Cambodia Fumes At 'disrespectful' Thai Ghost Movie

[george]

Cambodia fumes at 'disrespectful' Thai ghost movie

PHNOM PENH: -- Cambodian outrage was growing Wednesday over the new Thai horror flick Ghost Game which is set in an abandoned Cambodian jail strongly resembling the infamous Khmer Rouge Toul Sleng torture centre.

Accusing the Thai film makers of disrespect for the victims of Cambodia's genocide, head of the Culture Ministry's cinema department, Kong Kendara, said his office would cooperate with the Interior Ministry to confiscate and destroy any copies of the movie in shops in the capital.

Kendara said he had personally denied representatives of the Thai company Tifa Co permission to film the movie at Toul Sleng on June 27, 2005, because in the ministry's opinion, the script outline obviously failed to respect the memories of the victims of the Pol Pot-led Khmer Rouge regime.

"These film makers disappeared for a while but now it seems they are back. They want people to be scared, but the deaths (of hundreds of thousands of people) is not a game," Kendara said by telephone.

"The police and the Culture Ministry will cooperate, and when we find this movie, we will destroy it. I would rank it beside the videos from Iraq," he added.

Last year Cambodian cultural authorities banned the sale of harrowing images showing beheading executions by kidnappers in Iraq on the grounds that they were disrespectful to the victims and were a bad influence on young Cambodians.

The set of Ghost Game, directed by Thailand's Sarawut Wichiensarn, reportedly depicts lines of photographs on the walls in a seemingly direct reference to Toul Sleng, as well as piles of skulls and skeletons.

A group of 11 young Thais play characters in a TV reality show who must stay in the haunted Cambodian prison and brave angry ghosts to win prize money.

"The movie makes the dead out to be bad, but they are innocents. Our national tragedy is not a game. This movie looks like the Thais are not respecting the Khmer," Kendara said.

The movie, due for release Thursday in Thailand, has united all factions of Khmer politics in indignation, with some saying they fear renewed friction between the two nations due to the Thai production's allegedly crass treatment of a highly sensitive and still painful period of Cambodian history.

In January 2003, Cambodian mobs burned the Thai embassy and destroyed Thai-owned businesses during a riot sparked by unfounded rumours that a Thai soap actress had claimed Cambodia's most sacred temple, Angkor Wat, rightfully belonged to Thailand. Thailand made emergency evacuations of its nationals.

Deputy Governor of the former Khmer Rouge stronghold of Pailin in Cambodia's far northwest, My Meak, said he was horrified that anyone would see the killing fields as a business opportunity.

"This is not a tool to make business. The killing has stopped. We do not forget our past, but it should never be repeated in any form, and especially not in this way," My Meak said by telephone.

Local English-language newspaper, the Cambodia Daily, quoted a former soldier as saying Thailand should parody its own tragedies if it wanted to make light entertainment out of death.

"If they were neutral, they would make a film about Thai authorities killing thousands of their own people in their 'war on drugs'," soldier Loung Nhoung was quoted as saying.

Up to two million Cambodians died from torture, disease, overwork, starvation and execution under the Khmer Rouge's bloody Democratic Kampuchea regime, which lasted from 1975 to 1979.

--DPA 2006-04-26

[ProfessorFart]

This doesn't sound like the makers have really thought this one through before filming this. I think any decent person would find this a little distasteful so I can fully understand the Cambodian's outrage especially as many Cambodians have yet to get any kind of 'closure' on the Pot Pot era.

[jdinasia]

ultimately a tacky concept for a movie .... but even though it is tacky ... it seems like standard horror movie concepts ...

[britmaveric]

Well lets see it before we judge too harshly.

[jdinasia]

don't have to see it to know it is tacky .... and ultimately won't see it ... but only because it is not in a genre of film I enjoy

[yeti]

Saw the trailer, and it really looks like S21. At first I thought they had made a movie about Khmer Rouge and found it courageous. It did not take long to feel disgusted, and not by the ghosts

[BambinA]

i understand the khmer 's side

and i dont think thai peolpe will be happy if it has a movie about ghosts on 14Th Oct 2516.(@ democracy monument)

its not funny to play with other people 's past ..( especially nightmare)

Edited April 26, 2006 by BambinA

[BambinA]

i went to tuol sleng cambodia 2-3 yrs ago ..i cried with it

[mittheimp]

This sounds to be very unsensitive. Imagine a European film based on a similar location to Auswitch!

[monty]

Unbelievable they do something like that...

Unsensitive at the least.

Guess the Shin offices in Pnom Penh might go down again when the Cambodians get to see the movie...

[Jai Dee]

Ghost film raises fears of Cambodian backlash

A scene from ‘Ghost Game,’ which contains allusions to the infamous Khmer Rouge prison Toul Sleng, where thousands were tortured and executed.

More than three years after Cambodians burned down the Thai embassy in Phnom Penh, government officials are concerned that a Thai horror film that appears to make light of the Khmer Rouge genocide could reignite cross-border tensions.

Ghost Game, which will be released in theaters today, is set in an abandoned prison that strongly resembles Cambodia’s infamous Toul Sleng (or S-21) prison, where some 16,000 men, women and children were tortured before being executed.

The film stars former Academy Fantasia contestants who enter into a reality game show at a haunted prison called S-11. Confronting ghosts, the characters try to outlast each other for a prize of five million baht.

The Foreign Ministry has informed the Thai embassy in Cambodia about the film and expressed concern about its release. “We hope that the case will not be blown up out of proper proportion. I hope there is understanding and no unfavorable results,” said Foreign Ministry spokesman Kitti Wasinondh.

Tifa, the company producing Ghost Game, hosted a press conference yesterday to address a report by news agency AFP, which quoted a Cambodian researcher as saying the film was an “abuse of memory.”

Pantham Thongsang, managing director of tifa, said in a phone interview after the press conference that the movie would be released as planned and apologized to anyone who might be offended by the film’s content. “We don’t mean to make a problem,” he said.

News agencies reported yesterday that Ghost Game would likely be banned in Cambodia. “Right now it’s premature to say that people are upset, but when it comes out things could get interesting,” said Kevin Doyle, editor-in-chief of The Cambodia Daily.

Ghost Film was shot entirely in Thailand and never mentions Tuol Sleng or Cambodia, but Kong Rithdee, who wrote the film’s English subtitles, said the connection is obvious.

Relations between Thailand and Cambodia are sensitive. They reached a low point in 2003, when Cambodians burned the Thai embassy to the ground, allegedly incited by a rumor that a Thai actress said Thailand was the rightful owner of Angkor Wat.

Source: ThaiDay - 27 April 2006 21:53

[noctiluca]

Sometimes, I just don't get some Thai people. What makes this worse is I am a Thai myself. I think Thais are generally sensitive to other people's feeling and respectful, but sometimes they prove me wrong. For me the obvious is when a Thai call an E-sarn person "Lao" or something similar. I know most think is just a joke, and use it not very frugally. I think it is disrespectful and insensitive to our neighbour/friend. The problem is not with the word itsefl. It is the connotation or what and how they associate the word with. Most Thais would deny they want to offend, but they should know better, at least back their somewhere in their minds, they must have known. They, including me, would not want anyone to call me Thai but mean something else that is not nice.

[britmaveric]

Let's be honest the more press you give a movie especially controversy - the more sales will increase. Better to shut the gob and let it die on its own.

[Patex]

Thailand,

the hub of bad taste ...

Charlie Chaplin made the same mistake a few years ago... even worse .

[kat]

Now that the news is out, I'm glad to see I wasn't alone in my disgust. Last week they started marketing this movie in Major Cineplex. They set up black and white photos of blatant torture and execution-style imprisonment. I thought it was an exhibition on severe human rights violations in Burma or on the history of CAmbodia, and then I find out it's a preview of a frickin ghost-game movie!!! A game - a joke - fun!

I was shocked. I could not believe the depths of stupidity and callousness. I went over and talked to the representatives of the movie and told them how shocking this kind of thoughtlessness would be to the international community. They were also warned by Cambodian representatives previously.

Amazing Thailand, is all I have to say.

[jdinasia]

OK ... truly not my genre ... but guess I'll go see it!

really ... being politically correct is just not a good thing .... it is much better to let people decide for themselves .... (far better for a tacky film to be made than for a great film not to be made because it may be controversial)

[Diablo Bob]

"Let's be honest the more press you give a movie especially controversy - the more sales will increase. Better to shut the gob and let it die on its own."

I remember when Monty Python released Life of Brian. At the time I had absolutely no interest in seeing the movie.

It wasn't until the Catholics, Lutheran, Methodist, Baptist and every other Christian Church condemned, vilafied, crucified the picture that I said to myself "It can't be all bad, the devout hate it!"

I agree with Britmaverick, stop the adverts and let the movie die on its' own.

[LaoPo]

"Ghostly Reunion"

It's 'competing' about Baht 5 Million...

"Set in a mock-up of Phnom Penh's infamous torture centre, a new film stretches the reality game-show concept to the limit "

http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/04/25/ent...nt_30002475.php

and:

"EDITORIAL"

"Film brings shame upon Thai society"

http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/04/30/opi...on_30002874.php

No comment.

LaoPo

Edited April 29, 2006 by LaoPo

[elkangorito]

If anything needs to be banned, it's those mindless & otherwise moronic 'reality' shows. These pathetically puerile excuses for entertainment are nothing but a waste of electricity. The worrying thing is that they seem to draw record audiences...& these audiences are voters

Burning books, banning films & other censorship may seem to be upholding certain moral values but respect/disrespect ultimately lies in the hearts of the people & not within written words or displayed images.

I agree with the other posters who suggest to let the movie die a natural death.

What happens after all the books, films etc have been banned all because of how someone decides to feel? Go looking for witches to burn?

Isn't it about time that people learn that they can keep the things they respect within their hearts & souls, & that a book or a movie cannot remove or degrade this respect?...unless they choose to feel so.

Long live democracy & freedom of speech...before it's all banned because it upsets peoples feelings

[jdinasia]

hear hear!

[kat]

I think the concept of "politcally correct" in this case trivalizes the disregard for common decency and respect/understanding of suffering and genocide. There is no one on earth in their right mind that would make a gameshow out of the holocaust or gang rape, unless it was done as social commentary/teaching. In this case, it is mindless and profiteering - unforgivable. The producers knew better as well, because they allegedly sought feedback (the right thing), but then disregarded it.

I never mentioned banning it. In a sense, the Thai producers will only further damage Thailand's reputation, so Thais stand to lose more than Cambodians. And this in a country that banned a travel/information book on Bangkok because they mentioned and showed a picture of a bar girl on a pole.

[mog]

Cambodia fumes at 'disrespectful' Thai ghost movie

PHNOM PENH: -- Cambodian outrage was growing Wednesday over the new Thai horror flick Ghost Game which is set in an abandoned Cambodian jail strongly resembling the infamous Khmer Rouge Toul Sleng torture centre.

Accusing the Thai film makers of disrespect for the victims of Cambodia's genocide, head of the Culture Ministry's cinema department, Kong Kendara, said his office would cooperate with the Interior Ministry to confiscate and destroy any copies of the movie in shops in the capital.

Kendara said he had personally denied representatives of the Thai company Tifa Co permission to film the movie at Toul Sleng on June 27, 2005, because in the ministry's opinion, the script outline obviously failed to respect the memories of the victims of the Pol Pot-led Khmer Rouge regime.

"These film makers disappeared for a while but now it seems they are back. They want people to be scared, but the deaths (of hundreds of thousands of people) is not a game," Kendara said by telephone.

"The police and the Culture Ministry will cooperate, and when we find this movie, we will destroy it. I would rank it beside the videos from Iraq," he added.

Last year Cambodian cultural authorities banned the sale of harrowing images showing beheading executions by kidnappers in Iraq on the grounds that they were disrespectful to the victims and were a bad influence on young Cambodians.

The set of Ghost Game, directed by Thailand's Sarawut Wichiensarn, reportedly depicts lines of photographs on the walls in a seemingly direct reference to Toul Sleng, as well as piles of skulls and skeletons.

A group of 11 young Thais play characters in a TV reality show who must stay in the haunted Cambodian prison and brave angry ghosts to win prize money.

"The movie makes the dead out to be bad, but they are innocents. Our national tragedy is not a game. This movie looks like the Thais are not respecting the Khmer," Kendara said.

The movie, due for release Thursday in Thailand, has united all factions of Khmer politics in indignation, with some saying they fear renewed friction between the two nations due to the Thai production's allegedly crass treatment of a highly sensitive and still painful period of Cambodian history.

In January 2003, Cambodian mobs burned the Thai embassy and destroyed Thai-owned businesses during a riot sparked by unfounded rumours that a Thai soap actress had claimed Cambodia's most sacred temple, Angkor Wat, rightfully belonged to Thailand. Thailand made emergency evacuations of its nationals.

Deputy Governor of the former Khmer Rouge stronghold of Pailin in Cambodia's far northwest, My Meak, said he was horrified that anyone would see the killing fields as a business opportunity.

"This is not a tool to make business. The killing has stopped. We do not forget our past, but it should never be repeated in any form, and especially not in this way," My Meak said by telephone.

Local English-language newspaper, the Cambodia Daily, quoted a former soldier as saying Thailand should parody its own tragedies if it wanted to make light entertainment out of death.

"If they were neutral, they would make a film about Thai authorities killing thousands of their own people in their 'war on drugs'," soldier Loung Nhoung was quoted as saying.

Up to two million Cambodians died from torture, disease, overwork, starvation and execution under the Khmer Rouge's bloody Democratic Kampuchea regime, which lasted from 1975 to 1979.

--DPA 2006-04-26

[cclub75]

And this in a country that banned a travel/information book on Bangkok because they mentioned and showed a picture of a bar girl on a pole.

Out of subject... but a little update about this book (Bangkok Inside Out) : i bought it last week end in a thai shop at... Central Lad Prao.

You can say what a hel_l of a ban ! And another blow to the "Ministry of Culture".

I love this country.

[Sheryl]

While in another context I would agree with the "let it die a natural death and don't give it publicity" response, in this particular case I do not. One has to understand that the Cambodian response occurs in a context of Thai-Cambodian relations and that Cambodians have a LOT of issues with the Thais which, for the most part, the Thai population is unaware of and the Thai government insufficiently concerned about. Indeed, it was only after the anti-Thai riots a few years back (which I witnessed first hand -- I divide my time prettyu much equally between both countries and was in Phnom Penh staying with Cambodian friends at the time) that concern for their neighbor's sensitivities came on the radar screen at all.

In this particular situation, I think strong speaking out on the part of the Cambodian government is appropriate. Also, bear in mind that they need to appease their populace, and registering protest is a means of doing that. There is enough anger at Thais and Thailand among the Cambodian population to make a grass-roots explosion of violence (as opposed to the riots a few years back, which were initially instigated by the government) possible if people do not feel enough has been done to express the nation's sentiments.

It is particularly irresponsible of the film makers that they proceeded with the movie after being denied permission to film in Cambodia and being explicitly told by Cambodian officials that the concept was offensive. They can't plead ignorance.

It is appriopriate for the Thai government -- and Thai society, via its press -- to apologize to the Cambodians for this insensitivity. I don't think that will cause more people to go to see the film. How well the film does will depend upon how "good" it is by the standards of the genre.

[elkangorito]

While in another context I would agree with the "let it die a natural death and don't give it publicity" response, in this particular case I do not. One has to understand that the Cambodian response occurs in a context of Thai-Cambodian relations and that Cambodians have a LOT of issues with the Thais which, for the most part, the Thai population is unaware of and the Thai government insufficiently concerned about. Indeed, it was only after the anti-Thai riots a few years back (which I witnessed first hand -- I divide my time prettyu much equally between both countries and was in Phnom Penh staying with Cambodian friends at the time) that concern for their neighbor's sensitivities came on the radar screen at all.

In this particular situation, I think strong speaking out on the part of the Cambodian government is appropriate. Also, bear in mind that they need to appease their populace, and registering protest is a means of doing that. There is enough anger at Thais and Thailand among the Cambodian population to make a grass-roots explosion of violence (as opposed to the riots a few years back, which were initially instigated by the government) possible if people do not feel enough has been done to express the nation's sentiments.

It is particularly irresponsible of the film makers that they proceeded with the movie after being denied permission to film in Cambodia and being explicitly told by Cambodian officials that the concept was offensive. They can't plead ignorance.

It is appriopriate for the Thai government -- and Thai society, via its press -- to apologize to the Cambodians for this insensitivity. I don't think that will cause more people to go to see the film. How well the film does will depend upon how "good" it is by the standards of the genre.

I disagree with you.

[Sheryl]

I disagree with you.

Not a very helpful or informative post...disagree with what aspect or what I said, and why?

I can't figure it out from your earlier post, which was mainly against censorship, which I have certainly not advocated.

[jdinasia]

nuts...

The Cambodian Gov't has to complain .... ok

The Thai government has to say ... We are sorry you are offended by a film company that is here in Thailand.

There it ends ... The film company didn't break the law ... they just have a tacky concept for a movie ... and it has enough bite in the concept to make it timely and relevant.

Maybe the Cambodians will show someone how serious a topic this is to them BY ACTUALLY BRINGING SOME OF THE KR to trial

[elkangorito]

I disagree with you.

Not a very helpful or informative post...disagree with what aspect or what I said, and why?

I can't figure it out from your earlier post, which was mainly against censorship, which I have certainly not advocated.

My answer is a little 'idealistic' but nonetheless totally available to & achievable by, all humans.

Why would anyone want to react to an 'image'? My answer is 'fear'. The people who wish such 'images' to be 'banned' etc, believe that in some way, their life will be debilitated if such images are allowed. I would suggest that it is the individuals reaction to such images that are the most dangerous. I will further suggest that it is the 'individuals choice' to react to such images in a negative or positive way.

It is therefore obvious that these 'self offended' people are 'unwilling' to change. Instead, they want others to do the changing for them. This is a very sad situation...much sadder than the images of a movie. These people 'believe' that they are not in control of themselves. They believe that other things ARE in control of them. This is their CHOICE.

Instead of disenfranchising a large group of people who are not bothered by such images, maybe the 'self offended' ones could be encouraged to believe that they ARE in control of their own feelings & thus, a movie (image) censorship is not required? This is not a difficult suggestion & it will certainly help to bring peace to all. On the other hand, to sympathetically endorse their 'self offense', will help these people to believe that they are powerless & otherwise vulnerable.

Censorship will never bring back the dead. Nor will it change the past.

If people can realise that RESPECT & LOVE 'lives in this moment' & the past cannot be changed, unless the individual CHOOSES to believe otherwise, the world will be a better place. This ability is very much within the abilities of all humans. Those who refuse to change must learn to live with their DECISION.

CHANGE is hardly ever a problem. The perceived inability to change IS a problem for all of us, since CHANGE is ALWAYS possible. This is a matter of CHOICE & not censorship.

Edited May 16, 2006 by elkangorito

[mittheimp]

I disagree with you.

Not a very helpful or informative post...disagree with what aspect or what I said, and why?

I can't figure it out from your earlier post, which was mainly against censorship, which I have certainly not advocated.

My answer is a little 'idealistic' but nonetheless totally available to & achievable by, all humans.

Why would anyone want to react to an 'image'? My answer is 'fear'. The people who wish such 'images' to be 'banned' etc, believe that in some way, their life will be debilitated if such images are allowed. I would suggest that it is the individuals reaction to such images that are the most dangerous. I will further suggest that it is the 'individuals choice' to react to such images in a negative or positive way.

It is therefore obvious that these 'self offended' people are 'unwilling' to change. Instead, they want others to do the changing for them. This is a very sad situation...much sadder than the images of a movie. These people 'believe' that they are not in control of themselves. They believe that other things ARE in control of them. This is their CHOICE.

Instead of disenfranchising a large group of people who are not bothered by such images, maybe the 'self offended' ones could be encouraged to believe that they ARE in control of their own feelings & thus, a movie (image) censorship is not required? This is not a difficult suggestion & it will certainly help to bring peace to all. On the other hand, to sympathetically endorse their 'self offense', will help these people to believe that they are powerless & otherwise vulnerable.

Censorship will never bring back the dead. Nor will it change the past.

If people can realise that RESPECT & LOVE 'lives in this moment' & the past cannot be changed, unless the individual CHOOSES to believe otherwise, the world will be a better place. This ability is very much within the abilities of all humans. Those who refuse to change must learn to live with their DECISION.

CHANGE is hardly ever a problem. The perceived inability to change IS a problem for all of us, since CHANGE is ALWAYS possible. This is a matter of CHOICE & not censorship.

I have read your post three times now and I am non the wiser what you are trying to say!

I dont think the poster you were arguing with actually wanted the film banned anyway!! Just a little sensitivity shown! I don't necessarily agree with banning things - but I do think we have the right to complain and criticise others judgement and taste - and that is what we are doing.

[elkangorito]

I disagree with you.

Not a very helpful or informative post...disagree with what aspect or what I said, and why?

I can't figure it out from your earlier post, which was mainly against censorship, which I have certainly not advocated.

My answer is a little 'idealistic' but nonetheless totally available to & achievable by, all humans.

Why would anyone want to react to an 'image'? My answer is 'fear'. The people who wish such 'images' to be 'banned' etc, believe that in some way, their life will be debilitated if such images are allowed. I would suggest that it is the individuals reaction to such images that are the most dangerous. I will further suggest that it is the 'individuals choice' to react to such images in a negative or positive way.

It is therefore obvious that these 'self offended' people are 'unwilling' to change. Instead, they want others to do the changing for them. This is a very sad situation...much sadder than the images of a movie. These people 'believe' that they are not in control of themselves. They believe that other things ARE in control of them. This is their CHOICE.

Instead of disenfranchising a large group of people who are not bothered by such images, maybe the 'self offended' ones could be encouraged to believe that they ARE in control of their own feelings & thus, a movie (image) censorship is not required? This is not a difficult suggestion & it will certainly help to bring peace to all. On the other hand, to sympathetically endorse their 'self offense', will help these people to believe that they are powerless & otherwise vulnerable.

Censorship will never bring back the dead. Nor will it change the past.

If people can realise that RESPECT & LOVE 'lives in this moment' & the past cannot be changed, unless the individual CHOOSES to believe otherwise, the world will be a better place. This ability is very much within the abilities of all humans. Those who refuse to change must learn to live with their DECISION.

CHANGE is hardly ever a problem. The perceived inability to change IS a problem for all of us, since CHANGE is ALWAYS possible. This is a matter of CHOICE & not censorship.

I have read your post three times now and I am non the wiser what you are trying to say!

I dont think the poster you were arguing with actually wanted the film banned anyway!! Just a little sensitivity shown! I don't necessarily agree with banning things - but I do think we have the right to complain and criticise others judgement and taste - and that is what we are doing.

We all certainly have the right to complain, & this is very normal but when that complaint turns into action, there is a problem.

As for 'arguing' with the poster, I wasn't arguing...I was 'responding' to a question with my opinion.

Also & with reference to the poster who questioned me, I draw your attention to one part of my reply; "On the other hand, to sympathetically endorse their 'self offense', will help these people to believe that they are powerless & otherwise vulnerable."

If you can't understand my post, I cannot help you. Undoubtedly, you MAY one day understand the meaning of my post.