MCN Blogs
Ray Pride

By Ray Pride Pride@moviecitynews.com

6 years in Harvey's closet: Tears of a Thai director

ONLY RECENTLY FREED of the notorious early 2000s Miramax Shelf of Invisibility, Wisit Sasanatieng’s Tears of the Black Tiger (Fah Talai Jone, 2000, ****) is a sui generis mashup, a “Raiders of the Lost Archive,” a strange, fevered, delirious, 1950s-styled Thai western-romance melodrama and a singularity of the highest order. Giddy beyond belief, it embodies an era of Thai genre movies, with florid colors and visual devices that out-spaghetti spaghetti westerns, faded to the turquoise-gold-pink-chartreuse shades of 1940s roto newspaper supplements. The film’s major influence even sounds made up: the films of Thai independent filmmaker Rattana Pestonji, who as the press notes describe, is “unknown outside of Thailand [and] largely forgotten at home, where there is no tradition of repertory or archival screenings of vintage films.” Apocryphal or not, there is much wry, wild and weird in Tears, and its invisibility to northern American audiences for half a decade only adds to its allure. Fah Talai Jone 7.jpgQuentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriquez have said their upcoming Grindhouse will play with making their work look like a battered relic; this gentle yet persistent hallucination was way ahead of their game. Designer cowboys with shoulder rocket launchers? Gunshot wounds that can only be called “meaty”? Blood as viscous and sweet looking as lychee? Textures were created with a pre-digital intermediate process, with a transfer to DigiBeta video, lurid tweaking and then back to 35mm. Look for how many reviews describe this blossoming bruise as “indescribable.” Over at LA Times, the indispensible Dennis Lim shines a light on Miramax’s past and Sasanatieng’s present. Lim calls it “a delirious pastiche that whizzes through as many incongruous genres as it does implausible plot twists. The movie’s real-life trajectory—from festival star to battle-scarred survivor—Is almost as dramatic and convoluted… [I]t’s one of the most notable victims of the old, overspending Miramax, which in the Weinstein era was notorious for acquiring armloads of festival titles and sometimes allowing them to molder in the vaults indefinitely… Eamonn Bowles, president of Magnolia Pictures [the film’s current US distributor] remembers seeing Tears at its first packed Cannes screening. “The saturated color scheme and the incredibly arch nature of the characters and plot were counterbalanced by a seeming earnestness that just had no precedent for me,” he said… The first rumblings of trouble came when Miramax decided to re-cut the film within months of the Cannes purchase. Sasanatieng said he and his producers had been warned of the Weinsteins’ penchant for meddling. But, he said, “We were too innocent. We believed that they would respect our work. They told us again and again that everybody at Miramax loved the film so much… They didn’t allow me to re-cut it at all,” Sasanatieng said. “They did it by themselves and then sent me the tape. And they changed the ending from tragic to happy. They said that in the time after 9/11, nobody would like to see something sad.” [Quicktime trailer here [graphic violence]; Now playing Cambridge, Chicago, Los Angeles, Minneapolis and Seattle; March 16 Tucson and San Diego; March 23, Hartford, Grand Rapids, and Columbia, South Carolina; March 30, Detroit and University City, Missouri; April 6, Denver, Atlanta and Nashville.]

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments are closed.

Movie City Indie

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon