderstood that this film is the ending credit of another short film shown before it, but after the film ends, I got to understand that “the ending credit” is actually “the film”.

--Talking about some concepts in art, I like the concept of an artwork by Rirkrit Tiravanija very much. I saw a videotape recording of his artwork last year. In this video, he presented “rice” at an art exhibition and treated the rice as if the rice was a very precious diamond.


--You can see the image from my favorite scene in THE ALL-ROUND REDUCED PERSONALITY here:

Timothy Corrigan described this great scene in his book called NEW GERMAN FILM: THE DISPLACED IMAGE (1983).

This is a quote from the book:

“At another extraordinary point, however, the women carry the photo into a cinematic frame that replicates the very scene and angle of the photo, setting the image against the same wall that divides the center of the photographic space. The result is much more than a postmodern play with mise-en-abyme; it becomes rather a temporary but trenchant measure of imagistic difference as depth. Here the empty geometry of this street scene—which had developed a certain dynamic across the tension of the wall dividing those spaces—receives a critical turn through its doubling in the hands of the three women. What is added in the difference between the two representations of the scene is the self-consciousness of the image as always dramatizing a distance from a “real” scene or another image of it and the presence of a specific time and point of view (these three women again in this place) as the determination of the “depth” which that particular temporal and spatial position creates in distinguishing itself.”

Thursday, February 28, 2008


The exhibition ARTSPACE GERMANY at Silpakorn University includes ATLANTIC WALL by Magdalena Jetelova. If I don’t remember it wrongly, it includes a text by Paul Virilio, a sketch or a map of something, a painting, and some interesting photographs.

After I watch some films, I like to imagine a new film or a new story inspired by the films I watch. When I see a photo of Magdalena Jetelova, I imagine that this photo is what happens before the story in BIRTH OF THE SEANEMA (2004, Sasithorn Ariyavicha, A+++++++++++++++).

This is the photo:

You can read a review of BIRTH OF THE SEANEMA by Wise Kwai here:

You can read a review of BIRTH OF THE SEANEMA in Thai by Filmsick here:

You can read a review of ATLANTIC WALL by Colin Darke here:

ATLANTIC WALL is inspired by the writing of Paul Virilio. I have never read Virilio’s work, but I like an animation inspired by his writing very much. The animation is called DAS DRITTE FENSTER (THE THIRD WINDOW) (1998, Hanna Nordholt + Fritz Steingrobe, A+).

These are other photos from ATLANTIC WALL:

This is the painting in ATLANTIC WALL:

I would like to quote a review on ATLANTIC WALL from the wonderful book WOMEN ARTISTS IN THE 20TH AND 21ST CENTURY. The review is written by Frank Frangenberg:

"When she employed lasers to project text sequences by Paul Virilio on fortified bunkers – Virilio's theme – in her project ATLANTIC WALL, 1995, Jetelova came very close to Plato's compelling image of reality as shadows cast on the walls of a cave. Her interest in the looming concrete structures of the German line of defence in the Second World War was to translate linear real time into a discontinuous time, into a context of interpretation beyond time, which would bring history and the present moment, memory and experience, objectivity and subjectivity, into a complex whole. Jetelova works with us and our imagination to make time a concrete experience, by showing space to be subject to change, forever in flux. She engenders a new, holistic space-time experience, a space of immediate perception, artistically staged and aesthetically refined."


There are many things I like in ARTSPACE GERMANY. One of them is HERE AND THERE (1989, Ayse Erkmen, A+), which is a 16-part sculpture. It looks like a stone to sit on.

You can read an interview of Ayse Erkmen here:

CANDLE TV (1975, Nam Jun Paik, A+++++)

I just knew from Cinebeats’ blog about a clip from EDEN AND AFTER (1970, Alain Robbe-Grillet).

You can watch the clip here:


This is my comment in Matthew Hunt’s blog:

I’m glad you like MALDOROR. I agree with you that the glowworm looks like a refugee from David Lynch’s film. Hahaha. I couldn’t follow the story of LA FIN DE NOTRE AMOUR in the first viewing. Maybe I should give it a second chance. I like that the female character in this film has a blank black face. It gives such a weird feeling.


This is my reply to Matthew Hunt in my blog:

Mat, thank you very much for your information. I wonder if there will be a feminist response to “77 TESTICULAR IMPRINTS”. But I like Rachel Lachowicz’s response to Yves Klein very much. Hahaha.

Nam Jun Paik is a very interesting artist. I first saw his work last year when Thammasat University Library showed his video called GOOD MORNING, MR. ORWELL (1984, A+). This video is a little bit funny and seems to show some interesting aspects about television broadcasting. Many great artists appear in this video, including Laurie Anderson, John Cage and Oingo Boingo.

I just went to see the exhibition ARTSPACE GERMANY at Silpakorn University last weekend. The exhibition includes two works by Nam Jun Paik: “Internet dwellers: jswg.dreizehn.xulf” (1997, video sculpture, A+) and CANDLE TV (1975, object installation, A+). I love CANDLE TV very much. It seems like a sacred object. As for INTERNET DWELLERS, I think the 7-minute video is not very interesting now, but it might be very interesting back in 1997. However, I like the sculpture very much.


This is my comment in Prap Boonpan’s blog:

ขอให้คุณปราปต์คิดเรื่องราวที่จะนำไปสร้างเป็นหนังเรื่องใหม่ออกเร็วๆนะคะ จะได้มีหนังออกมาให้ดูกันอีก

ดิฉันก็คิดไม่ออกเหมือนกันว่าตัวเองอยากดูหนังเกี่ยวกับการเมืองไทยที่มีเนื้อหาอย่างไรในช่วงนี้ ดิฉันรู้สึกว่าตนเองลดความสนใจที่จะแสดงความคิดเห็นทางการเมืองลงไปมากพอสมควรในระยะนี้ ซึ่งอาจจะเป็นเพราะว่าช่วงนี้ดิฉันกับเพื่อนๆมักจะมีความคิดเห็นค่อนข้างตรงกัน นั่นก็คือ “เกลียดสมัคร” เพราะฉะนั้นในเมื่อคนรอบข้างมีความเห็นตรงกับดิฉัน และคนรอบข้างก็ได้แสดงความคิดเห็นและระบายความรู้สึกเหล่านั้นออกมาแล้ว ดิฉันก็เลยรู้สึกพึงพอใจและก็ไม่รู้สึกว่าตนเองต้องแสดงความเห็นซ้ำกับคนอื่นๆอีก และก็รู้สึกว่าตนเองใจเย็นลงเยอะในช่วงนี้ ซึ่งความรู้สึกแบบนี้ตรงข้ามกับในปี 2007 เพราะในปีนั้นมีหลายๆคนรอบข้างดิฉันที่ชื่นชอบคมช. แต่ดิฉันไม่ค่อยเห็นด้วยกับพวกเขาสักเท่าไหร่ การต้องตกอยู่ในสถานการณ์แบบนั้นก็เลยทำให้ดิฉันรู้สึกอึดอัดคับข้องใจและใจร้อน และเหมือนเป็นแรงกระตุ้นให้ดิฉันสนใจในเรื่องการเมืองมากยิ่งขึ้น


This is my comment in Bioscope Webboard:

ตอบคุณ pc

ได้เข้าไปดูมิวสิควิดีโอ DEXTER ของ Ricardo Villalobos แล้ว ชอบทั้งมิวสิควิดีโอและตัวเพลงมากๆเลยค่ะ และก็ต้องขอขอบพระคุณมากๆค่ะสำหรับบทความใน THE GUARDIAN เกี่ยวกับ minimal techno เป็นบทความที่น่าสนใจมากๆเลยค่ะ

ตอบน้อง merveillesxx

ขอแนะนำดีวีดี L’EROTISME เป็นอย่างยิ่งจ้ะ

คุณ FILMSICK เขียนถึงดีวีดีชุดนี้ไว้ที่นี่

Matthew Hunt เขียนถึงดีวีดีชุดนี้ไว้ที่นี่

Monday, February 25, 2008


--Jeremy Richey on Robbe-Grillet

--Mike Dekalb on Robbe-Grillet

--Mike Dekalb on SLOW SLIDINGS OF PLEASURE (1974, Alain Robbe-Grillet)

One of the films I would like to see very much is SLOW SLIDINGS OF PLEASURE. I found a review of this film in the magazine LITERATURE/FILM QUARTERLY, 1995, No.1. The article is written by Roch C. Smith.

These are some quotes from the magazine:

“Not surprisingly, perhaps, given Robbe-Grillet’s source, he makes use of various images of blood and flames to incorporate the motifs of the vampire and the sorceress. Such images are associated with a red kneeler, a shoe, a broken bottle—sometimes filled with red liquid—the sea, a metal bed and other objects of “punctuation,” as Robbe-Grillet calls them. All these images become part of a narrative contest between the young female protagonist—called Alice in the cine-roman, but never named in the film itself—and a cast of authority figures: the magistrate, the lawyer, the nun, and the priest. For the forces of authority and order, these images and objects become pieces of evidence that would establish Alice’s guilt.”

”The magistrate, the priest and the nun seek to impose a coherent story, one that would account for the disparate elements, by establishing that there was a crime and Alice was guilty of it. They seek to reestablish the reassuring and conventional world of traditional narrative. The character of Alice is scandalous to these figures of traditional authority, as it might be to like-minded spectators. Through her rebelliously playful responses, Alice subverts all efforts to impose a closed narrative by multiplying the possible meanings. Hers is the scandal of the open work.”

--There is a very interesting scene in SLOW SLIDINGS OF PLEASURE, in which nude Alice covers the front of her body with the red paint and presses herself against the white wall in four different spots, leaving imprints of her body on the wall.

This scene is clearly an homage to Yves Klein’ “Anthropometrie de l’epoque bleu (ANT 82)” (1960). Coincidentally, the Alliance Francaise in Bangkok just showed a short TV documentary about this artwork in January. The TV documentary is called SUIVEZ L’ARTISTE, in each episode of which a famous person got to choose his/her favorite artwork. In the episode I saw, it is Agnes Varda who chose Anthropometrie de l’epoque bleu (ANT 82).

In that red painting scene in SLOW SLIDINGS OF PLEASURE, there is also an interesting conversation between Sister Julia, who is the nun in charge of the convent, and Alice. I quoted this dialogue from LITERATURE/FILM QUARTERLY:

SISTER JULIA: You asked for paint and brushes to do that?

ALICE: Yes, Sister. You don’t find that pretty? Maybe you don’t like modern art?

SISTER JULIA: Don’t touch me, you disgusting, shameless girl, you criminal! Anyone can tell by looking at you that you’re the assassin.

ALICE: I don’t see the connection Sister. Jesus was innocent. He was condemned to death because he had the gift of exaggeration. I’ll speak to my lawyer about your libelous statements…Here Sister, here’s Veronica’s veil. [Alice holds up a red cloth which virtually fills the screen.]

--For more information on VERONICA’S VEIL, please read:

--Yves Klein’s artwork and that scene in SLOW SLIDINGS OF PLEASURE make me feel interested in works which use human bodies as paintbrush. I found that Ana Mendieta also created some artworks by the imprints of her body, and Nicolas Guagnini also had an exhibition called “77 TESTICULAR IMPRINTS”, in which he used his testicles as paintbrush.

This is the description of 77 TESTICULAR IMPRINTS:

“The paintings were produced with oil paint applied directly to the artist’s testicles and imprinted on various bound and ephemeral printed matter including: mainstream magazines such as Time and Life; art market staples such as Artforum, Art in America and Art News; exhibition and auction catalogues; rare magazines and artist’s books; personal letters; and lastly, on an assortment of original artworks, poems and studio notes by Vito Acconci, Simon Bedwell, Alejandro Cesarco and Dan Graham.”


This is my reply to Jesse in my English-only blog:

--Jesse, I think that your review on LA BELLE CAPTIVE is useful in way. I think at least it is a warning that anyone who has never watched any films by Robbe-Grillet should start with other films beside LA BELLE CAPTIVE.

Though I give LA BELLE CAPTIVE “A+”, I am also a little bit disappointed with it. But for me, I’m disappointed with it only when I compare it to other films by Robbe-Grillet, not when I compare it with films by other directors.

--At first I was also disappointed after I had finished reading RECOLLECTIONS OF THE GOLDEN TRIANGLE. But the disappointment rapidly turned into a new kind of pleasure. I read this novel when I didn’t know much about Robbe-Grillet’s styles. So when I was reading it, I expected that all the mysteries or puzzles would be solved in the end. I expected that I would understand everything in the final chapter of the book. But I found nothing like that in the end. No mysteries are solved. The novel seems to end with no conclusion. At first I felt disappointed. Then I realized that is Robbe-Grillet’s intention. My disappointment was not the result of Robbe-Grillet’s writing. It was the result of my wrong expectations. Robbe-Grillet’s novel changed me and changed my expectation when I read a book or watch a film.

Speaking of a novel with unsolved mysteries and without conclusion, I just remember that I once saw a short documentary interviewing Robbe-Grillet about his opinion on Michelangelo Antonioni. Robbe-Grillet seems to like Antonioni very much. It is not surprising. Antonioni created a new way of making films by directing L’AVVENTURA, a film with an unsolved mystery. Robbe-Grillet’s films and novels also show evidently the love of unsolved mysteries.

--Speaking of LAST YEAR AT MARIENBAD, I would like to add some information about this film here:

1.Dan Sallitt wrote about how to win the game in LAST YEAR AT MARIENBAD in his blog:

2.Lynn A. Higgins wrote a great article on LAST YEAR AT MARIENBAD in her book called NEW NOVEL, NEW WAVE, NEW POLITICS: FICTION AND THE REPRESENTATION OF HISTORY IN POSTWAR FRANCE (1998). Her article gave me a new thought on LAST YEAR AT MARIENBAD. She wrote about the rape which is in the story of the film, but is not shown directly in the film.

This is a quote from the book:

“Missing links, ironic reversals, and displacements to an “elsewhere” are the rhetorical strategies that keep the rape in MARIENBAD from being immediately apparent. For X they serve the functions of an alibi in its etymological sense: he desperately and repeatedly turns the discussion to a “formerly” and an “elsewhere”—last year, perhaps in Frederiksbad or Baden-Salsa. He also emplots the description of what happened (or is happening) in the mode of a love story. To the extent that his voice is the film’s (as in his opening question, “Are you coming?”, and his injunctions to “Follow me, please”, ostensibly addressed to A but encompassing the spectators), the fact that many stories are possible works to his advantage. But the film also works against him: his love story is full of holes, through which peek fragments of another tale that is its mirror opposite. In this light, MARIENBAD is the scene of a conflict or tug of war between its protagonist, who wants to turn the viewer’s attention to another time, place, and story, and the film medium, which shows the here and now. Rape in MARIENBAD is neither remembered nor forgotten. Rather, it is shown. Although it is not described, it is nevertheless inscribed. But as in a screen memory, it is rendered incomprehensible because it is fragmented and scattered about the film in inconsequential details, leaving a hole in the center.”


This is my reply to Jogesh in my English-only blog:

I regret I haven’t seen FINAL SOLUTION (2003). It was once shown here in the Bangkok International Film Festival a few years ago, but I decided not to go to see it because the film was shown here in the 2-hour version, but I wanted to see the 218-minute version. So I thought I had better wait for the full version. But that opportunity never comes. I should have decided to go to see the 2-hour version at that time.

AFTERSHOCKS is a real surprising film for me. I decided to go to see it because I had no choice at that time. It was the only film shown at that time slot in the Bangkok Film Festival in 2002. I was not interested in documentary, especially political documentary. But I decided to go to see it because I didn’t want to waste my time waiting for the next film. I really made the right choice at that time. After I had seen this film, I cried for about half an hour. I also like the way this film uses the song THE FINAL COUNTDOWN. I used to hate this song very much, because this song was too popular in Bangkok. But I like this song much more after I saw AFTERSHOCKS. Somehow this film can turn a boring song into a meaningful song.

Unfortunately, what had happened in AFTERSHOCKS also happened in Thailand later. After the tsunami in the south of Thailand, many Thai poor villagers in the affected areas were swindled or exploited by some rich evil people. These rich people want to possess the land of the poor, so when the rich saw that the villages of the poor had been destroyed by the tsunami, the rich tried to find a way to cheat the poor so that the rich could possess the land. I wished at that time that AFTERSHOCKS be shown widely in Thailand or be shown in a Thai TV. I think this film has the ability to educate many people in Thailand, including the poor, the government officials or some NGOs to try to find a way to prevent this kind of thing from happening again.

AFTERSHOCKS also corresponds to my viewpoint that natural disaster is hardly as fearful as man-made disaster.

Saturday, February 23, 2008



My twelfth poll is inspired by my most favorite film of January 2008—CORN IN PARLIAMENT: LE GENIE HELVETIQUE (2003, Jean-Stephane Bron, Switzerland). I saw this film at Alliance Francaise in Bangkok. I had never heard the name of this film or this director before, but I ended up liking this film very much. It’s hard to tell exactly why this film makes me feel so great. Everything in this film looks very ordinary. The director just interviewed some Swiss politicians while they were drafting a bill on GMO. We see some politicians offering their different opinions to the camera. We see who supports GMO, who is against GMO, and who is undecided on this topic. We follow the bill from the drafting stage until it goes to the parliament to be voted. There seems to be nothing special at all in this film. But why did I feel so good watching this film? I don’t know. Maybe the director creates the right amount of distance between the interviewer, the interviewees, and the audience. Maybe that female politician is very charismatic. Maybe the director just makes everything right in this film, including creating a little tension or a little suspense, but not manipulating the emotions of the audience too much.

After seeing and falling in love with CORN IN PARLIAMENT: LE GENIE HELVETIQUE, I decided to make a list of my favorite political documentaries. The countries listed here are the countries of the “subject” or “topic” of the film, not the nationality of the director nor the funding source of the film.


1.AFTERSHOCKS (2001, Rakesh Sharma, India)

2.BALSEROS (2002, Carlos Bosch + Josep Maria Domenech, Cuba)

3.BEFORE THE FLOOD (2005, Li Yifan + Yan Yu, China)

4.CEASE! FIRE! (2003, Saw Eh Doh Wah + Scott O’Brien, Myanmar)

5.CHECHEN LULLABY (2001, Nino Kirtadze, Chechnya)

6.CORN IN PARLIAMENT: LE GENIE HELVETIQUE (2003, Jean-Stephane Bron, Switzerland)

7.THE DAY I WILL NEVER FORGET (2002, Kim Longinotto, Kenya)

8.DIAL H-I-S-T-O-R-Y (1998, Johan Grimonprez)

9.FORD TRANSIT (2002, Hany Abu-Assad, Palestine)

10.THE HEART OF WHITENESS (2006, Rehad Desai, South Africa)

11.INCIDENT AT OGLALA (1992, Michael Apted, USA)

12.THE LAST BOLSHEVIK (1993, Chris Marker, Russia)

13.MINAMATA: THE VICTIMS AND THEIR WORLD (1972, Noriaki Tsuchimoto, Japan)

14.NIGHT AND FOG (1955, Alain Resnais, France)

15.PUNITIVE DAMAGE: A MOTHER’S TRIAL (1999, Annie Goldson, East Timor)

16.SEAPORT (2006, Attapon Pamakho + Benya Poowarachnan, Thailand)

17.11’09”01 – SEPTEMBER 11: SEGMENT “UNITED KINGDOM” (2002, Ken Loach, Chile)

18.THE TENTH DISTRICT COURT: MOMENTS OF TRIALS (2004, Raymond Depardon, France)

19.VIDEOGRAM OF A REVOLUTION (1992, Harun Farocki + Andrei Ujica, Romania)

20.VILLAGE PEOPLE RADIO SHOW (2007, Amir Muhammad, Malaysia)

--You can cast multiple votes.

--I try to make this list to include many countries, so I have to drop some great documentaries about Palestine from my list. Palestine may be the country which has the most number of excellent political documentaries.

--There are two films from France in my list (NIGHT AND FOG and THE TENTH DISTRICT COURT), because these two films cover very different periods of time. I decided to include NIGHT AND FOG here, because though the subject of the film is very old, something in it reminds me of Thailand nowadays. If I remember it rightly, there is a scene in NIGHT AND FOG in which many Nazi high-ranking officers said that they were not guilty of the Holocaust. That scene reminds me of some famous Thai people who have been saying all through the past 30 years that they are not guilty nor involved with the Bangkok Massacre in October 1976.

Friday, February 22, 2008


My eleventh poll ended long time ago. I’m sorry for not creating a new poll as fast as I can. I have been busy lately and there were many more things I wanted to write before I start a new poll. I guess now it’s time I start a new one.

Thank you very much for everyone who participated in my poll. This is the result of my eleventh poll. There are six votes in it, including my vote for FEAR OF HEIGHTS and TO CRY UNTIL EXHAUSTION:


1.THE THIRD PART OF THE NIGHT (1971, Andrzej Zulawski, Poland)
It got 2 votes or 33 %.

2.ALICE (2005, Marco Martins, Portugal)
+L’ENFER (1994, Claude Chabrol, France)
+FEAR OF HEIGHTS (1994, Houchang Allahyari, Austria)
+IMPERATIVE (1982, Krzysztof Zanussi, Poland)
+I ONLY WANT YOU TO LOVE ME (1976, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, West Germany)
+SHOCK CORRIDOR (1963, Samuel Fuller, USA)
+SPIDER (2002, David Cronenberg, Canada/UK)
+TO CRY UNTIL EXHAUSTION (1972, Jochen Gerz, West Germany)
+WOYZECK (1979, Werner Herzog, West Germany)

Each of them got 1 vote or 16 % .

12.BYE BYE BLACKBIRD (2005, Robinson Savary, Luxembourg)
+DARK HORSE (2005, Dagur Kari, Denmark)
+DREAMS (2005, Mohamed Al Daradji, Iraq)
+THE HEART (1955, Kon Ichikawa, Japan)
+THE MACHINIST (2004, Brad Anderson, Spain)
+MOTHERLAND HOTEL (1987, Omer Kavur, Turkey)
+MY STEP BROTHER FRANKENSTEIN (2004, Valeri Todorovsky, Russia)
+SOOTH: HIS PURE STORY (2003, Patana Chirawong, Thailand)
+STATIC (1985, Mark Romanek, USA)

--The magazine FILM COMMENT, Jan-Feb 2008 has a short review on THE THIRD PART OF THE NIGHT, written by Alex Cox.

--I’m sorry to hear about the death of Kon Ichikawa (1915-2008). I like THE HEART (1955, Kon Ichikawa, A+) very much. I just saw it in January this year. It actually has two men on the verge of a nervous breakdown. I’m fascinated by the character of Kaji (Tatsuya Mihashi). He is a man who is too serious to enjoy life, too serious to live in this world. He is able to live very happily, but he just chooses not to do it. He is a man who sometimes acts or does against reasons or society. This character seems like a real complex human being. He seems like a real very interesting man.

After I saw THE HEART, my friends made some interesting comments on the film. They said that the film is very homoerotic, especially the relationship between Nobuchi and Kaji, and between Nobuchi and Hioki. They think that in fact Nobuchi may love Kaji, but maybe the Japanese society at that time didn’t allow this kind of love to blossom easily. When Nobuchi finds out that Kaji loves the girl (Michiyo Aratama), Nobuchi decides to propose for the girl, not because he loves the girl, but because he loves Kaji and doesn’t want Kaji to get married.

I don’t know if my friends’ guess is true or not. I love this film very much, anyway.

WOMEN IN PRISON (1988, David Lam, A+)

This is my comment in Screenout Webboard:

ตอบคุณ Black Forest

ขอบคุณมากๆค่ะสำหรับรูปของคุณปารเมศ ท้วมสากล ถูกใจมากๆค่ะ โฮะๆๆๆๆๆ

เพื่อเป็นการตอบแทนพระคุณของคุณ black forest ดิฉันจึงขอมอบชายหนุ่มเกาหลี 6 คนนี้ให้คุณ black forest เป็นของกำนัลค่ะ แต่คุณ black forest เลือกได้เพียง 1 ใน 6 คนนี้เท่านั้นนะคะ ไม่รู้ว่าคุณ black forest จะเลือกใครเอ่ย

Six Korean actors for Black Forest

1.Bae Soo-bin

2.Cheon Jeong-myeong

3.Han Jeong-soo

4.Ha Seok-jin

5.Jang Ji-woo

6.Kim Jeong-wook

ถ้าหากให้ดิฉันเลือก 1 ใน 6 คนนี้ ดิฉันขอเลือก Kim Jeong-wook ค่ะ

วาทศิลป์บิณฑบาตของคุณ kicho

--เนื่องจากคุณ black forest และเพื่อนๆหลายๆคนไม่ได้ไปร่วมงาน Screenout meeting ในวันวาเลนไทน์ที่ผ่านมา ก็เลยไม่ทราบว่าทุกคนได้ทราบข่าวเรื่อง “วาทศิลป์บิณฑบาต” ของคุณ kicho แล้วหรือยัง ถ้ายังไม่ทราบ ดิฉันก็จะขอเล่าไว้ในที่นี้

บทสนทนาในการประชุม screenout เมื่อวันวาเลนไทน์

ผู้เข้าประชุมคนที่ 1: สภาพการเมืองไทยตอนนี้น่ากลัวเนอะ ไม่รู้ว่าจะมีการปฏิวัติอีกหรือเปล่า

ผู้เข้าประชุมคนที่ 2: แต่ถ้ามีปฏิวัติอีกครั้งนะ คราวนี้มันต้องนองเลือดแน่ๆเลย

คุณ kicho: ถึงจะมีปฏิวัตินองเลือดนะ ฉันก็ไม่สนหรอก ฉันสนแค่ว่าฉันจะต้องหาผัวให้ได้เท่านั้นแหละ


This is my comment in Twilight Virus’ blog:

ไม่เคยได้ยินชื่อหนังเรื่อง HOUSE OF WOMEN มาก่อนเลย แต่ถ้าหากพูดถึงหนังเกี่ยวกับนักโทษหญิงแล้ว หนังที่ชอบมากๆในแนวนี้ก็คือหนังฮ่องกงเรื่อง WOMEN IN PRISON (1988, David Lam) ที่มี Maria Cordero (INVISIBLE WAVES) รับบทเป็นพัศดีหญิงที่ชั่วมากๆ เพื่อนๆทุกคนที่ได้ดูหนังเรื่องนี้ทางโทรทัศน์ชอบหนังเรื่องนี้มาก และบอกว่าดูแล้วรู้สึกคันมือคันตีนอย่างที่สุด เพราะอยากจะกระโจนเข้าไปในหนังเพื่อช่วยนางเอกตบตีกับบรรดานางตัวร้ายในเรื่อง

Wednesday, February 20, 2008


I’m very sad to know about the death of Alain Robbe-Grillet (1922-2008).

Some new and old links:

English links:

Mubarak Ali’s blog:

GreenCine Daily:

Obituary written by John Sturrock in THE INDEPENDENT:

Jesse’s review on LA BELLE CAPTIVE:

A quote from John Sturrock:

Alain Robbe-Grillet interviewed by Tom Bishop:

Thai links:

Filmsick’s review on EDEN AND AFTER:

Some images from Robbe-Grillet’s films:

--I wrote about my feelings for LA BELLE CAPTIVE last year.

There is something I didn’t write at that time—comparing my feelings for LA BELLE CAPTIVE and PLOY (2007, Pen-ek Ratanaruang, A+), because I didn’t want to spoil the endings of these two films. But I guess many people have seen these two films already. So now I’m gonna write about my feelings for them.

I saw PLOY and LA BELLE CAPTIVE nearly at the same time, maybe within one month from each other. So I couldn’t help comparing these two very different films. In these two films, dreams, imagination and reality can’t be distinguished from one another. I think the structures of these two films have something in common—they seem to consist of dream within dream within dream, or in case of LA BELLE CAPTIVE—nightmare within nightmare within nightmare. However, though I love PLOY very much, I have to say that there is something I don’t like in PLOY, but that thing is not to be found in LA BELLE CAPTIVE.

After PLOY starts for about 30 minutes, there is something very bad happening in the film, then it is revealed that that evil thing is just a nightmare of a character. Then the story progresses. Some bad things happen. But the film seems to end with the reconciliation of the couple. And somehow I don’t like this kind of ending. I don’t like that the bad thing happening in the first part of the film is just a nightmare. Somehow I don’t like films which present some bad events and then tell the viewers that they are just nightmares and you will wake up to find a better reality.

But in case of LA BELLE CAPTIVE, I like the structure of the film very much. It seems as if a character has a nightmare, then he wakes up and finds himself still in a nightmare, then he wakes up and finds himself still in a nightmare, etc. But in the end he wakes up and finds that THE REALITY IS REALLY MUCH MUCH WORSE THAN ALL HIS PREVIOUS NIGHTMARES. I think this is the kind of a real great ending in my point of view.

--I read RECOLLECTIONS OF THE GOLDEN TRIANGLE (1978) by Alain Robbe-Grillet many years ago. The novel is translated by J. A. Underwood. I like it very much, though I understand nothing in it. There are many times in the novel when I don’t know exactly who is telling the story, what is happening, if it is really happening, if it is just a dream, if it is just a memory, who is dreaming, who is remembering, when the event takes place, where the event takes place, etc. I guess time and places are very fluid both in his films and his novels.

An interesting passage from RECOLLECTIONS OF THE GOLDEN TRIANGLE (from page 102-104):

“And suddenly she cries out in the unending silence, a long-drawn-out, manic cry that she could contain no longer. She says to herself: That’s it! Now I really am mad. I’ve finally succumbed to the darting demons of my adolescence, which have always been lurking in the still-water depths of my green eyes with their shimmering irises. On my identity cared I am Caroline de Saxe by birth, but my real name is Belzebeth, princess of the blood, more often called the bloody princess. I am walking now down the interminable corridor lined with tortures and murders. Even as a child, right at the back of the attic, where the beams came down too low…No, there’s no time for that now! This long black car with its window obscured by thick curtains, its motor ticking over, biding its time, on the grassy road that hugs the dune behind the row of bathing-huts, this I recognize: it’s the ambulance from the mental hospital where in a few minutes I shall be back with the sinister Dr. Morgan and his textual experiments, having once again passed through the black door that has neither number nor key and is surmounted by a vertical eye within a triangle of gold fillets, carved point downwards.

For how long have I today (when?) been shut up on my own in this cubical cell—already inventoried in detail several times—where, in the absence of any opening apart from the armour-plated door leading to the special interrogations and so-called clinical treatments along a narrow corridor that repeatedly bends at right angles in one direction or the other without any regularity, so that one can never manage to keep count of the multiple, inexplicable, unavailing detours…Where had I got to?...”Mistake! Penalty!” announces the cruel voice of the loudspeaker. Then, after a silence, the invisible corrector adds in a more neutral tone: “Go back to: where comma in the absence of any opening…”

…where, in the absence of any opening, it remains impossible to distinguish day from night. A uniform, wan light of which I have not yet managed to detect the source appears to diffuse from all directions simultaneously, reflected by the white walls, the white ceiling, and also by the floor, itself white like everything else with the sole exception of the armour-plated door, painted a very dark grey, beyond which begins the passage that gives access after many right-angled turns, to the series of…”

John Sturrock wrote a great article on Robbe-Grillet in the book THE FRENCH NEW NOVEL. Here is a quote from the book:

“Whenever Robbe-Grillet introduces roads, corridors, staircases and so on, he always does so in this fragmented and deliberately bewildering way. The progress of the narrator who tries to follow them and link them together into a coherent townscape or piece of architecture represents the will to find comfort in a definitive order of things. But the motion which Robbe-Grillet permits is only brief and fragmentary, each section of street, corridor, or the like, being simply the evidence of the mind’s frustration.”

Monday, February 18, 2008

IMPERATRIX CORNICULA (2007, Jerome Bertrand, A+++++)

It was such an intense weekend. I enjoyed some great films I saw very much—BIRTH OF THE SEANEMA, A SHORT FILM ABOUT THE INDIO NACIONAL (2006, Raya Martin, A+), but the most surprising thing for me is the dvd that I saw—L’EROTISME. It is a compilation of short films made by the directors I never heard of. I was stunned by the films in this dvd. Most of them are erotic/controversial/experimental. I like them very much. I think they are very creative. Some of them seem to be made on tiny budgets, but can create powerful feelings. Most of the soundtracks in this dvd are among the best ones I ever heard.

Though the films in this dvd are controversial, I think I don’t feel guilty enjoying most of them. I think I often feel a little bit guilty when I watch films which involve the real killing of animals. I can’t help thinking those animals don’t deserve to be killed. But for most of the films in this dvd, I don’t feel guilty enjoying them because I know they are fictional. I think one is entitled to enjoy some wild imaginations as long as one doesn’t hurt other animals or people in the real world.

I think the dvd L’EROTISME is strongly recommended for those who love some controversial films such as BAISE-MOI, A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, SALO OR 120 DAYS OF SODOM, AN ARIA ON GAZE or LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT.

I wonder what Kenneth Anger and John Waters would think about some films in this dvd.

You can buy this DVD from this website:

This dvd includes the following films:

1.IMPERATRIX CORNICULA (2007, Jerome Bertrand, Canada, A+)
Maybe one of the most effective horror films ever made.

2.ASS (2001, Usama Alshaibi, USA, 9 min, A+)

3.EXTASE DE CHAIR BRISEE (2005, Pierre-Luc Vallencourt + Frederik Maheux, Canada, 16 min, A+)

4.BABY DOLL (2006, Serge de Cotret, Canada, 3 min, A+)

5.MALDOROR: A PACT WITH PROSTITUTION (2005, Micki Pellerano + Nate Archer, USA, 9 min, A+)

6.THE LONELIEST LITTLE BOY IN THE WORLD (2000, Mike Dereniewski, USA, 5 min, A+)

7.KI (2001, Karl Lemieux, Canada, 3 min, A+)

8.RITUALIS (2004, Pat Tremblay, Canada, 8 min, A+/A)

9.PARANOID (2005, Anne Hanavan, USA, 3 min, A+/A)

10.LA FIN DE NOTRE AMOUR (2003, Helene Cattet + Bruno Forzani, Belgium, 9 min, A)

11.D’YEUX (2002-2007, Monk Boucher, Canada, 13 min)
This is a compilation of still images of some interesting erotic artworks.

You can read the review of this dvd from:

You can watch the trailer of this dvd from:

Saturday, February 16, 2008

HOPE (2008, Siwadol Ratee, A+++++)

I went to see 2008: VERY SHORT NEW YEAR CINE-BRATION yesterday. This event shows 29 Thai short films. Each of them is about 3-minute long. I like this event very much, though there might not be a real great film in this event. I think most of the films in this event are not highly ambitious. So watching these films makes me feel like having a casual talk with many people, instead of feeling like listening to someone making a presentation or making a report about some serious topics in front of the class. The latter kind of feeling is the feeling I get when I watch some films in the Thai short film competition.

These are the list of films:
(Some films have no official English titles, so some English titles which appear here are the ones I translate from the Thai titles.)

(in alphabetical order)

2.GIRAFFE (Nawapol Thamrongrattanarit)
3.HOPE (Siwadol Ratee)
6.TARN (Wanweaw Hongwiwat + Weawwan Hongwiwat)
7.2008 (Soraya Nakasuwan)
8.UNIFIED FIELD (Jakrawan Nilthamrong)

(in alphabetical order)

9.ANOTHER EVENING OF THE THIRD (Wiwat Lertwiwatwongsa)
10.2008, LET’S COME OUT (Thanapol Chaowanich)
12.WE SHALL TRY TO GIVE THIS FILM A DIFFICULT TITLE AS 200ooPs! (Kriangkrai Wachirathammaporn)

(in alphabetical order)

13.AMEE AMIGO (Thitimon Mongkolsawasdi + Nichamon Mongkolsawasdi)
15.A LITTLE BLISS (Teepisit Mahaneeranont)
16.NEW YEAR AGAIN (Winai Kitcharoen)
17.ROY TAI PRAE (Uruphong Raksasad)
19.2008 (Tulapop Saenjaroen)
20.2008…YEAR OF PROSPERITY OR BANKRUPTCY (Prempapat Palitpolkarnpim)
21.UP AND DOWN 2551 (Sivaroj Kongsakul)

(in alphabetical order)

23.GOODBYE, 2008 (Yanin Pongsuwan)
24.ONE MORE NIGHT STAND (Chakorn Chaipreecha)
25.OY IS 3 MINUTE LATE (Teepanun Petchsri)
26.REVERSE (Noppasorn Limchaiyawat)
27.STILL (Nuttorn Kangwanklai)


--This is my comment in Wise Kwai’s blog:

Thank you very much for writing about this topic. I'm afraid the future of Thailand is not very bright at the moment. I don't want to imagine what will happen next. :-(

I just saw some Thai short films today, and there are two short films which talk about Samak among other topics. These two films are ROY TAI PRAE (2008, Uruphong Raksasad) and SPORT NEWS: THE BULLSHIT ARE GOING, THE WANDERING GHOSTS ARE COMING (2008, Manussak Dokmai). These two films were made near the end of 2007 after people had known that Samak was going to be the next prime minister. I’m sure there will be more Thai short films made in the near future about this government.


--This is my comment in Wise Kwai’s blog:

Yes, I think many good films got bad trailers. Filmsick (my Thai friend) said that he likes IN COUNTRY AND MELODY (2007, Note Chern-yim) a lot. But I didn’t choose to go to see this film because of that scatological trailer. If the trailer of this film did not have that scatological scene, I might have gone to see it already.


--This is my reply to Aaron in my English-only blog:

I like the opening scene a lot. I have heard that the opening scene of DESPERATELY SEEKING SUSAN (1985, Susan Seidelman) is directly inspired by the opening scene of CELINE AND JULIE GO BOATING, but I haven’t seen DESPERATELY SEEKING SUSAN yet.

I just saw PARIS BELONGS TO US (1960, Jacques Rivette) from a dvd a few months ago, and this dvd includes Jonathan Romney’s comment on the film, which I think is very useful. At first I thought PARIS BELONGS TO US is only about a girl getting involved with a conspiracy, but Romney’s comment makes me think that maybe the film is actually about “how to create a story”. I think Rivette’s films can be appreciated in many levels. I can’t analyze any films deeply, but I still love Rivette’s films a lot because his films represent a limitless filmic world or something like that to me. But for people who can analyze films deeply, they also find Rivette’s films very interesting, too.

Yeah, I would love to translate Filmsick’s blog from time to time. His latest reviews include reviews on KILLER OF SHEEP, VAGABOND, MOTHER INDIA, THE THIRD GENERATION, A MAN ESCAPED, MY LIFE TO LIVE, THE THIRD PART OF THE NIGHT, DARWIN’S NIGHTMARE, THE IMAGE (Radley Metzger), and GLORIA (1980, John Cassavetes). He is really prolific.

Wednesday, February 13, 2008


--Senses of Cinema has included my list in its world poll. I feel very glad. Thank very much to the editor of Senses of Cinema. You can now read my list here:

--Aaron, who is a huge fan of Jacques Rivette, asked me to translate Filmsick’s review on CELINE AND JULIE GO BOATING from Thai to English. So here it is. If you find any mistakes in my poor English, please tell me about it so that I can correct it.

You can read Filmsick’s original writing in Thai here:

The following is my translation of Filmsick’s review:

It happens in a summer afternoon. Julie, a librarian with big glasses and curly red hair, is sitting in a garden. She is reading a big book about magic and using the heels of her shoes to draw a magical sign on the sand. Suddenly Celine, a small black-haired woman with strange haircut, loose-fitting shirt and gigantic bag, is walking past Julie. Celine's eye-glasses are dropping out of her bag.

Julie sees it and tries to call Celine. Julie shouts and runs after Celine, but Celine never looks back. She even drops many more things along the way. Julie tries to pick them up. At first Julie tries to help Celine, but later it seems as if they are playing a game by chasing each other around the town in the afternoon sunlight. Julie wears the eye-glasses and scarf of Celine, and follows Celine into a small shop in which Celine performs some magical tricks. Their chase ends at a coffee shop.

After that, they move into the same room. Each of them takes turn living the other one's life. They discover an extremely strange haunted house where each of them alternately enters to try to find the truth about the murder of a little girl. Everything happens in a cheerful mood.

"It is as if the air is full of magic," says someone who watches CELINE AND JULIE GO BOATING. This is a film made in 1974 by Jacques Rivette, one of the French New Wave filmmakers who collectively wrote a new page for the history of cinema. They began by working as critics for the magazine Cahiers du Cinema and formed a group of friends, including Francois Truffaut who made some tender films (JULES AND JIM, THE 400 BLOWS), Jean-Luc Godard who tirelessly experiments with films (BREATHLESS, ALPHAVILLE), Claude Chabrol who is the master of films about marital problems and skeletons in the closet (LE BOUCHER, LES BICHES), and Eric Rohmer who is the master of films about the witty and sensitive relationships between men and women (A WINTER'S TALE, PAULINE AT THE BEACH). Rivette may be the least well-known among them, but if we compare them by their skills and techniques, Rivette may be one step ahead of his friends.

In CELINE AND JULIE GO BOATING, which can be considered Rivette's most successful film, Rivette takes us into a strange magical world. It is a world where everything is possible, a world where a haunted house is another side of an amusement park, a world where alphabets and magic stay the closest to each other, a world where dreams and reality merge into each other, a world where an image tastes as sweet as candy, a world which we can simply call it a movie.

This is a film which speaks about films. It isn't only a film which refers to other films, not only a film which contains another film, but it is also a film which speaks about films and filmgoers with love and mockery.


In the first twenty minutes of the film, we watch Celine and Julie play with each other. If we regard it as the chase between a librarian and an illusionist, it can be considered as the phenomenon of the invention of cinema, because cinema is the combination between a story (a librarian) and an illusion of moving images (an illusionist). Sometimes Celine and Julie switch into each other's role. Sometimes Celine, the magician, goes to a library and draws pictures in books. When Celine is among her friends, she tries to tell a story (this is the only scene in the film which is improvised by the actors), but her story about an American friend is ridiculously full of plot holes. Sometimes Julie, the librarian, goes to perform some magic tricks instead of Celine during the time Celine visits the haunted house. But instead of giving a magic performance, Julie tells such a weird story on the stage that the shop owner cannot stand her any more. Each of the women has her own roles. When each of them switch into the other's role, the result would look ridiculous (though lovely). And when each of them alternately visits the haunted house, their memories are full of fragments. Everything can be clearly understood only when both of them enter the haunted house at the same time.

In one scene we see both of them transform into skating ninjas to steal a book from a library, because they want to find a formula to make magical drinking water! This is the meeting between books and magic, stories and illusive images, which lead to a new thing—the magical drinking water which can take both of them into the world of the haunted house, or the world of films.

In one scene when Celine is in the haunted house, Julie climbs the stair on the other side, and that stair becomes an important thing in the final part of the film. It is as if the support that stories and images give to each other is the only thing that can make films go farther than before.

But in another way, Celine and Julie may be the same person since the beginning. In the first scene, Julie is reading a magic book, and suddenly Celine, who is a magician, appears in front of her. In another scene, when Julie visits the haunted house, Celine disguises as Julie to go on a date with Julie's fiance and he seems to notice no difference between them. (Celine even makes him go naked.) Sometimes Julie recites some magic words when she stays home, as if she becomes Celine. Each of them alternately plays the same part of the nurse in the haunted house.


After visiting the haunted house, both Celine and Julie seem to be exhausted, and their mouths always contain some sweet candy. This seems like an experience of watching a movie in the afternoon. Some good movies draw our life energy until we become exhausted. We walk out of a theatre, with some tastes linger in our memories so that we can cherish them for a long time. After Celine and Julie come home, they sit beside each other and face the camera, and they swallow the candy, and then they are lost inside the haunted house again.

In this aspect, Celine and Julie are the audience. The audience has seen a film which has sucked out their life energy. And when they come home, they try to remember the film. When Celine and Julie swallow the candy, images start to appear. We see images inside the haunted house juxtaposing with images of Celine and Julie laughing, feeling sleepy, becoming excited, and screaming. This is not different from watching images of a film shown on a screen juxtaposing with images of the audience in the theatre. Before this scene, Celine and Julie are the raw materials used in making a movie, but in this scene, Celine and Julie become the audience who watch a whodunit thriller.


This is the most precise definition of film. Film is a haunted house. The experience of watching a film is like going into a haunted house. We walk into a dark room. We are haunted by unknown lights and shadows, which forcefully stir our feelings and emotions—our suffering, our happiness, our love, our hatred, our bravery, and more importantly—our fear.

The experience inside the haunted house takes both of them back into the 1940's, into a big mansion in which a widow resides. He has a sick daughter, a nurse to take care of her (they alternately play the role of the nurse.), and there are two other women in the house. Images in their memories come in fragments. First the images appear very briefly, very incomprehensible. Then we begin to see a scene or an event. Every time a scene appears before our eyes, Celine and Julie (and all of us) will start guessing the outcome of an event in different ways, until our guesses are betrayed by the next images.

At this time Celine and Julie become characters in a film. They become a nurse who does more than the role of a supporting character. In the final part when both of them enter into the haunted house at the same time, they even take a nurse's uniform with them so that they can both take turn performing a nurse without interruptions.

Some critics say that the events inside the haunted house take us back to the period of Henry James' novels with a story about melodramatic love inside a luxurious mansion. Even the names Celine and Julie are familiar names used for the characters of Henry James.

At the moment when both of them have to start performing a nurse, we always hear a knocking sound. Some critics say that the knocking sound is the sound used to call a performer to appear on the stage. At this moment Celine and Julie have fully become actresses.

But they do more than that. They start changing many things in the haunted house, but the story still moves forward. At this point Rivette makes us understand how ridiculous and static a story can be. (We can see in the later part that the people in the house, except Celine and Julie, have very pale faces and move like zombies.) Celine and Julie's attempts to change the story cannot really change the fixed plot of the story. Even when Celine and Julie play tango music, the characters still dance to waltz music. Celine and Julie try further by changing the clothes of these characters and dancing by themselves. Finally Celine and Julie transform the story by an aggressive means—kidnapping a character!

Finally Celine and Julie become filmmakers, and they make unusual films. Starting by representing the audience, they later become the representation of Jacques Rivette, a filmmaker who chooses not to let the story dominate the lives of people in his films. A story is only an element under the control of the filmmaker, who can twist it in any which way he desires. When a story moves forward, it doesn't mean that the significant thing is only the progress of the story, because there are other stories outside the main story. Sometimes some stories merge into each other. Sometimes some stories diverge from each other.

In one scene Julie discovers her own box which contains an old photo of that haunted house. She used to live in that neighborhood when she was a child. When she goes there, she meets her nanny. If we consider the fact that the person who takes Julie back to that house is Celine, we may think that all of this is just a daydream of Miss Julie—an intense dream full of magic, madness, and energy. We should also notice that Celine and Julie wear blue and red clothes in the early part of the film, but they stop wearing these colors when the characters in the haunted house wear these colors. Celine and Julie's colors are transferred to these characters.


In the final scene of this film, Celine and Julie and her character go boating along a quiet river in the afternoon sunlight. They meet the boat of the characters in the haunted house. Maybe all of this is an experience of going boating in a quiet afternoon. We feel the fresh air, but we also have a deep fear, because we are journeying into an unknown area, creating stories out of the things we meet, and destroying stories within the same river. The film repeats itself but changes the origin as if stories can be told and re-told forever. And the cat (which we see at the beginning and at the end of the film) watches us and daydreams about us.

The crossing between fiction and reality has blurred the line between them and destroyed the audience's senses until we cannot understand it within one dimension. (It is very interesting that during this period there are some other films which twist and play with the dimensions of storytelling, such as INDIA SONG (1975, Marguerite Duras) and EDEN AND AFTER (1970, Alain Robbe-Grillet)) This helps turning film watching into an exciting experience, like an experience of going into a haunted house and leaving it with a souvenir in the form of a sweet candy in a late afternoon sunlight.

Tuesday, February 12, 2008


This is the news about Samak’s interview from MATICHON’s website:

“ส่วนหนึ่งของบทสัมภาษณ์ที่นายแดน ริเวอร์ส ผู้สื่อข่าวของซีเอ็นเอ็นถามนายสมัคร สุนทรเวช นายกรัฐมนตรี ออกอากาศในรายการทอล์ก เอเชีย ทางสถานีโทรทัศน์ซีเอ็นเอ็น เมื่อวันที่ 9 กุมภาพันธ์ เกี่ยวกับเหตุการณ์นองเลือดเมื่อวันที่ 6 ตุลาคม 2519 ซึ่งขณะนั้นนายสมัครเป็นรัฐมนตรีช่วยว่าการกระทรวงมหาดไทย

@ มีบางคนวิพากษ์วิจารณ์อย่างรุนแรงถึงบทบาทของคุณในอดีต บางคนถึงกลับกล่าวหาว่ามือของคุณเปื้อนเลือด คุณจะพูดอย่างไรเกี่ยวกับเรื่องนี้?

-ผมปฏิเสธทั้งหมด ผมไม่มีอะไรเกี่ยวข้องกับเรื่องนั้นเลย ผมเป็นเพียงคนนอกในตอนนั้น

@ คุณต้องการที่จะใช้โอกาสตรงนี้ในการประณามเหตุการณ์ที่เกิดขึ้นเมื่อปี 2519 รึเปล่า?

-ที่จริงแล้วมันเป็นการเคลื่อนไหวของนักศึกษาบางส่วน พวกเขาไม่ชอบรัฐบาล

@ แต่มีคนหลายสิบคน หรือบางทีอาจจะหลายร้อยคนเสียชีวิตจากเหตุการณ์ดังกล่าว

-ไม่ มีผู้เสียชีวิตเพียงแค่คนเดียว มีนักศึกษาราว 3,000 คน ในมหาวิทยาลัยธรรมศาสตร์ตอนนั้น

@ ตัวเลขผู้เสียชีวิตอย่างเป็นทางการอยู่ที่ 46 ราย และหลายคนบอกว่าจริงๆ แล้วมันสูงกว่านั้นมาก

-ไม่ สำหรับผม ไม่มีใครเสียชีวิตยกเว้นชายผู้โชคร้ายคนหนึ่งที่ถูกทำร้ายและถูกเผาที่สนามหลวง มีผู้เสียชีวิตเพียงคนเดียวในวันนั้น

@ หมายความว่าไม่มีการสังหารหมู่เกิดขึ้นหรือ?

-ไม่ ไม่มีอย่างแน่นอนแต่คุณลองนึกภาพสิ มีนักศึกษาทั้งชายหญิงมารวมตัวกัน 3,000 คน พวกเขาเลยบอกว่ามีคนตาย 3,000 คน

@ ผู้คนบอกว่าความเป็นพวกขวาจัดของคุณทำให้สถานการณ์ลุกเป็นไฟ

-เป็นฝ่ายขวาแล้วผิดตรงไหน ฝ่ายขวาจงรักภักดีกับในหลวง ฝ่ายซ้ายเป็นคอมมิวนิสต์

@ คุณคิดว่าเป็นเรื่องที่ให้อภัยได้หรือในการฆ่าผู้บริสุทธิ์เพื่อเป็นการปกป้องประเทศไม่ให้กลายเป็นคอมมิวนิสต์?

-ใครฆ่านักศึกษาล่ะ ถ้าการต่อสู้เกิดขึ้นระหว่างกองทัพ กองทัพก็มีหน้าที่ต้องป้องกันประเทศ ใครบางคนต้องการที่จะนำระบอบคอมมิวนิสต์เข้ามาในเมืองไทย มันขึ้นอยู่กับกองทัพ จำนวนผู้เสียชีวิตนั้น.... คุณต้องไปตรวจสอบดูว่าเกิดอะไรขึ้น

ด้านนายอภิชาติ ศักดิเศรษฐ์ ส.ส.นครศรีธรรมราช พรรคประชาธิปัตย์ กล่าวว่า การที่นายสมัคร สุนทรเวช ให้สัมภาษณ์สำนักข่าวต่างประเทศ ระบุว่ามีผู้เสียชีวิตเพียง 1 คนเท่านั้น เป็นการบิดเบือนข้อเท็จจริงอย่างร้ายแรง เพราะเหตุการณ์สังหารหมู่กลางเมืองหลวงเมื่อ 30 กว่าปีก่อน มีผู้เสียชีวิตที่ทางราชการยอมรับถึง 46 คน สูญหายไร้ร่องรอยอีกนับร้อย เป็นประวัติศาสตร์ที่คนทั่วโลกรับรู้ความจริงอย่างหมดเปลือกแล้วว่าเหตุการณ์เกิดขึ้นอย่างไร ใครเกี่ยวข้อง ใครบงการ และมีผลสะเทือนที่เกิดขึ้นกับสังคมไทยรุนแรงอย่างที่ไม่เคยเป็นมาก่อน จึงอยากเรียกร้องให้ผู้เกี่ยวข้องในเหตุการณ์ 6 ตุลาคม ออกมายืนยันความจริงเรื่องนี้

หน้า 14”


There are three Thai short films that I like very much. They are DON’T FORGET ME (2003, Manutsak Dokmai, A+), RE-PRESENTATION (2007, Chai Chaiyachit, Chisanucha Kongwailap, A+) and “RED” AT LAST (2006, Suchart Sawasdsri, A+). DON’T FORGET ME and “RED” AT LAST deal directly with the Bangkok Massacre in October 1976, while RE-PRESENTATION deals with many topics, including the Bangkok Massacre in October 1976.

After I read some news about Thai current PM’s interview with CNN, I think I love these three Thai short films even much more than before.

This is the news from Bangkok Post’s website:

“Oct 6 people angry at PM's CNN interview


Former student activists who experienced first-hand the brutal crackdown on pro-democracy demonstrators on Oct 6, 1976, have been outraged by Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej's interview with CNN.

During the interview on Saturday, Mr Samak said that on Oct 6, 1976, only one person was killed in the violent crackdown on protesting students and other demonstrators by the authoritarian government of the time.

Apichart Sakdiseth, a Democrat MP for Nakhon Si Thammarat, said Mr Samak had totally distorted the facts about the bloody Oct 6 crackdown.

''In the massacre that took place in the heart of the capital 30 years ago, the official number of people killed was 46 and hundreds of others went missing.

''They're historical facts that people around the world have learned,'' said Mr Apichart.

It was internationally known what led to the Oct 6 bloodshed, who were involved, who the masterminds were and its unprecedented and significant repercussions upon Thai society, he said.

Mr Apichart urged all people involved in the events of Oct 6, including former student activists, academics and relatives of those killed, to come out to defend the facts.

Former student activist Suthachai Yimprasert, now a history lecturer at Chulalongkorn University, said he assumed Mr Samak intentionally gave the wrong information to escape the accusation that he was also responsible for the 1976 massacre of student activists and other protesters.

''I don't want to debate the facts with him. He should know himself that this isn't the first time he has lied,'' said Mr Suthachai.

The history lecturer said there were two major sets of events on Oct 6, 1976.

First, soldiers and police surrounded Thammasat University and killed 46 students, wounded hundreds
others and arrested more than 3,000 people.

Then, in the evening, there was a coup d'etat. All newspaper offices were closed for three days. They resumed publication on Oct 9, and none reported the massacre. Consequently, the casualty figures reported later on were rather confusing.

However, Mr Suthachai said it was not good for a forum to debate the facts about the Oct 6 massacre.

He did not want Mr Samak's incorrect remarks to be the starting point of political conflict.

At least Mr Samak was an elected prime minister, said Mr Suthachai. Academia and the public should give him a chance to run the country as a democracy, he added.

''I still want him to run the country smoothly. But if he is found to be corrupt, then we should come out against him,'' said Mr Surachai.

Jaran Ditapichai, a core member of the pro-Thaksin United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship of Thailand and former Thammasat student who was arrested on Oct 6, 1976, insisted there was clear evidence that more than one person was killed on that day.The prime minister had given incorrect information, he said. ”


I haven’t seen SHOAH (1985, Claude Lanzmann), though the DVD of SHOAH is available in Bangkok. After I read the news about Samak, it reminds me of some people who deny that Holocaust ever happened. I think SHOAH can confirm the truth, can confirm what really happened. I wish there is a Thai director who follows Claude Lanzmann’s example. Maybe we can record the testimony of the survivors of the Bangkok Massacre in October 1976 on video and post some of the clips on Youtube. I know that there are many TV documentaries about this topic, especially the TV documentaries made in 1996 (20 years after the event), 2001 (25 years), and 2006 (30 years). Maybe we can compile these TV documentaries together. Maybe we can made a film in the same style as SHOAH about the Bangkok Massacre in 1976.

--Filmsick’s review in Thai on DON’T FORGET ME:

--Manutsak Dokmai’s filmography

--These are some photos about the Bangkok Massacre in 1976. I copy these photos from MERVEILLESXX’ blog:

--This is a photo from the photo series HORROR IN PINK (2001) by Manit Sriwanichpoom, which is inspired by the event.


This is my comment in Bioscope Webboard:

ชอบตัวละครโลล่ามากๆเลยล่ะ อยากให้ตัวละครตัวนี้มีบทบาทมากกว่านี้ เธอดูแรงดี

ชอบหนังเรื่องนี้ในระดับ A+ นะ แต่ไม่ได้ชอบมากสุดขีดถึงขั้นจะติดอันดับประจำปีหรืออะไรทำนองนี้ เราไม่ค่อยชอบอารมณ์ของภาพตอนน้ำทะลักอุโมงค์แล้วศพลอยสวยน่ะ (ทำให้นึกถึงฉากตอนน้ำท่วมห้องของ Julianne Moore ใน THE HOURS ที่มันอาจจะให้อารมณ์ทะลักเกินไปเหมือนกัน) และหนังมันเหมือนมีอารมณ์บางอย่างที่ไม่เข้าทางเราเท่าไหร่ แต่ merveillesxx เขียนดีนะ เราไม่ได้สังเกตประเด็นเรื่องเสียงพิมพ์ดีดที่ดังตลอดเรื่องว่ามันมีความหมายอะไรบ้าง ดีที่ merveillesxx สังเกตตรงจุดนี้

โดยส่วนตัวแล้ว ถ้าหากพูดถึงหนังเกี่ยวกับชีวิตคนยุคนั้น เราชอบ THE HEART OF ME (2002, Thaddeus O’Sullivan, A+) กับ BRIGHT YOUNG THINGS (2003, Stephen Fry, A+) มากกว่า บางทีอาจจะเป็นเพราะว่าตัวละครใน ATONEMENT เป็นตัวละครประเภทที่เรา identify ด้วยไม่ได้มากเท่าตัวละครใน THE HEART OF ME และ BRIGHT YOUNG THINGS แต่ก็อย่างที่ merveillesxx เขียนไว้นั่นแหละ บางทีการที่เรา identify กับ ATONEMENT ไม่ได้อาจจะเป็นเพราะหนังเรื่องนี้มันเกี่ยวกับ “การเขียน” หรือ “การแต่งเรื่อง” มากกว่าจะเป็นหนังที่เล่าเรื่องอย่างตรงไปตรงมาเหมือน THE HEART OF ME และ BRIGHT YOUNG THINGS


--Jesse Ataide posted a poetic review on INDIA SONG (1975, Marguerite Duras) by Alison Smith in his blog:

Alison Smith wrote two interesting books:

Sonthaya Subyen gave me this book.

I haven’t found this book in Thailand yet.

--As for books about films, the number one in my wish list right now is ALLEGORICAL IMAGES: TABLEAU, TIME AND GESTURE IN THE CINEMA OF WERNER SCHROETER. The book is written by Michelle Langford. If anyone knows where this book is available in Bangkok, please tell me.

I know about this book from Twilight Virus’ blog:

Monday, February 11, 2008


Coincidentally, three films I saw last weekend have interesting (disguised) pregnant women. I-BE AREA (2007, Ryan Trecartin) has a very crazy disguised pregnant character. WANDA (1970, Barbara Loden, A+) has the leading character disguised as a pregnant woman for the purpose of committing a crime, while the real pregnant character in SLEEPWALK (1986, Sara Driver, A+) is the leader of a crime gang. These (false) pregnant characters seem to carry an unusual but interesting images.

I saw WANDA and SLEEPWALK at Thammasat University Library. For the full programs of the films shown there, you can read it from the link below:

Mubarak Ali wrote about SLEEPWALK here:

I really agree with Mubarak that SLEEPWALK reminds me of Jacques Rivette’s films. Another film which reminds me of Rivette lately is TURTLES SWIM FASTER THAN EXPECTED (2005, Satoshi Miki, A+). This Japanese film has nothing resembling Rivette’s, but it reminds me of Rivette’s films because its story is about a young housewife whose daily life seems to enter a new dimension after she decided to work as a spy for another country (I think it implies North Korea here.) She doesn’t have to do any dangerous mission as a spy. She just has to carry on her daily life as usual, but now her small town which used to look very ordinary transforms into a town which is only ordinary on the surface, but full of secrets and conspiracies deep down. It reminds me of Rivette’s films because I think films like CELINE AND JULIE GO BOATING, GANG OF FOUR, UP DOWN FRAGILE, and LE PONT DU NORD also makes an ordinary-looking town, city or streets into something full of secrets or magic. While Rivette’s films put magic into daily life, TURTLES SWIM FASTER THAN EXPECTED transforms such an ordinary life into something very exciting.

Another thing I like very much in TURTLES SWIM FASTER THAN EXPECTED is the performance of Yu Aoi. I just saw her in RAINBOW SONG (2006, Naoto Kumazawa, A+), and it’s hard to believe it’s the same actress starring in both films.

--The upcoming weekend is very exciting. I hope to go to see THE VERY SHORT NEW YEAR CINE-BRATION PROGRAM at Chulalongkorn University on Friday.

And I hope to go to see BIRTH OF THE SEANEMA (2004, Sasithorn Ariyavicha, A+++++++++++++++) for the third time this Saturday and a film by Raya Martin on Sunday. As for BIRTH OF THE SEANEMA, you can read an interview with Sasithorn by Sonthaya Subyen in Thai here:

Sunday, February 10, 2008


This is my comment in Bioscope Webboard:

ดิฉันใช้วิธีนั่งรถไฟฟ้าแล้วไปลงที่สถานีสุรศักดิ์เลยน่ะค่ะ แล้วค่อยเดินย้อนกลับมาทางถนนปั้น คิดว่าถ้าหากเดินแบบนี้ ก็ไม่ไกลเท่าไหร่ ใช้เวลาเดินช้าๆแค่ประมาณ 10 นาทีเท่านั้น

ที่ CONFERENCE OF BIRDS GALLERY ตอนนี้มีฉายหนังสารคดีแนวทดลองของ HANNA SHELL ด้วยค่ะ เป็นหนังเกี่ยวกับสัตว์น้ำ ดูเพลินดี หนังสารคดีเกี่ยวกับสัตว์น้ำจะฉายที่ชั้น 3 ของแกลเลอรี่ ส่วนหนังเรื่อง I-BE AREA ฉายที่ชั้นสองของแกลเลอรี่

แต่ที่น่าสนใจมากๆก็คือว่า หลังจาก I-BE AREA ฉายวันสุดท้ายในวันที่ 14 ก.พ.แล้ว ในวันที่ 16 ก.พ.ถึงวันที่ 3 มี.ค. ทาง CONFERENCE OF BIRDS GALLERY ก็จะจัดฉายหนังการเมืองของ PAUL CHAN ซึ่งมีคำบรรยายถึงหนังของเขาไว้ดังนี้

“A firebrand activist, Chan’s didactic, politically aligned video works tackle issues sensitive to America, including the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, and a film shot illegally in Iraq just weeks before the outbreak of war.”

ในขณะที่คุณคนมองหนังอยากเข้ามาในกทม. ดิฉันก็อยากเดินทางออกไปที่ชายขอบของกทม.อย่างมากๆค่ะ เพราะขณะนี้ดิฉันอยากไปดูงาน RIPE PROJECT: THE VILLAGE AND HARVEST TIME ของ Sakarin Krue-on อย่างมากๆ งานนี้จัดแสดงที่ ARDEL GALLERY ซึ่งตั้งอยู่ที่หมู่บ้านเบลวิลล์ ถ.บรมราชชนนี กม.10.5 ไม่แน่ใจว่าแถวนั้นอยู่ใกล้บ้านของคุณคนมองหนังหรือเปล่า ดิฉันไม่มีรถยนต์ส่วนตัว ก็เลยไม่กล้าไป กลัวว่าขาไปอาจจะเรียกแท็กซี่ไปได้ แต่ขากลับไม่รู้ว่าแถวนั้นจะมีแท็กซี่ให้เรียกกลับเข้ามาในเมืองได้ง่ายๆหรือเปล่า

งาน RIPE PROJECT นี้เป็นงานศิลปะเกี่ยวกับการปลูกข้าว และเคยจัดแสดงที่ DOCUMENTA 12 ในเยอรมนีมาแล้ว อ่านรายละเอียดเกี่ยวกับงานนี้ได้ที่

งานนี้มีจัดแสดงที่ TANG CONTEMPORARY ART ที่สีลมแกลเลอเรีย ซึ่งตั้งอยู่ใกล้ๆถนนปั้นด้วย ดิฉันยังไม่ได้ไปดูตัวงานนี้ที่ TANG แต่ถ้าเข้าใจไม่ผิด งานที่จัดแสดงที่ ARDEL GALLERY จะเป็นการจัดแสดงนาข้าวจริงๆ ส่วนงานที่จัดแสดงที่ TANG จะเป็น “การถ่ายทอดสดภาพต้นข้าวขณะกำลังเติบโตที่อาร์เดล แกลเลอรี่”

รู้สึกว่าข้าวเป็นแรงบันดาลใจให้ศิลปินไทยหลายคนดีจริงๆ ถ้าจำไม่ผิด ก่อนหน้านี้คุณมนตรี เติมสมบัติก็เคยทำงานศิลปะเกี่ยวกับข้าวมาแล้ว ซึ่งรวมถึงวิดีโอเรื่อง RICE/LIFE EVER-PRESENCE (2006, A+) ที่เคยมาแสดงที่หอกลาง จุฬา ในขณะที่คุณฤกษ์ฤทธิ์ ตีระวนิชก็เคยนำเมล็ดข้าวมาจัดแสดงราวกับว่ามันเป็นอัญมณีอันทรงคุณค่ายิ่ง




ชอบคำว่า “สวยแบบงงๆ” มากค่ะ เป็นอะไรที่ฮามาก


เนื่องจาก SCREENOUT มีสี่ดรุณีแล้ว ก็เลยน่าจะมีสี่ดรุณเพื่อมาเป็นน้องชายให้สี่ดรุณีได้ดูแล และสี่ดรุณในที่นี้ก็อาจจะเป็นดารานำของหนังเรื่อง “ปิดเทอมใหญ่ หัวใจว้าวุ่น” ที่กำลังจะลงโรงฉายในเร็วๆนี้

สี่ดรุณในที่นี้ประกอบด้วย ชาลี ไตรรัตน์, ศิรชัช เจียรถาวร, รัชชุ สุระจรัส และฉันทวิชช์ ธนเสวี

เนื่องจากดิฉันเกลียดเด็ก เพราะฉะนั้นดิฉันขอรับหน้าที่ดูแลฉันทวิชช์ ธนเสวีแล้วกันนะคะ ไม่รู้ว่าจะมีใครรับดูแลดรุณอีกสามหน่อที่เหลือบ้าง

I-BE AREA (2007, Ryan Trecartin, A++++++++++)

In 2001 I was shocked by THE DEATH OF MARIA MALIBRAN (1972, Werner Schroeter)

In 2003 I was shocked by A VIRUS KNOWS NO MORALS (1985, Rosa von Praunheim)

In 2004 I was shocked by SEVEN DAYS, SEVEN NIGHTS (2003, Joel Cano)

In 2005 I was shocked by MADAME X: AN ABSOLUTE RULER (1978, Ulrike Ottinger)

In 2006 I was shocked by WHAT HAPPENED TO MAGDALENA JUNG? (1983, Christoph Schlingensief)

In 2007 I was shocked by LOOK OF LOVE (2006, Yoshiharu Ueoka)

In 2008 I am shocked by I-BE AREA (2007, Ryan Trecartin, 108 minutes)

In the first half of I-BE AREA, I think there is a classic moment happening every one minute. In the second half of I-BE AREA, I think there is a classic moment happening every five second.

As my listening comprehension is very bad, I understand only 1 % of what the characters in I-BE AREA are talking. But understanding what the characters are talking or doing, or understanding what is happening in this video seems to be of no importance to me. Just watching it, without understanding it, is enough to make me laugh and feel very excited. I am sure I-BE AREA will hold a spot in my top ten most favorite films of 2008.

I-BE AREA also reminds me of the music video DOIN’ THE DO (1990) by Betty Boo. It is as crazy as that music video.

This is a quote from Holland Cotter’s review on I-BE AREA in The New York Times:

“Mr. Trecartin, in his 20’s, grew up in Ohio and now lives in Philadelphia, and owes a lavish debt to Kenneth Anger, Jack Smith, John Waters and a rich tradition of queer film and theater, as well as to artists, queer and not, like George and Mike Kuchar, Peggy Ahwesh, Sadie Benning, Paul McCarthy, John Bock, Kalup Linzy, K8 Hardy, Sue de Beer and the collective Paper Rad.”

I-BE AREA is showing now at CONFERENCE OF BIRDS GALLERY in Bangkok. You can see the map to the gallery at the link below.

Contrary to the information in the website above, I-BE AREA is shown there until February 14. The gallery is open from 12.00-20.00 hrs.

You can watch some clips of I-BE AREA from the links below:

You can see some images of I-BE AREA from the link below: