Vagues invisibles

What do I mean by that? Two things come to mind (although I'll let, better yet encourage you to interpret it in any way or fashion you like):

1) This movie (waves) does have a slow pace ... is this bad? I don't think so, but if you're used to mainstream movies and want some big bangs every other minute you are definitely wrong here!

2) This movie is also not supposed to be as entertaining as a mainstream movie (that's why you can't ride it). It's gritty and raw (not as a documentary, of course) and the camera let's you inside. You won't get pretty pictures, but you will get shots that feed the mood of our main characters.

You will also get a man on his journey (literally and philosophical). A great ending, that some might not like (too quiet), but there could not be any other ending ... imo!

I just want to add the interesting parallels to Pan-Ek's film "Last Life in the Universe." Most of these are probably quite obvious, and I suspect there are more subtle comparisons.

1) The lead character is or was involved with a Yakuza gang. 2) The similarity of the lead character's name Kyoji to Kenji (Last Life). 3) The name Noi and Nid used in both films 4) The reference to Lizard. 5) The atmosphere and music very similar. 6) The theme of death.

This is the type of film that would require a deeper analysis to uncover its finer details and meanings. I would agree that overall, it's not as strong a film as Last Life in the Universe. However, the mood created on the ship to Phuket was in itself, masterful, surreal, other-worldly. In fact, at one point I had thought that Kyoji had already entered hell, and had departed this world.

There's a lot to like here, though judging from the reviews there is not enough to please everyone.

The main character is unforgettable. The more see of him, the more there is to like or relate to. Each scene is a gem--tight, edgy, emotional in some way or another. And there a lot of variety to the scenes--the action moves around to very different places, always offering a lot for us to take in.

Yet even with something big going on in front of the camera, this is pretty much the antithesis of an action film. The director gives us lots to watch, but what we're most drawn to is on the inside--brooding, fear, struggling to get by, not knowing how things will work out.

To me the film succeeded both as storytelling and as a character study. It's one of those films I didn't want to have end, because the plot and the technique were both so absorbing. seeing.

Last Life in the Universe is one of, if not the best movie I've ever seen (save for Trainspotting). Because of this, like many others, I tracked down Pen-Ek's other films and found this. I have to say that it was disappointing. Many here argue that those who did not like this film simple "didn't get it," because they don't have the mind or tastes for it. I'd have to disagree. If you appreciate Last Life then there's really no reason why you shouldn't be able to appreciate this, (had it good) as both films move at the same pace and have all the same people behind them. (I liked how they used the names Nid/Noi again, does he always do that?) Invisible waves looks the same, sounds the same, but for some reason just doesn't feel as good. Something is missing, something that could have been great was lost somewhere. Last Life didn't have much of a story but managed to be a masterpiece, and comparatively this film's story is much better but just doesn't work. One thing that really bugged me was the acting. All of it felt very fake; I was too often reminded that I was watching a film. The dialogue was poorly written, in my opinion, and probably contributed to that. Were Tadanobu Asano not in this I wouldn't even bother, even out of curiosity for Pen-Ek, as he is this films one and only saving grace. But even then he plays almost the exact same character as he did in Last Life, only a lot less interesting. All the ingredients for a movie like Last Life are here, but in the end it didn't just work.

I can't help but react to the only 2 reviews posted on this site.

Surprisingly, they are both from Singapore (like me) and both hate the film with a vengeance. To correct myself, Dick hates it, Peter dislikes it. What is most interesting is a display of how a film explode an audience.

Why is there so much frustration when one cannot comprehend a work of art? I'm not saying that the inability to understand is a reflection of one's level of intelligence. i'm simply asking the big EMOTIONALLY question. why do people get so frustrated over something they have problem comprehending? Have you ever dream a dream that you do not understand? Have you ever dream of signs, symbols, incidents, characters, animals, locations that doesn't make sense at all? how do you come to terms with those unfulfilling surrealist images?

Honestly, i may not get the film myself. It wasn't one of the most engaging film i have watched. it was certainly much weaker than Last Life of the Universe. But i see it as a surrealist film. The constant hollow sound through out the film may have dropped a hint. It is simply a dream about a man who is confronted by betrayal of people close to him and maybe even himself. The faint bizarre incidents creates many space for observations with the characters and the environment.

Todate, there are only postings from Singapore audience on IMDb. This shows that we are one of the earliest privilege film buffs in the world who get a chance to preview the film. It shows a great deal of confidence from the filmmaker in Singapore audience. I do not agree that it is a bad decision to bring in such art-house film. the idea about art-house often equivalent to no formula and therefore equivalent to no traditional benchmarks. there is always a different appetite needed by a different audience. i embrace picture house effort and i hope they continue to brave obscure titles with huge risk at box office for that is the spirit of art-house.

when i walk into a theatre to watch an art film, i'm expecting to be challenge as an audience.

My purpose of this writeup is merely to provide a different viewpoint. no offense.

I'm a mortal, i get angry with many things and people around me. For example, I always get angry with my dad cos i do not understand most of his behaviours and ideas. Therefore i can understand a frustrated audience as well.