|
They know that Don (Petchtai Wongkamlao), a former villager, is the culprit and that he has taken the head to Bangkok. In the city Ting easily finds Don but he has already disposed of the head. We are shown that Don makes a living as a thief, gambler and associates with drug dealing - he has been thoroughly corrupted by the city. At first he just wants to shrug off Ting but when he cannot get rid of him he tries stealing from him, and then when he discovers that he can fight like a one-man army he tries exploiting him in the gambling dens of Bangkok.
It might all seem like a comic-strip action movie, but there is a sub-plot where a young woman over-doses on drugs, which indicates the ‘real’ evils of the city. In contrast, the unsophisticated “country bumpkin” Ting, and his rural village are shown to be spiritually and morally rich. Indeed, to emphasis this point when Ting is offered the winnings from one of his fights he rejects it. Despite all the obstacles put in his way Ting stays focussed purely on his mission to get back the Buddha’s head. The
storyline is simple to the point where you feel
like shouting at the screen “give him back the
head”, but this would mean losing face which
would not be acceptable at any cost to the
film‘s characters. When I viewed it at the 5th
Bangkok
International Film Festival one French
critic shook his head afterwards and said this
was a very “bad film”. I accept it’s not an art
movie, but I think the consensus opinion was
that it is a very exciting action movie. The
set-pieces are excellently staged, especially
the fight sequences and the extended Tuk Tuk
chase, and it moves at a fast clip.
Nigel
Watson http://www.actualtests.com/exam-C4090-958.htm http://www.pass4sure.org/EMC/E20-891.html http://www.test-king.com/training/cissp-bootcamp.htm
|
After much
fighting, chasing and action Ting meets with the
Mr Big of crime in the city. He looks like he
should be in a James Bond movie, as like most
Bond villains he has several physical
disabilities that emphasis his underlying evil
and symbolically ‘disabled’ brain. For a start
he is wheelchair bound and as icing on the cake
he needs an electronic vocaliser to speak with.
He has a penchant for collecting ancient and
valuable treasures, and like any self-respecting
Bond villain he has do everything on a grand and
eccentric level. He hides all his stolen
treasures in a net submerged in the Choa Phraya
river; not the best place for preserving your or
other people’s valuables. Towards the end of the
film there is a set-piece in a huge cave where
his men are busy drilling off the head of a huge
Buddha statue. I’m sure Freud would have many
erudite things to say about such an
interest in Buddha heads, but on a more
practical level wouldn’t this desecration ruin
the value of the head? Since the head is about
the size of a living room it would be of
decorative value as a garden ornament to impress
the neighbours but it might also be spotted by
the most short-sighted policemen. But then what
do I know about the criminal mind except that in
this case the villain is literally and
metaphorically ‘heading’ for trouble.
Another
thing regarding the villain is that he starts
shouting in the cave when the Buddha’s head is
about to roll into action. So are we led to
believe that he did not need to speak like
Stephen Hawkins after all?