Apichatpong Weerasethakul spreads his Ashes | Bleader

Apichatpong Weerasethakul spreads his Ashes


Sign up for our newsletters Subscribe


One of the more abstract images of Apichatpongs short
  • One of the more abstract images of Apichatpong's short
For the past few weeks, Mubi.com has been streaming for free the latest short by renowned filmmaker—and School of the Art Institute graduate—Apichatpong Weerasethakul (Tropical Malady, Uncle Boonmee Who Can Recall His Past Lives). The short, Ashes, is one of the director’s more purely experimental works, an impressionistic photo essay about contemporary Thailand shot on a variety of film stocks and employing mainly nonsync sound. In a recent interview for Mubi, Apichatpong shared his skepticism about the fate of his home country, comparing it to a slowly sinking ship, and Ashes reflects this sentiment in its images of antigovernment protests and in its funeral-set conclusion. Yet the overall tone is gentle and inquisitive: tellingly, the only dialogue is a short description of a pleasant dream.

The movie is an experiment in more ways than one. Apichatpong shot it mainly on the LomoKino, a brand new 35-millimeter camera that’s being promoted as cheap and easy to use. Judging from Ashes, the images it produces look more like old-school 16-millimeter than studio-quality 35-millimeter, but it seems an enterprising filmmaker can still achieve a variety of textures with it. Apichatpong relies on these different looks to give Ashes a subtle sense of structure, progressing from warm, sun-blanched images of rural life to sober, black-and-white shots of urban life, then back again. (It’s hard to determine where the coda was shot, though the spectacle of the traditional Thai funeral overshadows any sense of place.) This progression suggests how six years of political troubles—starting with the military coup of 2006 and continuing on to the massacre of 87 protesters in 2010—have tainted even the most remote areas of Thai life.

This sense of structure shows the clear influence of narrative cinema and points to why Apichatpong is a major filmmaker. Few other contemporary directors have shown such interest in collapsing the barriers between experimental and narrative filmmaking. (Abbas Kiarostami, whom Apichatpong’s cited as an influence, is another major example.) For fans of his work, his films convey an almost sensual drift between passages of storytelling and sequences that exploit sound and image for their own sake. Ashes sometimes suggests a sketchbook, the rough images conveying initial impressions to be used later as part of a feature film. I’m glad that Apichatpong’s willing to share his sketches with an audience—and for free, no less—as they offer insight into how his mysterious art takes shape.