• Independent Films: Why they are not being seen in Thailand?
  
  
• Media Literacy in the Contemporary Culture
  
  
• Illegal Abortion Causing Through Teenagers or Government’s Neglect

George Bernard Shaw, Irish playwright

The photograph shows Cho Seung Hui pointing a gun at his head. I think I know him but, in fact, I don’t. He is the student at Virginia Tech University who killed 32 students but he looks familiar to me. Turning the page, I do recognize Cho from the way he holds a hammer. He looks exactly like, Dae-Su Oh, the protagonist of the film “The Old Boy”, a film censored in Thailand which I happened to see on an illegal DVD. Could the film influence a brutal crime? Thai government believes that independent films might convey too much violence and sexual misconduct. This might be the reason why Independent films are not showing in Thailand. But what if there are high quality independent films that are worth of seeing?

Some people blame independent films for creating illusions that might lead people committing a crime. What gives those people the right to judge? Doesn’t it depend on the audience judgment to look in the same angle as the director does? Park Chan-Wook, the director of the “Old Boy” tries to warn society to be aware of little things, which could soon cause violence. In the story, the revenge caused from small gossip ends with the huge crime, shooting and striking others with hammer. When I first saw the “Old Boy”, I wondered why such a great, constructive, independent film is not being shown in Chiang Mai. Would it be just to believe that the authorities have more power to judge the film screening? Is it the censorship when Major Cineplex intends to show the movies and decide not to without explanation? Are the authorities using their power and not allowing people to judge the film for themselves? Does the viewer have any influenced about the movies that are shown? Could the censorship be the reason of this issue?

Traditionally, the independent or indie film means a film produced by an unknown director who has to work on the shoestring budget outside the mainstream studio or Hollywood system (Filmsite.org). Also, the cast and crew are unknown in order to save the film budget. But in the last ten years, the prospect of independent film has been changed into any film that is not funded or distilled by the Hollywood system but there is some soul of director portrayed in it. Therefore, the film like “U-Turn” (1997), directed by Oliver Stone, has many famous stars - Sean Penn, Jennifer Lopez, and Joaquin Phoenix. “U-Turn” is the independent film, although famous stars are on the screen but they didn’t earn much money for acting in it. Most people would assume that the film with low budget means bad acting and low production value. In fact, the independent films don’t follow the mainstream movie trends. The independent films choose to portray the philosophy of life and the perception towards society through alternative themes. The performances of the actors in the independent films are great, often worth watching several times. Even so, some of them might not have much dialogue but the great performance would give us the clue of the performers’ thought. The most significant difference to Hollywood movies is that the director produces the film without the pressure of earning money back so independent films tend to be more artistic and thematically risky. The open spaces at the end of independent films are waiting for the audience to choose through their own consideration how the film should end. Unlike the Hollywood’s films, which must try hard to attract a large audience and use handsome leading actors and beautiful actresses, who fall in love and leads to happily ever after.

During Song Kran festival, I watched many independent films at independent cinemas in Bangkok. There are only three cinemas in Thailand that show independent films - Scala, Siam, and Lido that is managed by the APEX Company, are the places expose students’ and outsiders to independent films. They are all located in the Siam Square. The APEX cinemas aim to give the best alternative choice of films to the customers. With the cinemas’ low budgets, each independent film can be shown for no more than 2 weeks. However the ticket costs only 100 baht because the owner doesn’t want to loose his customers. When I went to the cinema I met many younger Thais who love the constructive point of views towards the world are portrayed through the independent films. Also, it could allow them to think freely and critically. We could also begin to understand what is happening on the other side of the world, outside the mainstream of Hollywood system. Shouldn’t we have more cinemas that could show the independent films in Thailand?

The independent films are not being seen in Thailand because Thai people are being blinded by the authorities that blame the independent films are at the risk when viewed by Thai people. According to Wikipedia, the censorship may be imposed to preserve national security, maintain public order, preserve the rights of others, protect public morals, and prevent criticism of the royal family and insults to Buddhism. The authorities had one-sided view concerning about the independent films that contain too much violence and sexual scenes. The censorship department has the right to delete, or blur the indicated of violence scene in the independent films. It becomes unbearable for me when they decided not to show those independent films without explanation. Now, there is an arbitrary case of the censorship for the Thai independent film called, “Syndromes and a century”. Mr. Apichartpong Veerasettakul, the director of the film is supported by the Australian foundation’s project named “New Crowned Hope”. The problem of showing this movie is about the unjustified mechanism for censorship by Thai authorities. The film was intended to show on April 19th, at the confined cinemas; the Paragon Cineplex and the Esplanade Cineplex. Now it cannot be seen in Thailand anymore because the censorship committees agreed that the movie contain the obscured scenes, for example a kissing of Thai doctor and a nurse. The committees claimed that the younger Thais would be spoiled by viewing this film. In fact, the movie has the theme to represent the lacking of medications and the poor hospitals in Thailand. The film maker and the free films movement had quitted their decision to show the movie in Thailand and asking for the film back without cutting any scene out. Unfortunately, the censorship committees did not give the film back to Mr. Apichartpong, and threaten that they would cut the sexual scenes out. Who give them the right to cut the work of art into pieces? The most significance is the budget of the film is not from Thai foundation. Is it illegal to censor the film that belongs to the Australia foundation? From the quote of George Bernard Shaw, this movie is challenging the exist institution. Is the movie the risk to be seen because it contains the truth about Thailand Ministry of Health? I really cannot understand where the standard lines of the censorship in Thailand are. Does the so-called “censorship” of the independent films really protect Thai people from viewing violence?

Viewers have to watch more independent films that convey the sophisticated messages. Most of the younger Thai who have already experienced the constructive of the independent films are smarter and cooler than those who haven’t. Thai people get caught in the whims of mass movie marketing in order to being up-to-date. People always talk about the big films with blockbuster stars. Meanwhile, the cinema would show the films that are established by the guarantee of “Top Ten Box offices in the U.S.”. Also the cinemas choose to put a film on screen from its reputation and the dominant’s needs. The media itself controls the audience’ perceptions to coerce viewers to feel incredible when they watch the big film made with big budget from the big Hollywood mainstream studio. This is the failure of Mass media that affects from the marketing strategy “Make the film that sells”. This quote has established the aims of most mainstream cinema to show only the mainstream films. On the other hand, APEX owner choose the films by its value, and most of those are independent films.

Napachanan, a student at Thammasat University majoring in film, said she fell in love with independent films because they helped her improving her critical thinking skills. She was inspired by the film “Perhaps Love” to write a play for her thesis called “Hopefully yours” which was chosen to be staged last year at Thammasat University. Pim added that her teacher often brought the ghost copy DVDs as case studies about independent films. Pim felt sorry for others in Thailand who has never get to experience an independent film. She said “I think these films can open minds in our society and people will learn love to think more critically about the social and political issues in Thailand, just by watching independent films.” Why aren’t people asking for more space for independent films? I was lost when my friends talk about the number one film in the box offices in Thailand. I asked myself, “Did I have to see it because I’m too afraid of being an outsider?” Now I am not afraid of loosing face whenever I talk about the independent films with my friends. I’m proud that I, at least, have experienced being the outsider. The outsider sees the best of the game. The independent film is worth to analyze and discuss. In fact these films should be valued for the perseverance of the directors and producers, who shoot the film with so small budgets, and the brand new actors, who take a risk with the director whether the film is successful in the audiences’ eyes or not.

In Thailand, too few people watch the independent films so there is not enough discussion, and this, in turn, affects the flow of movie industry. The movie industry will make movies that address hot issues in order to reach a bigger target group. Why do we have to spend too much money on a film that could not convey sophisticated messages for people to deliberate on? People believe that the films are made for only entertaining. Indeed, we could gain a lot of from the films, -the great performance of an actor, the marvelous cinematography, the emotional light setting, and the reflection of social issue or political issue in the certain time. Independent films, which contain sophisticated messages and urge critical thinking, are now being cut off from the Thai viewers. This is stunting the growth of our brains. Isn’t it expanding our mind and understanding towards to world? This isn’t just about the independent films that convey the independent point of views. If our Thai government is censoring independent films from us, what else are they keeping from our eyes?”

References:

APEX Siam square. (*the business run the Scala, Lido and Siam cinemas)    
“Censorship in Thailand”. Wikipedia. 2007.    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_Thailand
“Independent film”. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.,. 2007.    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_film
Independent Films. http://www.independentfilms.org/independent-film.html
Shaw, George Bernard’s quote.     http://www.quoteland.com/author.asp?AUTHOR_ID=69
Tim Dirks. “Empire's 50 Greatest Independent Films”. 2007.    http://www.filmsite.org/independentfilms.html

The term of “media literacy” means the audiences’ ability of analyzing, evaluating and communicating the information received from the variety kinds of media. Culture refers to patterns of human activity and symbolic structure that give the activity significance. On December 2, Dr. Jiraporn Wittayasakpan mentioned the interesting topic that is “Is the culture controlled by the mass media?” In order to avoid the media to control the culture, I think the audience should learn about the idea of media literacy by analyzing the message to detect propaganda, censorship, and biased

Media have created the tacit knowledge and virtual image that are presented in the concrete idea of mass media. For example, there is limited time for Television advertising so the advertiser creates the short phrase “Silky hair in three days” to remind the audience. Moreover, the advertising will present a very beautiful celebrity with the silky hair. In fact, this spot has a small line of explanation that no one could notice. The line might say that “The result will sometimes depend on the quality of user’s hair”. In my opinion, the audience should pay more attention and concern on the media that they perceive. Being aware of brainwashing by the advertising, the sentence “I don’t believe you” should be recalled in the audiences’ brain.

Most of the culture and society values are occurred when they were repeated many times, collected unconsciously and accepted as the living conceptual of an entire society by the citizens. Therefore, the virtual reality that broadcast 24 hours a day causes the teenagers to understand that slap on someone’s cheek is so normal. Once there was video clipping that showed the schoolgirls bullied each other. Three days after it has broadcasted on the television breaking news, there was another clipping of the bully schoolgirls. Actually, the bullying in schools is not just happen, I have seen so many times and everyone in my school said that it is so usual. In my opinion, the kids and teenagers might spend too much time watching the televisions without any advice from their parents. They perceive the messages “If you are angry, you can let it out by bullying.” maybe from the soap opera and the news. From this example I believed that the media controlled the culture.

The audiences have to concern that the media has its own nature or the unique form of presenting the news. Sometimes the newspaper has to use interesting words for the headline in order to raise the number of selling. In the same time, the news reporters have to shorten the news in the newspaper by telling, “Who is doing what in where and when”. However, the news has never mentioned “Why someone is doing the action?” or “How could someone do that?” Actually, the newspaper would claim that they have limitation of time and space to publish in the papers. On the other hand, some television program is using the strategy of telling the story in the mostly morning news. Sometimes the news reporters also added their own opinion which affected the audience to be confused and unable to distinguish between the reality and personal opinion. If only the audience would be more critical on the details of the news, the media will not be able to control the culture anymore.

Knowing and practicing the media literacy seems to be hard for the audiences. In my opinion, the government or any authority should pay close attention to the benefit of knowing media literacy before it harms our kids and our culture. In the democratic society, there should be a media literacy camp, a standard curriculum on media literacy in schools and universities, a website about media literacy and etc. which would urge people to understand the variety forms of information.

While I was reading the news about a group of Thai women caught in between the process of illegal abortion, I asked myself whose false is exactly. One would have blamed the women who act so bitchy, troublesome, and playful around guys and suddenly got themselves into pregnancy. Looking through the other point of view, there is some unwanted pregnant among women who were raped or miscalculating their periods.

Numbers of illegal abortion clinic are rising as well as the numbers of women who have to admit in the hospital after they got infected by the improper abortion. In the class, Thai teachers usually blend the sex study with the biology by showing the sex organs and how they work. Some teacher believes that showing the video clip of illegal abortion and the interviewing of HIV infected patients would scare the students to avoid having improper sex. As we all know, Thai society is not widely open for the opinion expression on the topic “SEX”. Whenever, one mentioned about sex, most of the audience would feel that they are listening to immoral gossip, improper issue, and having sex process. The word sex study should be clearly taught separately from the sex discrimination and the moral thought. The teenagers have rights to learn that sex appealing can happen at any time, but it should be reconsidered about the proper time. If they had known more about sex as the open issue, they would have never tried to have the sex ahead of time.

Recently, the Thai society starts to argue about the legalization of the abortion performing for the raped women. The (appearing to be) moral person claims that it will be immoral to kill a children according to ethics of Buddhism. On the other hand, some people sympathizes with the raped women who should have right to get the legal abortion. Although, the legal abortion is provided in numbers of hospitals, the pregnant women still are afraid of being recognized and gossiped in the society. The society gives them no way out except doing the illegal abortion.

Besides the moral lessons, the media also beget the perception of the Thai society. The newspapers always refer to women performed illegal abortion as “spoiled women” or “cold-heart mother”. The prejudice towards the illegal abortions is conducted through the daily news. Little by little, the Thai readers learn to hate every women going through the illegal abortions. The prejudice prejudgment among Thai people even encourages the illegal abortion to run their business smoothly. It is time to change the perception of Thai people to understand more about sex education that it is how to live with the nature instinct happily.

Some people might raise an issue whether the legal abortion will lead the teenagers to be easily seduced and go through numbers of abortion. If the abortion made them feel so pain for long, no one would ever want to go through that very often. Shouldn’t we legalize the abortion for those unlucky women in order to support them choosing to raise or get rid of an unwanted child?