MB UNIUD

Decide if you agree with the considerations below

1.

Tuptim's execution is the strongest sequence of the film. Roger Bondelli's editing juxtaposes

the public execution of the lovers with Anna praying in her English home and Mongkut praying

at a temple. Instead of showing the failure of Siamese culture, Tuptim and Mongkut accept

their culture and the consequences of their actions. However, Anna's Bible offers her no solace,

and in her frustration she knocks over her tea service: Christianity isn't without value, but it's

inappropriate in Siam and leads to destruction.

I agree with this consideration. While the two lovers are going to die scenes of Mongkut and Anna appear. He is praing at the temple and she despairs because she can't help them. As a matter of fact Anna can't stand the fact that they have to be killed but Siamese culture is different than English one ad she can't tell Siam's king what to do or not to do. From the scene of the public execution of the two lovers Anna's culture and Siamese culture mixed up and they try to conjugate. The scene is the strongest one in the film because from that moment something changed in the film like Mongkut's decisions.

2.

In this postcolonial retelling of the relationship between the English teacher Anna Leon Owens

and King Mongkut, the film does not make the common mistake of overvaluing or mystifying

Eastern culture. The Siamese are not portrayed as "inscrutable" or "mysterious" or innately

superior. Though the minor English characters are shown as treacherous and hypocritical,

treachery also exists within Siamese culture--and is revealed to Mongkut by a self-serving

English merchant. Buddhism is portrayed neither as pagan superstitions (as in the earlier

movies) nor as more spiritual than Christianity. The respective religions are presented instead

as separate paths. The King is shown to be a caring and loving husband to his many wives and

concubines. When Anna' son, Louis, asks his mother "Why doesn't Queen Victoria have more

than one husband?"--it is less a ridiculous thought than an honest questioning of cultural

assumptions.

I agree with this consideration. I think so because the cultures presented in the film are equal in some points even if they may seem very different. As a matter of fact there is the theme of treachery both in Siamese and in English culture. I think the most relevant difference is the fact that England is roled by a woman while Siam is roled by a very strong man who has  many wives and a lot of children.

DISCUSSION TOPICS - Siam, Siamese traditions, conflicts between cultures, concubines,

colonization, love, murder, death of loved ones, grieving, betrayal, courage.

I think that the three most important topics of the film are conflicts between cultures, love and grieving. As a matter of fact there are a lot of characters with grief, physical or emotional. We can see the two lovers that suffer for the frustrating or the king who cries for his little daughter. All that succedes in this film is caused by the conflict between cultures. So I think it is the most important and the biggest problem of the story of this film. But there are also important love stories: the one between the two youngs that died,and the one between the king and Anna.

MESSAGES:

1. Tradition should not be followed blindly, without thought or examination;

2. Leadership is about doing the right thing, not inspiring fear or appearing to be strong: We see that king Mongku appears very strong and all people are afraid of him,even his children. I think that it may be important for being respected by the people, but respect can be earned even if you simply do the right thing. I think that king must be a superior person, authoritative but he has to take good and right decisions. If he inspires fear he would appear more and more as a "monster" and people could go on without learning nothing relevant.

• 1- Who is the speaking voice? The speaking voice is the first Mongkut's son who is the prince of Siam.
• 2- Why did the director choae that narrative tecnee? I think that the director makes the child speak because he wants to show things by someone that sees all things at the same. As a matter of fact a child doesn't know the defferences between cultures, he looks at things as they are the same for everyone.