Apichatpong Weerasethakul's 'Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives'

[Redruth]

'but what if i'm dead?'

 

 

[youtubehd]Jk-EoUb0nvg[/youtubehd]

[eugene]

as if he was trying to outslow european art-fag directors

[Guest iep]

hella moody :/

[Guest KY]

as if he was trying to outslow european art-fag directors

haha indeed.

 

I saw this once in theaters, once on my computer...maybe twice. I thought it was really interesting, beautifully shot, but wildly slow, (perhaps to its credit) in an almost meditative way. Intellectually and visually, it was very engaging, but not in any visceral way due to the pacing. So I'm definitely a bit torn, but seeing it in theaters was a wonderful experience.

[huzur]

can you at least for once focus on the content, instead of blindly criticizing the filming technique?!

 

for how long will phrases like "really interesting" be considered a legit comment on such spiritual and deep manners?

[dr lopez]

yeah I saw this in the theater.... I had a gigantic school project due the next day, so I was looking for some fun distraction....

 

 

what I got was a very slow movie and I was too pissed to pay attention to anything else.

[Guest KY]

can you at least for once focus on the content, instead of blindly criticizing the filming technique?!

 

for how long will phrases like "really interesting" be considered a legit comment on such spiritual and deep manners?

 

Okay.

 

But the film is a departure from traditional narrative, instead creating its own quiet, beautiful world teeming with philosophical musings on the relationship between man and nature (both within the primary plot, as well as folktales and political acknowledgements). Plus, this film is part of a multimedia installation by the director, so to address the "content" in a traditional theatrical sense doesn't quite do justice anyway.

 

So it's obvious why the "filming technique" (although I think you just mean overall aesthetic, as "filming technique" seems limited to technical aspects) is so commonly acknowledged. It's a relatively abstract visual parable just as much, if not more, than it is a film.

 

The idea of transformation in the film is interesting, from Boonmee's son to the Boonmee himself—while his son's appearance was, at first, borderline-comedy for me, both do reveal a form of spiritualism that seems to link man and nature. I suppose this link was also referenced in the tale of the princess and the catfish, although there must be some cultural context of which I'm unaware.

 

Anyway:

 

 

1. Other people have different opinions, clearly you haven't learned that.

 

2. "at least for once"? Do you follow my film critiques or something?

 

3. Rather than focusing on the content yourself, way to criticize others' opinions—that's far better than critiquing the film in any way.

[chim]

for how long will phrases like "really interesting" be considered a legit comment on such spiritual and deep manners?

 

When people call things interesting, I reach for my revolver.