Original subtitles

My name is Anocha Suwichakornpong.

I was born in Chonburi, Thailand.

I grew up in Pattaya,

a seaside town about two hours away from Bangkok.

I spent my childhood there.

I loved watching movies as a kid, but mainly Hollywood films.

Those were the only kind of films we used to get.

I wasn't exposed to foreign films.

But when I went to study in the UK

I got the chance to see more foreign films.

I'd often visit a video rental shop - back then it was VHS.

I liked looking at the World Cinema section

as those video covers were much more striking.

So I started renting them.

And the more I watched them, the more I liked them

because they were different from the cinema that I knew.

I was really getting into it and I began to feel I wanted to make a film too.

I felt I had some stories to tell.

I began to imagine, this is how the story should be,

this is how the film should look.

But I didn't do it as I didn't know how to get started and I didn't know anyone -

I had no friends or family members who were associated with filmmaking.

So, it just remained a dream.

I finished a Master's degree in the UK in Arts and Cultural Studies.

Then, I came back to Thailand.

I did several odd jobs. I changed jobs a few times.

My life became static.

I kept thinking about filmmaking. I wanted to go back to study.

So, I did. I thought that I should do what I really wanted to do.

I just didn't want to look back in my old age

and regret not doing the thing I most wanted to do in life.

So film school seemed a good idea, as I didn't know how else to start.

Back then, the Internet wasn't as fast or as full of information like it is today.

So I thought I should go to film school to study filmmaking.

I applied to film schools in New York.

I graduated from Columbia University.

There was a bit of a turning point

when my graduation film, "Graceland", was selected

for the Cannes Film Festival Cinefondation student film competition.

The film had a good response and was invited to other festivals,

winning some awards, which encouraged me further

and made me think maybe I was on the right track.

"Mundane History", or "Jao Nok Krajok" in Thai

is based on a short story which I'd written many years ago.

But I had to adapt and expand it as it was a very short story, only one page.

It was written like a diary entry, from the protagonist...

...writing about his feelings towards his father.

That was the story, basically.

I wanted to make a film about that story.

So I turned it into a screenplay. It deals with social issues.

It required a different structure, when I adapted it to a screenplay,

being feature-length. I felt it needed more events, more characters.

But yes, that was how the film originated.

As for the title, "Mundane History",

well, actually the Thai title is "Jao Nok Krajok",

which in English means 'the sparrow'.

In Thai it is "nok krajok".

But "nok krajok" in Thai has double meanings.

One is the name of the bird.

The other is a derogatory term used to look down on something or someone.

Whatever is deemed commonplace is usually called "krajok".

The word is used to mean something cheap or worthless.

Then I found out later that the name of the bird in Thai,

which is "krajok" actually derived from this word

because "krajok" (sparrows) are everywhere in Thailand.

So, it's as if when there are so many of them, they become worthless.

Nobody cares about them.

I felt that the word has a rich meaning.

And it fits with what I wanted to say in the film.

So, I titled it "Jao Nok Krajok" in Thai.

As for the English title, "Mundane History",

I wanted to have two words whose meanings clash with one another.

"Mundane" hints at something very ordinary, with no significance.

But "history" connotes something grand, and meaningful.

An event must be so extraordinary in order to make it into history.

I felt it was a dichotomy.

By juxtaposing these two words,

it would create the meaning which I wanted the film to convey,

which is to say an ordinary story vis-a-vis history.

The film talks about the human condition.

About birth, ageing, sickness, death.

These concepts are embodied in the characters of the father and son.

Birth and sickness.

It's a life cycle.

Not only do humans have a life cycle, but so does a society.

A country, a star... everything has to go through a life cycle,

which consists of birth, decay,

death and rebirth.

I suppose you could say the film is political.

But in actual fact, the script or even the short story -

to go back to the beginning -

was more to do with a social issue, a socio-political issue

rather than national politics.

It was more about politics in everyday life.

But it turned out that while the film was in production,

and by the time it was finished,

Thai politics had undergone severe and radical changes.

This affected every single person in Thailand,

whether an ordinary person or someone with a title or high status.

Every class within society was affected. I felt that it was a collision

between everyday life politics and national politics.

It fused into one.

Therefore if you asked me if this film is political, I suppose it is.

But like I said, in the beginning it was more to do with socio-politics.

The fact that I am Thai and I live in Thailand

my beliefs are formed by my environment

and the beliefs that exist in my society.

And in Thailand, there exist many beliefs that seem unnatural,

mysterious or superstitious.

Sometimes it's a natural phenomenon, and sometimes it seems supernatural.

On one hand, you could call it metaphysics.

On the other hand, this concept is inherent in Buddhism -

the four stages of the life cycle.

And rebirth.

Actually, rebirth is a Hindu concept.

But Buddhism in Thailand was influenced by Hinduism,

so us Thais share this kind of belief.

It's very normal in Thailand to talk about the transmigration of souls,

or ghosts and spirits. Things that may not seem to exist.

But actually, it cannot yet be proven -

even science still cannot prove whether these things exist or not.

But to sum it up, these are the kind of beliefs

that float around in my society, in my country.

And I'm a part of that society.

So, naturally, I wanted to talk about this phenomenon.

I worked with my editor, with whom I'd worked on my previous films.

His name is Lee Chatametikool.

We talked a lot about the structure of the film.

And during editing, we tried...

Eventually, we found a song which had a structure that was similar to our film

which is like a firework that begins with a small explosion and then expands.

And there's another explosion and it expands

and another explosion and still it expands.

So, that's how the structure of the film is,

the same as the structure of the music we chose.

The main song is by a Malaysian band called 'Furniture'.

Apart from the soundtrack, the use of sound was important.

The protagonist is paralysed.

He cannot move his lower body and has to stay in bed.

Therefore, his field of vision is limited.

He can only see what's in his bedroom, at the foot of the bed,

the windows on his left,

the bookshelf on his right, and the door.

But all the time he can hear the sounds outside his room

especially the other sounds in the house.

The sound of his father's footsteps,

who sometimes doesn't come into his room.

All these things are in the film

but I don't show them, I only wanted to use the sounds.

The protagonist constantly reacts to these sounds.

I felt that the off-screen sounds are very important

because they convey

what is happening around him without showing it.

The sound acts as a guide.

The film's first screening in Thailand was at a film festival:

The World Film Festival of Bangkok.

It had to be submitted to the censor board.

And it received a 20+ certificate

which was the most restrictive rating we have in Thailand.

It was also the first Thai film to get this rating.

At first, I was a bit shocked

as I didn't expect it to have such a restrictive rating.

But for whatever reason, that was what it got, so I accepted it.

At least, I didn't have to cut out any scenes

or have anything censored.

As for the feedback

well, actually, I'm not the kind of person

who will follow up on audience reactions,

if they like the film or not.

But I do think the film did generate some discussions

which was a good thing for me. I was happy with that.

When it was screened abroad,

the audience reactions were probably different.

I felt that for the Thai audience,

the subject matter, by which I meant the politics,

was so close to our hearts.

For audiences abroad who might not have been following Thai politics,

they might not realise that the film has a political subtext.

But I felt it was OK, because the film has other dimensions.

Every viewer can have their own view and interpretation.

That's the function of the film.

My next film is going to be opposite to "Mundane History".

"Mundane History" talks about masculinity.

And the structure of Thai society.

But in my next film, the one I'm currently working on,

it will be about femininity

which may seem like the opposite end of the spectrum

but in actual fact, the antipodes may be closer than we think.

I would like to investigate that space.

The film will have mainly female characters.

And it will take place in many provinces in Thailand

which is also the opposite to "Mundane History".