Simply A Masterpiece

i must have seen a different film!!

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

"Cemetery of Splendour" is technically immaculate - perhaps the first thing to stand out is the framing; every shot involves near-flawless subject composition, and in such a way that the figures involved do not appear to be arranged in a way chosen specifically for the sake of the framing - instead, everything looks natural. However, with this said, the contents of the film, i.e. the people, only assume such a natural manner for as long as doing so serves the technical aspects of the film. When they do not, however, all naturalism flies out the window - characters seem stilted and awkward, and possess no fluidity or chemistry whatsoever. This same flaw applies to the writing as well - every conversation seems like inane small talk, and any attempt to introduce a weighty theme through conversation only seems like a sudden and clunky interjection, and the conversation still carries on in the same mundane manner. In regards to the themes - they are both daring and interesting. "Cemetery of Splendour" explores themes that are, overall, mystical in their evocation, yet the dull and sterile atmosphere in which they are introduced seems like a vacuum to what breath of life they may bring, and so the themes of the film are left hanging off forced conversations - stunted and immobile. The film also seems to be set in a world wherein mystical notions are so commonplace, that they are often swept amidst the numerous trivial things that happen within a day; machines that affect patients' dreams are advertised as though they were simply handy electronic tools, a dream-interpreter is pointed out by a nurse and described as "talented" as though her job weren't paranormal in the slightest, and the visiting of two deities is treated merely as an uncommon occurrence. The resultant effect is of a narrative that merely hovers about each theme without penetrating the surface, only including them rather than exploring. "Cemetery of Splendour" includes a few odd moments scattered throughout the film, likely in an attempt to spur thought. These include a scene where people, sitting and enjoying a view, play a seemingly spontaneous game of musical chairs, which reoccurs later on; a strange and idle creature floating in a lake, which the main character later recounts as though from a dream; a giant microbe floating through the sky; and a strange editing ploy, wherein an object in the water is examined from one angle, then suddenly examined from the other, creating a jarring and somewhat haphazard effect - this is executed near the beginning of the film, and repeated near the end; among other scenes. Perhaps these moments of strangeness tie in with the film's concluding notion - that the majority of the narrative is a dream co-experienced by two characters, and hence these odd episodes seek to fortify that notion. The film also seeks to tie in two of its overarching presences - the notion of a spiritual battlefield, situated on top of the very hospital that most of the film takes place in, and the continued digging operation conducted upon the hospital's grounds - perhaps the digging is in an attempt to uncover the bodies suspected to be buried there (after all, the film does make several references to "past lives," and it is suggested that the spiritual battle, although being present simultaneously in a seemingly metaphysical manner, is in fact the echo of an actual historical battle). This tie-in, as well as the narrative's initiation and conclusion as a mutual dream, are the only forms of closure within the film, and they are largely unsatisfying. The end result feels as though every dull and strained moment leading up to it was merely in service of something ultimately unrewarding, as fluff stuffing fabric. In addition to this, the director seeks to wield the film's arid style as though it were restraint, by including unprecedented close-ups of characters during some of the film's final scenes, as well as one occasion near the end where the camera moves about its axis - the only point in the film where it does. However, the moments where this restraint is supposed to pay off seem, much like the narrative conclusions, unsatisfying and ultimately a waste of what could've a far more suitable style for a film exploring heavily mystical and even metaphysical themes. Overall, while "Cemetery of Splendour" boosts astounding technical aspects - most notably its framing - and interesting themes often excluded from cinema, the film's lifeless and awkward execution provides no fertile ground for such themes to flourish, and hence the finished piece remains as more of a blueprint than a fully formed vision.

I got fooled again by the high ratings on IMDb. It was my mistake though, didn't see there were only thirteen reviews before mine. So it's obvious that the positive reviewers are or paid to do so or are related to someone playing in the movie or crew. I already saw a lot of really bad movies but this one must be in the top three of worse movies I ever saw. It's because I took a very long nap in the afternoon that I didn't fall asleep watching this garbage. Cinicly the movie is about sleep, while you will literally fight to not fall asleep watching this. I don't even want to say anything about the story line because there is just none. The only thing I can say about that is it's extremely boring. I didn't think it was even possible to make something so boring and doing it for more then two hours. Now if you are like the thirteen other morons that wrote a positive review you will probably like the complete absurd scenes like a shot of a book that goes on for several minutes, a scene where people change seats on benches in a park for several minutes, shots of a wall for several minutes, shots of a tree for several minutes and so on. I see this movie is categorized as fantasy also. Don't get fooled by that either, there is no fantasy at all. You can't even rate the actors because I don't think they are actually real actors. They're probably some random people they took out of the jungle there and gave a couple of dollars to just sit around and look depressed. In conclusion, if you are like me and always finish a movie you started to watch, even though it's absolute garbage, do not start watching this one. It will be two hours of your life you will never get back. You could pay me 10000 euros to watch it again and I won't do it. If you're not like me just start watching it and I will guarantee you that you will give up before half of the movie. Do something useful instead. Paint a wall or so and watch it dry. That will be more pleasant to watch then this.

Every moment of this film is enjoyable. For much of the movie, it struck me as no more or less than a solid example of the cinema of auteur Arichitapong Weerasthakul. He is, perhaps, the most sincerely and successfully magical-realist artist that cinema has known. The social rhythms seem utterly naturalistic, even when the main character, an old, recently handicapped hospital worker, is having a pleasant chat with ancient deities. As with early Peter Weir, Weerasthakul's natural landscapes are utterly, well, natural yet they seem to suggest a haunting, an otherworldly force that's face is the world, one which may or may not be benevolent. History, for Weerasthakul, is the haunting of the present and future by past lives and past worlds, spectral- beings that traverse and are traversed by the present. During Cemetery's last scenes I came to think this may be Weerasthakul's most fully realized work. The penultimate shot is extraordinary. The main character stares out at a central square of the village where the film has taken place, which the current government is digging up, presumably to make way for some "modern convenience". Children play over the new ruins like spirits of the future levitating over a present fading into the past. Our lives, our worlds, can only exist atop the ruins and amid the ghosts of the past. Destruction is therefore creation. But that doesn't make destruction, perhaps especially in its contemporary, mechanized form, any less terrifying.

A young woman sings to her lover in public, ancient kings use the energy of sleeping soldiers to fight battles and figurine princesses come to life and discuss things like skin-tone and how much they appreciate offerings. Such characters and scenes are not brought about through computer animation, elaborate costumes or thrilling action sequences, but mundane and leisurely compositions.The film follows Jen and Keng, local women who voluntarily visit and help care for soldiers in a remote and tiny hospital. The soldiers seem to be under the sway of a spell or perhaps dreams and thoughts of their own making. Keng is a psychic and has the ability to communicate to the soldiers in their sleep. The whole film is something of a meandering daydream or series of magic spells, which is both good and bad. It is cerebral, loosely organized and full of depth. It is a kaleidoscope of Thai culture, lawn ornaments, colored lights, dreams and figures from the past, present and future, among other things. According to the TIFF catalog the film blends "neuroscience, Khmer animism, meditations on war and death, and the quotidian details of everyday life in a small village." They mention this, of course, just in case you caught too much Khmer animism and neuroscience in previous films. Seen at the Toronto International Film Festival 2015.