Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss 
President Barack Obama’s short stopover in Thailand was rich in political symbolism.
Coming two and a half years after Bangkok was torn apart by urban warfare, Obama’s visit signals just how quickly political stability has been restored following the election of Yingluck Shinawatra in July 2011.
Over the past month or so there has been more than the usual chatter about the prospect of a military coup against Yingluck but it would be a brave or, more plausibly, foolish general who would challenge Yingluck’s legitimacy. Domestically, her diversion of tax-payers money to rice farmers continues to infuriate the commentariat but holding firm to Thaksin Shinawatra’s legacy of populism will do her no political harm. Faster than expected economic growth is also helping to secure her domestic authority.
On a broader stage, Obama’s visit is another sign that Yingluck is internationally accepted as a leader in her own right, further weakening the claim that she is a puppet of her exiled brother.
Prior to the meeting with Yingluck, there was an audience with King Bhumibol, in which Obama presented a photo album featuring the King’s meetings with former U.S. Presidents. This was a noteworthy encounter at many levels. In recent years rumours about the king’s health have been even more popular than rumours about military intervention. Lately there has been talk that the king’s condition is very fragile indeed. This very public appearance will, if only briefly, silence the rumours. The televised encounter between two very different heads of state was a public relations triumph of royal persistence. Thai royalty thrives on auspicious imagery and, for some, the audience with the all-powerful Obama will help to prolong the magic.
But the montage of images–Obama with the ailing King at Bangkok’s Siriraj Hospital; Obama with a beaming Yingluck at Government House–also spoke to Thailand’s contemporary transition…
Read the full story here.
Link to YouTube Thai tv video of Obama standing, shaking hands with the Thai King on Sunday evening.
0
0
I remembered when Obama met with the Japanese Emporer he bowed (a Japanese traditional way of greeting, as I understand it) to the Emporer and was criticized for bowing too deelply.
In view of such criticism, why didn’t he bow or did the Thai version of bowing (what is it, I’m not sure) to the Thai King?
0
0
Both President Obama and the King of Thailand are leaders of their own countries and should be considered equals. Only someone in a lower position like a Secretary of State would “Wai” (greeting to a superior). Place hands palms together in a prayerlike position and bow.
0
0
Thongdaeng (or his clone) also wasn’t present. Thai elected leaders are for more fortunate than the World Leaders to be able to get up close and personal with the King’s pet dog.
0
0
Worth noting that the King was born in the U.S. and so qualifies to be a U.S. citizen with the right to run (however inexplicably) for U.S. President.
0
0
Bet he doesn’t pay taxes in the U.S. like all citizens and permanent residents do when overseas.
Before jumping to too many conclusions, this is just a dig on the tax liability (or not) of the CPB.
0
0
Looking at Obama’s visit to Thailand through the symbolic frame is truly enlightening. This paradigm provides a very interesting perspective. Thank you.
0
0
It is going to be harder for the right wing royalists to overthrow Yingluk now she has added legitimacy from pro democratic Obama.
0
0
James – Donald Trump would probably ask for Bumiphol’s birth certificate – and never believe it was real when he got it.
0
0
We are so grateful to President Obama’s visit to Thailand and King Bhumibol. It’s the signal to the world that US is now fully supporting the elected government of Thailand not the military coupes as had happened so many times during the reign of the present King.
0
0
It’s going to be a busy week for Bhumipol, with it now reported that he will meet with outgoing Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao. Perhaps Wen will also bring along a photo album so the two can reminisce over 60 years of Thailand’s relationship with communist China :-O
0
0
Tenured academics (deputy deans even) who take sides in political disputes.
Very pitiful.
There are two sides to this political dispute and the coverage of this reality is woefully inadequate in this blog.
Red shirt Dr. Weng, another example of a partisan intellectual, who can only see human rights violations where it supports Thaksin and red shirt protests, dismissing the 2003 War on Drugs with thousands of deaths as being ok.
What exactly is the goal here of always only looking at one side of the argument?
To create a bunch of echoing mini-mes ?
One would think academics would try to set an example of even-handedness.
Being partisan blinds people to the two-sided nature of truth.
[Hierarchy and deference to authority is ingrained at all levels of Thai society, not just the highest which some obsessively focus on in their analysis.]
0
0
Hi Jon, let’s debate the issues. What points do you see as being particularly partisan? That Obama’s visit helps Yingluck, domestically and internationally? That royalty thrives on auspicious imagery and that Obama’s visit provides just that? That the public imagery of Obama with both the King and Yingluck highlights the challenges of Thailand’s political transition? That Obama was clearly backing the elected Prime Minister? That the US no longer sees the Thai monarchy as a bastion for democracy? That Obama’s behaviour in the presence of the King may prompt some reflection on the relative status of royalty and elected politicians? That Obama provides positive imagery for elected politicians? That the electoral popularity of the Shinawatras poses challenges for the monarchy?
I think all of these points are debatable, and I would welcome debate. But I can’t see that you have attempted to engage with any of them.
0
0
jon
Are you seriously suggesting there is something wrong for an academic to adopt a particular political perspective? Or, in truth, just one you don’t agree with?
As for being partisan, your views are absolutely that.
Of course you’re perfectly entitled to support the most anti-democratic and fascistic elements in Thai society as you have been doing for the past few years.
But don’t assume that that is a “neutral” position. Nobody else does and nobody else would believe that you make a credible arbiter as to what is “partisan” and what isn’t.
0
0
Hey John let me know if you encounter any impartial truth on your planet! All truth is partial and value laden, one takes sides and judges to impose ones truth. Get real
0
0
Hear hear! Well said Andrew
0
0
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/11/18/president-obama-secretary-of-state-clinton-meet-king-of-thailand/
First Point
Any significance of the fact that Obama mentioned to the king that “elections in the US are very long yet very gratifying to know [American] people still have confidence in me. Did he try to suggest without elections, the Thai King has no way to know if the Thai people have confidence in the King?
Obama then smiled and said: “Elections in the United States are very long but it’s very gratifying to know people still have confidence in me. I thought it was very important that my first trip after the elections was to Thailand, which is such a great ally.”
Second Point
Why did Obama mention that he met Thaksin in Bali and that it strengthened US-Thai relationship. Wouldn’t he know Thaksin is on the run and this could potentially irritate the King. Did he try to send a strong message?
Reporters were led out of the room as the group continued to talk, and Obama could be overheard saying he met with Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra in Bali last year and that it “strengthened our relationship” as we left.
0
0
“That Obama (beside Thai politicians) provides positive imagery for elected politicians?”
Maybe so but not all the time. Yingluck certainly felt so … her reverse smile contortion (the photo) was almost girlishly a smirk of pride she could stand ‘beside’ USA President Obama while paying respects to the Thai King.
Now had Obama embraced Yingluck like Obama embraced (awkwardly yes but you all get the point) Aung Sang Syu Ki, that would have truly meant that “hallejuah … Obama embraces Thaksin (yes Thaksin, who else?)”
0
0
Rather desperate even by your usual standards, Vichai…..
Obama’s awkward cheek-peck moment with Aung San Suu Kyi was itself a cultural mis-step – albeit during a relatively informal meet with an MP at her home and not with a Thai PM on a formal state occasion at Government House.
Maybe even you get that point?
0
0
The iconography and carefully orchestrated symbolism of the Obama visit to Thailand would seem to suggest that the days of the royalists, their generals and military coups are over. Time to move on into the 21st century, elections, globalization and a more opportunity-based egalitarian society with gradual ASEAN integration on the horizon.
0
0
Here is an interesting extract from Nixon’s statement on his visit to Thailand in 1969:
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=2153
0
0
“The charmer-in-chief: Obama gets flirty as he schmoozes with Thai prime minister on first stop of historic Asia visit”
0
0
Puzzling that AW should inject ex-President Nixon to the thread. BUT Nixon is just the type of USA President who would embrace Thaksin (pre-fugitive or current-fugitive status would NOT matter.) AND former USA President Clinton would be just the type of USA President who would embrace Yingluck!
0
0
Did Bush’s visit in 2003 help Thaksin?
Andrew wrote:
“The President expressed “his appreciation for his audience with His Majesty the King of Thailand” and conveyed his “warmest wishes” to the King and Queen. Then, in the very next sentence, he “reaffirmed the enduring US support for democracy in Thailand and welcomed the Royal Thai government’s commitment to strengthen Thailand’s parliamentary democracy”.
The juxtaposition of royalty and democracy may have been accidental, but both Obama and Yingluck know that Thailand’s over-investment in the monarchy is an important factor the enduring weakness of its electoral and parliamentary systems.”
In October 2003 at the Royal Thai Army HQ, Bush Jr said
(http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=64837&st=bush&st1=bangkok)
“I’m grateful to His Majesty the King and Her Majesty the Queen for inviting us to this ancient and beautiful land.
Earlier today I met with Prime Minister Thaksin, and I was proud to reaffirm the great friendship between our nations. We share a belief in democracy and human rights and ethnic and religious tolerance.”
Though Bush didn’t thank the King for an audience (if he got one? What’s it say if he met Thaksin, but not the King?), was this juxtaposition between Monarchy and functional democracy identified in the ‘very next sentence’ also because Bush knew that “investment in the monarchy is an important factor the enduring weakness of its electoral and parliamentary systems”, too? Is it continuity from the State Department re not having much faith in genetically based leadership? Or are speech writers just recycling?
Do people think Obama was being light re the gratitude for an audience? Couldn’t Bush have also been being light re being invited to an ancient and beautiful land (isn’t every land able to claim that)?
Who can believe anything said by smooth talking (or drooling) American Presidents?
0
0
I do sometimes wonder if there is a US interest in keeping Thai democracy weak.
On the one hand they make all the right noises publicly but, on the other, as the Thai cables revealed, they are secretly sucking up to the coupmakers. And while the cables only really gave an insight into 2006 it almost a certainty that the US have backed every single coup.
Maybe the US realise that a more democratic Thailand might see its interests being better served by closer links to China? The cultural and social links are already there and this will only grow when ASEAN opens up more. Also China is the future economic power, not the USA.
Maybe the USA military relationship with Thailand has been understated in all the post-Obama visit analysis?
Thailand is still considered as a plaything of the US defence establishment – lots of contracts, lots of contractors and lots of cash. And that’s before the long-term strategic details are taken into account.
So who will guarantee the US that that status quo is preserved? Well, the Thai Army almost certainly has and if Thai democracy is a price to pay for US strategic ends, so be it.
Much historical evidence points to that being the case and Thailand is still well within the US-sphere. And being in the US sphere doesn’t always guarantee apple pie, rock n roll and democracy. Just look at the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan etc.
0
0
Please wait and see what’s about to happen in Thailand politics by Nov. 24-25th. A gigantic anti government demonstration preceding a military coupe, well planned and funded by the Royalists & people in & around the Palace. It’s their last struggle to survive despite the US & China warning.
0
0
Well Wen Jiabao had his audience with the King. A very stiff affair it must be said. Watch it at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3S9xAepnk6I . The King does not appear to speak – in fact almost nods off at the very end, and who could blame him.
But surely this is also an interesting symbolic marker in Thailand’s political history when the Chinese Premier is carefully given equal status to long time US allies. No doubt noted by Obama’s team.
0
0
Thanks for the timely article.
But I have a quibble on one point where you write: “…On a broader stage, Obama’s visit is another sign that Yingluck is internationally accepted as a leader in her own right, further weakening the claim that she is a puppet of her exiled brother…”
I can’t see any evidence for this, and much evidence against it.
A few photo-ops shouldn’t be seen as evidence that Yinglak is not beholden to her brother.
Yinglak has been in politics for less than two years. It is difficult to believe that she could suddenly run a mass political party – and the country – as her brother has been doing for much of the last 12 years, and having been in politics for the decade prior to this. We know that Thaksin is in contact with Yinglak regularly, as often as 2-3 times a week according to the recent Forbes interview with Thaksin (according to the same interview Thaksin also met with Kissinger, and is in contact with China’s leaders, Hun Sen, and other world leaders). We also know that Thaksin regularly meets Puea Thai MPs.
But the more important point is that by saying approvingly that Yinglak is not a puppet you risk falling into the royalist argument. You appear to be agreeing that Yinglak SHOULD NOT be a puppet for Thaksin, which is what the royalists have been demanding.
My question is, why not?
Firstly, at the last election Peua Thai campaigned on a platform, “Thaksin thinks, Puea Thai does”. That’s what got them elected. That’s why Thaksin has won the last five elections. So why should Thaksin not call the shots?
But secondly, and more importantly, why shouldn’t Yinglak represent her brother? He has been driven out of politics by a coup, a politically-motivated court case engineered by his royalist enemies, not to mention threats of assassination. Thaksin has every right to have a representative (whether it’s a sister or brother-in-law or whoever) at the head of his political party when the royalists prevent him from doing so himself by these extra-parliamentary means.
All this is not to say that Yinglak does not have some very good political skills of her own. But the idea that she is, or should be, independent of Thaksin is wrong, in my view.
0
0
Just because Yingluck consults her brother doesn’t mean she is beholden to him. I want to see Yingluck become separate from Thaksin because the Thaksin versus the establishment narrative is toxic.
0
0
Also, your accusation about the risk of falling into the royalist argument because the royalists argue Yingluck should be separate from her brother is ridiculous. The royalists may also like green curry. Would you dislike green curry if that were the case ?
0
0
Here’s one reason why we can’t have nice things in the media: President Obama gave a joint press conference early this morning (U.S. time) in Bangkok with the Prime Minister of Thailand. They discussed the fighting in Gaza, human rights, trade and the so-called “fiscal cliff.” But what was Fox News’ first reaction? The good looks of Obama’s Thai counterpart. Oh, and his comments about Thai food.
To their credit, Fox News was the only news network to cover the entire news conference, according to Mediaite. But given Fox’s usual lack of interest in Obama’s public remarks, I can’t help but think they had a reporter champing at the bit for a gotcha question or were desperately hoping he’d make a faux pas on Israel (he didn’t) or Benghazi (it didn’t come up, much to Fox’s disappointment, I’m sure).
Fox & Friends co-host Clayton Morris noted that the press conference “touched on everything from Thai food (everyone laughed appreciatively) to what’s going on in Israel… and also human rights abuses in and around the Asian region as well.” Then co-host Dave Briggs jumped in:
Two real observations from the folks on Twitter this morning. And one is the relative attractiveness of the Prime Minister of Thailand (Morris nodded his head in emphatic agreement and co-host Ainsley Earhardt said, “She’s quite beautiful”) another being the President’s thoughts on Thai food! I mean, that is going deep but that is speaking my language!
Earhardt did quickly say that Prime Minister тАкYingluck ShinawatraтАм is “also very smart.” And the entire Curvy Couch Crew complimented her for speaking English. But if they had bothered to do any research, they might have known that she got a master’s degree at Kentucky State University.
Finally, after those “enlightening” insights from the hosts, they tossed to reporter Wendell Goler
0
0
I believe Deputy PM Chalerm Yubamrung just recently blurted to a Thai reporter that indeed Chalerm Yubamrung is merely a ‘servant’ of Thaksin. Probably the whole Peau Thai Party executive ranks and ministers are too ‘servants’ of the fugitive Thaksin S.
Jory is not stupid when he says that Yingluck is merely a puppet of Thaksin S.
But Jory is being stupid when he insists that Yingluck should publicly and proudly acknowledge that fact. A stupid mis-step like what Jory suggests would be the end of Yingluck’s regime and Thaksin’s party would be outlawed (again!).
0
0
You “believe”?
Feel free to provide a credible link.
0
0
What is with SteveCM. Doesn’t he read the Thai news at all? It is common knowledge the whole Peau Thai Party serves (as in “servant”) Thaksin and only Thaksin.
But to satisfy SteveCM thirst for VichaiN fact, here is the link:
http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/322016/chalerm-sets-condition-for-interviews
“I’ve been Thaksin’s servant for a long time — don’t you know that?” Mr Chalerm told reporters on Monday (Nov. 19th).
But do you agree with me SteveCM that Jory is being stupid above with his ridiculous ‘Yingluck is a Thaksin puppet and should publicly admit it’?
0
0
It is official because The New York Times reported what every Red village in Thailand had been chanting very day: “Fugitive felon Thaksin Shinawatra is running the Thai government since day one, and Yingluck Shinawatra is a … puppet.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/30/world/asia/thaksin-shinawatra-of-thailand-wields-influence-from-afar.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0
” … For the past year and a half, by the party’s own admission, the most important political decisions in this country of 65 million people have been made from abroad, by a former prime minister who has been in self-imposed exile since 2008 to escape corruption charges…”
“… It might be described as rule by Skype. Or governance by instant messenger, a way for Mr. Thaksin to help run the country without having to face the warrant for his arrest in a case that many believe is politically motivated…”
” … “We can contact him at all hours,” said Charupong Ruangsuwan, the interior minister and secretary general of Mr. Thaksin’s Pheu Thai Party. “The world has changed. It’s a boundless world. It’s not like a hundred years ago when you had to use a telegraph.”
To illustrate the point during an interview, Mr. Charupong took out his iPhone and scrolled through a list of phone numbers for Mr. Thaksin. (Mr. Thaksin gives different numbers to different people, often depending on seniority, party officials say.)
“If we’ve got any problem, we give him a call,” Mr. Charupong said.
“ … He’s the one who formulates the Pheu Thai policies,” said Noppadon Pattama, a senior official in Mr. Thaksin’s party who also serves as his personal lawyer. “Almost all the policies put forward during the last election came from him… ”
Oh well. Thailand’s current running Yingluck ‘democracy’ is puppetry? We know ‘puppet governments’ are embarrassing, usually shady and sooner/later come to a very ugly end.
0
0
Probably much much later Vichai … and more likely Yingluck will not only complete her term but get reelected.
Thaksin did say that Peau Thai Party could put an ‘electric pole’ as candidate and still win against the Democrats in any election. We will definitely see Democrats lose in the coming Bangkok governor seat election.
The Democrats are so impotent at elections, I would expect them to lose against Thaksin’s ‘electric poles’ candidates anytime. And Yingluck is Thaksin’s No. 1 high-voltage truly electrifying manificent pole!
0
0
chat: “Probably much much later Vichai … and more likely Yingluck will not only complete her term but get reelected.”
I’m inclined to agree – much as that reality plainly causes such acute dyspepsia for some. I do wonder why they seem quite so surprised and/or imagine Thaksin’s influence is such a revelation. After all, as Thomas Fuller’s piece usefully reminds us:
While Mr. Thaksin’s role in making appointments and setting policy is unusual by the standards of other democracies, voters knew what they were getting. His Pheu Thai Party’s widely publicized slogan during the 2011 election campaign was: “Thaksin thinks; Pheu Thai does.”
Worth noting (as Vichai N predictably doesn’t) Thitinan’s wry but also realistic observation in the piece about “a kind of uneasy accommodation”. Very Thai, IMO…..
0
0
Obviously SteveCM is content (happy even?) that Thailand Yingluck’s regime is a puppet government with strings being pulled by a convicted corrupt fugitive politician. I don’t think SteveCM had even endured even a hiccup, much less any stomach upsets, from the past and present antics of fugitive convicted corrupt Thaksin Shinawatra.
But my warning stands. Yingluck’s puppet government is very vulnerable because Yingluck’s regime is a charade … because the real leader or ‘shadow’ Prime Minister is Thaksin Shinawatra running the Thai government, and all the unseen shady sleazy profitable multi-billion deals the old Thaksin-cum-Potjaman were notorious for (the 30% under-the-table-cuts remember?).
Or maybe Chat is right … that somehow Yingluck could be able to complete her term and get reelected, despite all the Thaksin behind-the-scenes sleaze and shady deals. In Thailand’s murky politics anything is possible. But neither Chat or SteveCM could be able to convince me that under puppet Yingluck S., Thailand is a functional or functioning democracy.
0
0
No Vichai, however [cough] “obvious” to your mindset, neither “happy” nor even “content” – but certainly unsurprised and recognising the reality of what is. Neither do you have any insight into my view of Thaksin’s misdeeds or their context. As to setting out to “convince” you of anything, that’s a task that I’ve long regarded as fruitless.
0
0
Since SteveCM mentioned it, perhaps he could clarify what exactly is SteveCM’s “view of Thaksin’s misdeeds or their context.” That would certainly help instead of his obvious embarrassments at ‘coughing’ some incoherent posters here in there describing his ‘obvious’ displeasures at one Vichai N.
0
0
BANGKOK – For some Thais, the country’s latest hit soap opera seemed strangely familiar. The prime-time drama “Above the Clouds” revolves around black magic and a corrupt politician aiming to bag a lucrative satellite project, and appeared to some viewers to echo a few aspects of the life of one of the country’s most controversial leaders, ousted premier Thaksin Shinawatra.
An ambitious telecommunications tycoon who often refers to fortune tellers, Mr. Thaksin was driven from office in a military coup six years ago and was later convicted on a corruption charge which he says was trumped up to discredit him.
But if all that wasn’t enough to get tongues wagging, broadcaster BEC TERO Entertainment PCL unexpectedly pulled the final episode from its market-leading Channel-3 network on Friday, sparking a firestorm of speculation that the government of Mr. Thaksin’s sister, Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, is trying to set the networks’s TV schedules.
National Broadcasting and Telecommunications Commission commissioner Supinya Klangnarong Saturday said she wondered whether the country’s politicians had pressured BEC TERO to pull the plug on the show in order to protect its concession to run Channel 3, while the opposition Democrat Party is urging Thailand’s independent Ombudsman to investigate why Channel 3 suddenly dropped the drama. In a meeting Monday, the broadcasting commission decided to gather more information before deciding whether to call in Channel 3 executives for an explanation.
Network officials aren’t commenting on the decision to cancel the show. In a televised advisory to viewers who tuned in to watch Friday’s installment, Channel 3 said that the network considered the content of “Above the Clouds” to be inappropriate, without elaborating.
Varathep Rattanakorn, who supervises television broadcasters as part of his job as a minister in Ms. Yingluck’s office, denied that the government is directing events at Channel 3. A deputy spokeswoman for the ruling Puea Thai Party dismissed suggestions that Mr. Thaksin himself had ordered show’s run to end from his base in Dubai.
Either way, the controversy shows the pull which Mr. Thaksin continues to exert over Thailand despite in Dubai to avoid imprisonment on his corruption conviction.
His sister’s government is looking for a way to bring him back to the country a free man. It is considering an amnesty bill that would exonerate persons accused of political crimes, and which would enable Mr. Thaksin’s return. But Mr. Thaksin – the only Thai leader to be re-elected – is considered as toxic among the highest ranks of the country’s military and civil service. His brash, almost presidential style of government grates in a country where traditionalists insist on lavish displays of subservience to its constitutional monarchy. The prospect of his return to the political scene already is raising temperatures, and last year triggered violent scuffles in Thailand’s Parliament as Mr. Thaksin’s opponents attempted to derail discussions on the proposed amnesty.
Now, the axing of “Above the Clouds” is adding to the sense of unease that a larger conflict is looming.
Dialogue from previous episodes offered a sometimes biting commentary on the acrimonious state of Thai politics. In one scene a corrupt politician, a deputy prime minister, justifies feathering his nest by saying that “it’s totally stupid for a person with power to fail to use his power.” His nemesis, a do-gooding prime minister, retorts by saying “People who cheat the county don’t deserve any honor.”
The denouement, though, might come from not from Thailand’s politicians, but its soap viewers.
Thailand’s Constitutional Protection Association says the move to axe “Above the Clouds” violates consumers’ rights. The association’s secretary-general, Srisuwan Janya, said the group will petition Thai courts and the Consumers Protection Board to instruct Channel 3 to broadcast the remaining episodes, while a late-night TV sex therapist quit his show in protest at the axing of “Above the Clouds”. Kampanart Tansithabudhkun, host of “Spice Up Your Love, Spice Up Your Gratification”, described the canceling of the show as “a disgrace” on his Facebook page.
Parliamentary opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva, meanwhile, took to the Twitter social media urge the broadcaster to reconsider.
“I am not a drama viewer, but (axing the series) is tantamount to infringing on people’s rights and liberties,” Mr. Abhsisit, a former prime minister, said.
So far, though, there is no sign just yet of viewers getting the sense of closure many seem to be craving, just like in Thailand’s never-ending real-life political battles. This drama could be set to run a while longer.
0
0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBxV62ZLoTo
One of the show.
0
0
I was completely entertained by the movie “Lincoln the Vampire Hunter” and this Hollywood version of Honest Abe’s did not provoke much controversy in USA I heard. But the Thai soap opera “Above the Clouds” is causing much hullabaloo because it closely parallels “Dishonest Thak’s” rise and fall; and my maid who had been devoted to this series told me that the fairy tale ending was the coming of Thailand’s first lady PM and which was why the TV show was quashed.
That saddens me. Because I heard that other exciting and controversial life-to-fiction Thai movies were being planned including:
(1) “Lt. Abhisit” – the story of the honest good-looking society darling who rose to be Thailand’s PM but was undone by the military rank he forgot he possessed until reminded by a powerful Defense Minister who resented society boys not bragging about their ranks (or medals) while holding an elected office.
(2) “Lt. Duang Yubamrung” – the story of the rapid rise (in the military ranks) by a thuggish son of a powerful politician whose claim to his rank rested on his sharpshooting skills ably demonstrated during a bar melee when a police sergeant was shot dead.
(3) “The Red Village” – This is a really scary horror movie. It seems to be about walking zombies who only sit down for lectures from mentors wearing Red coats; and, all lectures start with the Red mentors raising a huge photo to which the zombies start chanting “Thaksin! Thaksin!”
0
0
Here is another one for you Vichai N.
http://www.newmandala.org
/2011/04/13/seditious-tales-in-thailand/
The snopsis and the screenplay are already to go. Just run down to the Bangkok Bank and show it to them, you’ll get the finance in a flash. After that the bidding war for production will begin. With channel 3’s strong record of edgy innovation they are a shoe to get the gig.
Everything is possible in the land of the free. Isn’t it?
0
0
Some more war movie near Siam Cenima.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=8j5SwKStSFA
0
0
This story even made news in Oz.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-08/an-thai-soap-opera-axed-over-fears-it-could-destabilise-country/4456244
Even the commentators are the usual suspects.
0
0