Angelina Jolie’s Cambodian film ‘First They Killed My Father’ has a trailer

Embed from Getty Images

Netflix has finally released a trailer for Angelina Jolie’s First They Killed My Father. This is the now-controversial film based on Loung Ung’s memoir of the same name, telling the true story of living through the Khmer Rouge genocide in the 1970s. I’m sure the trailer would have always been noteworthy simply because Angelina Jolie is the director. But the trailer will get even more attention because of the controversy over the audition process for the child actors in the film. Jolie’s statement over the weekend about the audition process was also an effort to clean up this mess ahead of the trailer debut, I would assume. Here’s the trailer:

Since I haven’t read the memoir, I did not know what the film was going to entail. Loung Ung and her brother Meng survived under the Khmer Rouge for five years (1975-80) before they escaped to Thailand, where they became refugees and then relocated to the U.S. The film deals mainly with those five years under a violent, autocratic regime.

I tend to think the fact that Netflix is doing this movie, and that people will be able to stream it from the comfort of home, will end up helping people see this difficult story. Most people – myself included – wouldn’t seek this out in a theater.

7th Annual Veuve Clicquot Polo Classic

Photo courtesy of Getty, poster courtesy of Netflix.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

101 Responses to “Angelina Jolie’s Cambodian film ‘First They Killed My Father’ has a trailer”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. rachel says:

    It’s a great poster.

  2. NotSoSocialButterfly says:

    Heartbreaking.

    • Belle Epoch says:

      I want to turn away, but we have to face how awful people can be (and still are in some places). AJ may be beautiful and famous but she truly cares about war, refugees, world health, and so on. I wish Trump would watch this instead of starting a war with N Korea!

  3. ArchieGoodwin says:

    Not sure this website can survive an Angie thread and a J-Law thread in the same day 🙂

    I won’t be watching, didn’t watch the trailer, not going to. Don’t buy her statement, because at the end of the day, like I’ve said before, this was always about making a movie.

    • Goats on the Roof says:

      My feelings exactly. Not watching.

    • Ollie says:

      Yep, not going to watch this.

    • V4Real says:

      I won’t be watching either and it’s not because of the casting process. I don’t see anything special in the trailer. I understand why it’s on Netflix

    • Jegede says:

      LOL.

      And agreed.

    • SpareRib says:

      I hope you read/have read the memoir then. Dont disrespect this story and those who can finally speak out about the horrors to a wider audience because you dont like a celebrity. Never miss the chance to learn something or see from a different perspective.

      • V4Real says:

        Listen sometimes not wanting to see a film has nothing to do with not liking a celeb. I had no interest in seeing Lone Survivor do you think it’s b/c I dont like Mark Wahlberg. I had no interest in seeing Bradley Cooper tan booty shorts movie when it was out does that mean I don’t like Bradley.

        The film doesn’t interest me and it’s my choice to not want to see it. So you go ahead and enjoy the film and leave me alone over not wanting to see a Netflix budget movie.

    • magnoliarose says:

      Me neither. If I want to watch an excellent film about the Khmer Rouge I will stream The Killing Fields. The Cambodian co star is a man who barely escaped. He ended up winning an Academy Award. The film won several other awards too. It was filmed in Thailand.

      • MostlyMegan says:

        I hope this girl finally got enough money from Angelina to bury her grandfather in a decent way. That is all I can think about.

      • Zigga says:

        The Killing Fields is brilliant and one of the all time great movies. It tells the story of the Khmer Rouge with brutal and heartbreaking honesty without coming across as a Hollywood production trying to preach. Haing S. Ngor and Sam Waterston were both powerful in their roles, especially Haing S. Ngor, who himself survived the Khmer Rouge.

      • Maria says:

        The Killing Fields isn’t the only story to be told about the Khmer Rouge. How do you know this story isn’t as good or better? That’s like saying someone knows everything to know about slavery because they watched Roots — no need to watch Glory, 12 Years a Slave, Beloved, Amistad, etc. One perspective is enough? This movie obviously won’t be for everyone but the knee jerk dismissal of Loung Ung’s story because Angelina Jolie is making the film, or because it’s on Netflix, is…distasteful.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Zigga, I love this film. Haing S. Ngor’s escape is a story of its own.
        There are several good documentaries on the subject s well.

      • magnoliarose says:

        No Maris I am not rejecting this story.
        It has nothing to do with Netflix since I support Netflix and Amazon because they give small films a chance to be made. I don’t reject the subject matter I reject the ethics behind the casting, the use of real soldiers and I reject the idea that this movie was made in Cambodia. Finally, I don’t think she is a very good director. In my opinion she would be better off exploring these issues as a documentary filmmaker.
        I don’t flinch from hard subjects. I am just not a person who thinks Hollywood is a source of deep understanding of history or the last stop in efforts to expose atrocity.
        The Killing Fields is one of many films about this but it is most likely the easiest sourced since others are often very small productions from years ago or foreign. There are small independent video rental stores that may have them but those are a dying breed themselves.
        After Slumdog Millionaire I would expect more sensitivity when casting children living in 3rd World poverty. Since she is a humanitarian I am disappointed in her methods because I expected her to be beyond reproach but this is not the case. The excuses her fans make won’t change anything since they aren’t objective critics in the first place. They can’t seem to accept that it is not about AJ the person but about her actions in this case.
        Personally I prefer documentaries and books about complex subjects if I want to learn about them. Well made films are important but I choose those based on artistic expression as well as the handling of the subject. Ethics are a consideration as well.
        What I find troubling is that people supporting the film can’t accept the stated reasons those who won’t. Not one person said a word about content. Now it is about Netflix? Not one person said they can’t handle the subject matter. Or we must be haters. AJ is a celebrity, and she does good work but it doesn’t make her immune to criticism. I am not invested in her any more than I am invested in any other celebrity. I like some things about her and I don’t like other things about her. We gossip here and it is all about opinion.

      • Zigga says:

        @Maria, I never said that the Killing Fields is the only story to be told about the Khmer Rouge. I simply stated that it’s a brilliant movie and was concurring with @magnoliarose Please don’t cast aspersions about my history and knowledge. Really lovely that my first time commenting on this site results in an attack simply because I mentioned one other film.

        @magnoliarose The story of Haing S. Ngor is so tragic and especially so due to his tragic death. Thank you for sharing your appreciation of a fantastic film and the story of Haing S. Ngor.

    • Zigga says:

      I won’t be watching this either. There are too many ethical issues for me surrounding this movie that I find haven’t been dealt with by AJ in her non-statement. I’ve long had a problem with her humanitarian work and don’t feel it’s authentic. Her close relationship with William Hague is problematic for a start. I also think her true lack of understanding of the complexity of the many issues she’s been involved in has come to the fore in the making of this movie. There’s a reason why aid workers and people in the human right’s sector generally have to have years of experience and degrees to back them up.

    • Eveil says:

      Loving the privilege that allows you to dismiss a film about the atrocities and genocise of a race solely because you don’t care for the woman who directed it. Get on out of here with all of your priveleged allied asses. No wonder white allies won the Root’s whypipo contest.

      • Zigga says:

        @Eveil I am not dismissing this film without reason. Of course the story needs to be told and it has been by Loung Ung. I don’t come from a position of privilege and know full well the effects of war and genocide. I think that you are displaying incredible arrogance by assuming that I’m white and privileged. So fascinating that a first time commentator gets told to get out of here because I raised ethical concerns about the making of the movie, not the story itself. Coming from a background and living through an oppressive regime, I understand all too well the abuse of people and don’t think it’s appropriate to do so in the making of a movie.

    • G says:

      Wholeheartedly agree.

      • Eveil says:

        And yet this was co-written and approved by the woman whose experiences the movie explores.

        The fact that you’re more bothered by my comment than the fact that people are dismissing this movie solely because they dislike AJ shows that even if you aren’t white, you aren’t interested in promoting the voices of other people of color either.

  4. crazydaisy says:

    I just watched the trailer, twice. It’s so powerful and deep – wow, I cried. Yes I will see this movie, and I think you’re right, Kaiser, about the Netflix platform engendering a wider audience.

    The film will not be easy to watch, but I think it will be important. It’s natural to want to hide from our shadow – both the personal shadow, and the collective shadows of society and humanity at large. But to be whole, to heal and to grow, we can not hide from any part of ourselves.

    People often criticize or mock Angelina Jolie for being ‘so dark’. Who wants to be reminded of pain all the time? And yet… we must excavate the cave within, if our wish is for Light to enter. Angie’s movie looks amazing, the little actress a gem. May we learn to kindly love our neighbor. May there be Peace on Earth. ☮️ 💟

    • phlyfiremama says:

      ^^^What she said.

    • jj says:

      totally agree, it will be a hard film to watch, just like Beasts of No Nation, but this really happened to thousands of people. Needs to be shown so people don’t forget that there is evil in the world and it is still there.

    • L says:

      I will be watching this too! Cant wait!

    • Justjj says:

      If you go to Cambodia you can still see the killing fields and the schools they turned into prisons. A horrifying time but I think people need to see those pictures of schools in the recent 1970s turned into places of torture. Beyond the horror of genocide-the horror of destroying knowledge, the centers of growth, learning, and progress. Professors, doctors and scientists, all being targeted. It is so chilling and a story that needs to be told in general and especially in these times and just a dark chapter of world history people should learn more about. The country is littered with schools and universities that became prisons, not to mention hundreds of thousands of UXO’s, along with Laos, all dropped by the USA in the Vietnam war. It is a daily reality for people in SE Asia. It is not just history. This part of Cambodia’s story should be told. Yes, it’s a movie. But we can still learn from films.

  5. Nicole says:

    I’m still unsettled by the optics around the movie so I’ll probably give this a pass sadly.

    • crazydaisy says:

      I am sure that there are people in power, now or formerly, who would prefer this movie had never been made. Creating a scandal around casting methods may have been a brilliant coup. Anything to keep people from seeing the film minimizes potential damage to the corrupt governments and officials who enabled, carried out or tried to erase the atrocities depicted.

      • GiBee says:

        Exactly. And now plenty of people can ignore a difficult-to-watch, important story about unimaginable cruelty and what leads to it – but they can claim they have moral reasons to do so that outweigh the importance.

      • GiBee says:

        People who are shocked – SHOCKED – by the casting story and happy to ignore the valid explanations that came out afterwards, then wow, a story about mass murder on an unimaginable scale will probably be way too much for them. We should give them a copy of Legally Blonde and a warm blanket instead.

      • MostlyMegan says:

        I love Legally Blonde and warm blankets, I do.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Lol I don’t need to watch another mediocre Angelina Jolie film to school me on genocide and ruthless regimes. What happened in Cambodia is not unknown event and there have been far superior directors that have made documentaries and films about Khmer Rouge since it happened.

        It is fine you are new to the subject but a lot of us aren’t. If this gets anyone interested in exploring what happened then that is a good thing.

  6. Emma33 says:

    Powerful poster, and I like that they’ve written the title in Khmer first.

  7. Megan says:

    I think the casting process and the use of military in the movie are problematic, but I do hope this movie motivates the Khmer Rouge Tribunal to step up the cases before the accused are all dead. Justice is essential to healing, even if it is late in coming.

    • PPP says:

      It’s pretty much done, isn’t it? Dang Kek Iew was found guilty in 2010. Nuon Chea got a life sentence in 2014. Ieng Sary died in 2013, was in custody since 2007. Ieng Thrith was also in custody since 2007 and died in 2015.

      Most of the most senior members died after being run to the jungle, including Pol Pot.

      I don’t think the problem facing Cambodia is so much bringing justice to the most senior members of the regime, but the fact that Hun Sen is corrupt as hell. And while the trailer certainly seems strong, and I will watch the movie (but I will probably not pay money for it directly), we really ought to remember that this movie was made by cooperating with Hun Sen.

      Cambodians know their story. This movie isn’t made for their benefit. It’s made to tell their story to non-Cambodians. And there is a value in that. But what does it do for the Cambodian people? Bring over some more Westerners to provide infrastructure the corrupt head of state fails to? It seems to me that focusing on the past at the expense of perpetuating the current problems isn’t the way to bring Cambodia forward.

      • Megan says:

        The tribunal is still active. They are pushing for three more trials, but the current government is not cooperating. When a country has suffered like Cambodia, justice is critical to healing the nation and moving forward as a society, rather than simply existing under the strong men that arise. The fact that government and military remain so corrupt is that many of them came out of the Khmer Rouge and have never been brought to justice.

      • PPP says:

        @Megan

        Thanks, I haven’t lived there in a while so I haven’t kept up with the news. If there are still senior members left then yes, they should definitely go through the tribunal.

  8. Maya says:

    Lovely trailer – so sad that this movie will now be tainted because of Vanity Fair’s pathetic sensationalisation by twisting the words.

    Vanity Fair statement plus Cambodia Army’s statement which puts all the child abuse and human rights violations accusations to rest. Vanity Fair claiming that they made is clear it was a game and that they mentioned Angelina and Co didn’t exploit the children and took every precaution etc.

    Some will say that The Cambodian Army is not a reliable source but if they were used, it can easily be proven.

    I hope Angelina sues Vanity Fair and the guy from Human Rights Watch who accused a person without fact checking.

    http://www.khmertimeskh.com/5075893/army-blasts-human-rights-watch-chief/

    https://www.apnews.com/ec045aa4d24b442ab494d4855b72c586

    http://m.phnompenhpost.com/national/jolie-and-panh-refute-alleged-mistreatment-children-during-film-casting

    • Goats on the Roof says:

      It doesn’t matter if Vanity Fair or Angelina or you call it a game. At the end of the day, they deliberately sought out children from traumatized backgrounds and triggered them for the “authenticity” of this film. I work with children–you can tell a five year old something is a game til the cows come home but that doesn’t mean the child will understand it fully. This child’s reaction, sobbing because she couldn’t afford a funeral for her grandfather, backs me up on this.

      • Tanguerita says:

        @Goats: THIS. Everything else is a good ol’ spin.

      • Felicia says:

        Yes. And it was real enough to that child that AJ “teared up” (her own words). That should have been a big clue right there. That kid wasn’t playing a game.

    • Dana says:

      As a professional he should know to check his facts first.

    • Yellowrocket says:

      I love Angelina and I will definitely watch this film, but Vanity Fair were not wrong to run the article they did.

      I still find the casting process problematic, even with Angie’s statement. AND I also think she’s an amazing actress and humanitarian. It doesn’t have to be mutually exclusive.

      If anything the VF article and the controversy has helped promote an important movie and made people think about the ethics of movies casting and helped them educate themselves more on the story behind the movie.

      Win win IMO.

      Plus, Angelina will be fine, all the most interesting women cause controversy and the fact that this story took off like it did shows the influence her words have in the world

    • Megan says:

      @Maya Unless I’ve missed something, Jolie has not denied the use of 500 government officials in her movie. I find it fascinating that you are willing to take the word of one of the most abusive militaries on earth over Jolie’s.

    • V4Real says:

      AJ sue for what, she said it. In her statement she just elaborated on it, it still happened. Didn’t expect the backlash so she issued a statement which I don’t fully believe. She was still wrong on various levels.

  9. Jilly says:

    Army blasts Human Rights Watch chief

    Defence Ministry spokesman Chhum Socheat said the claim that the army provided 500 personnel for the film was completely false.

    “The military does not have time to make a film. Those involved were just actors wearing military uniforms,” he said.

    http://www.khmertimeskh.com/5075893/army-blasts-human-rights-watch-chief/

    Rithy and Loung are two survivors of the genocide in Cambodia, people think they would accept any disrespect for the film. This VF journalist did the whole interview so poorly done, full of incorrect facts, alterations and interpretations of it, but once shows that Angelina does not control what she publishes about her. It’s a shame to see what the media has become, to sensitize a story like that of Cambodia. We know the power the media has to manipulate and destroy.

    • Skylark says:

      Thanks for that, Jilly. I hope those who persist with the ‘evil Angie’ narrative read it.

    • crazydaisy says:

      This is not the first time Vanity Fair writer Evgenia Peretz has been guilty of an attempted take-down. In 2014, she did it to author Donna Tartt, and was clearly called out:

      “She [Peretz] consistently treats other people’s views as self-evidently the product of bad faith. In the world that Peretz describes, almost no one holds an opinion that is not motivated by personal animus, posturing, or some other crucial taint. Peretz’s sources share some blame, as some of them indulge in the practice of impugning the motives of their opponents. But choosing what quotes to include is part of journalism, and Peretz is ultimately responsible for framing the debate the way she wanted.”

      https://newrepublic.com/article/118133/vanity-fairs-donna-tartt-essay-evgenia-peretz-criticism

      • The Original G says:

        Seriously? Someone didn’t share Peretz’s opinion about a book and you think that’s evidence of animus towards Jolie?

    • Megan says:

      @Jilly So you are taking the word of a corrupt military that illegally seizes land, violently breaks up peaceful protests, and has protected a despot for three decades?

      • LadyT says:

        If Angelina could have truthfully denied using the Army to Huffington Post she would have. She didn’t address it even though it was part of the uproar. What she didn’t say says a lot.

      • Paige says:

        If she released a statement right now saying the military was involved some still wouldn’t believe her. It’s pointless now. Any further explanations from Angelina, the cast, or crew would be seen as PR or a cover up. Am I right?

      • Paige says:

        Edit: I meant if she released a statement saying they weren’t involved no one would believe her or a crew member. No one would want to say, hey maybe Byran Adams comments were presumption especially since he began his statement with “if”

  10. Ophelia says:

    The faux pas regarding casting left a bitter taste in my mouth. While I have read and will probably read Luong Ung’s book again, I will pass on watching the movie.

  11. Skylark says:

    Yes, Netflix is the right place for it.

    I’ll definitely check it out but it will be more out of interest in and respect for Loung Ung’s experience than the fact it’s a Jolie movie. That said, I hope it’s well received.

  12. Honey says:

    I’ve never had any kind of opinion about Jolie, but even if I was a fan, I wouldn’t watch. The interview she gave was so upsetting and I think her explantation after the outrage was probably just her covering up what so many saw as an awful thing she took part in. Fake money and doctors being there wouldn’t have kept this from being traumatic for the children

    • Skylark says:

      Or maybe she told the truth and corrected the erroneous impression the VF article left? How about that as a possibility?

      • Honey says:

        Or how about the possibility that Angie made a mistake? She’s a human being, not a saint. Her mega fans have to face the fact that the movie stars they love and idolize aren’t perfect and like everyone else, they make mistakes

      • L says:

        Her mega haters also have to realize that she is not a saint and she a mere human makes mistakes…right?
        And fans/stans don’t think she’s a saint or even call her that, her non fans do.

  13. detritus says:

    I’m still conflicted.
    She responded on an artist, not a humanitarian, and I was originally wondering how she could be so stupid to put what she said out there, but now I wonder if it was on purpose?

    I am happy there were safeguards put into place for the children, I am unsure if they were sufficient, but I will leave that to the experts to determine. I am not super pleased that human suffering and pain was used as a metric for authenticity though.

    There are a few stages in producing change, the first is to advertise that there IS an issue. So in this case, increasing public knowledge of what the khmer rouge and the political regime that created it did. The second stage is to use this knowledge to produce action, this is often the stage I think we lack.

    If we are being generous, this film is in the first stage – promotion of the issue. I also think Angie wants to be taken seriously as a director, and is probably deleteriously channeling what she’s been exposed to as artistic merit, namely method and true pain as the more authentic form of artistic expression. She needs to reexamine that, just as any actor participating in method acting does when it impacts others, but I’m not cancelling her.

    • MostlyMegan says:

      An interesting conflict that you are pointing out here between Artist vs Humanitarian. The journey of both are not necessarily the same. This wasn’t a documentary, this was an art piece. The artist in Angelina won out this time.

  14. Michelle says:

    The fact that you people can’t tell a shoddy write up interview when you see one speaks volumes about the stance you took to demonise her because her words were given no context whatsoever & because of that she’s branded a child abuser. The making of the film that they showed in March confirmed that it was actors playing the khmer rouge, not the army. The whole vf write up was insulting, even towards writer describing her children. Anyone that took that interview for reason to outrage is very naive.

    • L says:

      + 1 million!

    • TheOtherMaria says:

      How insulting to generalize those who disagree with you in defense of a person you will never know….

      Most of the outrage I saw that day on this site was almost always prefaced with a genuine respect for what she has accomplished (there were a few exceptions certainly).

      I read the book but won’t see the movie because her directing skills do little for me, I wish she’d stick to acting once in a blue moon instead but to each their own.

      • Michelle says:

        My generalizaton was about not seeing the bad write up in vf. Not about whether you wish to see the film or not based on ur own opinion.

    • Fa says:

      Don’t waste your breath on them, the producer statement is enough for me a survivor of the genocide and the presence of NGO and parents on site is enough for me. Let them believe whatever they want it just make them more petty.

      • L says:

        FA 👏🏼 👏🏼 👏🏼!

      • Alexandria says:

        FA, I feel the same, those against this movie would not be convinced and they’ve made up their minds. Which is fine, I just personally won’t call it petty. I mean, whatever else is said and whoever else who tries to explain, would be labelled as PR anyway. Just don’t ask for any more explanations from Angelina and the production team, I guess. It is what it is.

    • Jessica says:

      Vanity Fair has collaborated with Angelina at least a dozen times including profiles, photo-shoots, etc. I’m supposed to believe that when a profile has a negative reaction that all of a sudden Angelina had absolutely nothing to do with it. She put the information out there and apparently didn’t expound (usually the writer will ask follow-up questions to get clarifications on statements the interviewee has made) so I’m not sure why the writer is getting all of the blame.

      I still have reservations about the movie and how the casting went down (specifically searching slums, circuses, orphanages instead of just getting a regular kid who can act). Like the boys from Moonlight are regular, happy kids who tried out for a movie and got the role (same with Beasts of no Nation). I will also pass because Angelina isn’t a good director.

  15. bap says:

    This film is going to Educate the world.

    • Felicia says:

      It’s not exactly as if the entire world has been blissfully unaware of what happened in Cambodia up until now. Just putting that out there.

      • crazydaisy says:

        Actually, most of the world and Americans in particular really DON’T have a clue. Whether they are watching reality TV or worrying about paying bills, raising decent kids, saving their marriage and so on…no blame. I grew up in the Nixon era watching the Vietnam war on TV, but know very little about Cambodian history. One has to seek out this information. I expect to learn a lot from this movie.

    • Goats on the Roof says:

      I’m sorry, no. This attitude is arrogance. You act like people don’t know. They DO. And if for some reason they didn’t, I doubt a piece of entertainment will be the thing that educates the masses.

    • Jessica says:

      No it won’t.

    • Joannie says:

      You cannot be serious. Educate the world? That’s laughable.

  16. Cleo says:

    I will not be watching. Again, beyond the problematic audition story, actual survivors of the Khmer Rouge were traumatized by certain parts of the production process. Jolie herself admitted as much when she described them breaking down in tears during filming. I’m not throwing my money at that kind of trash.

    This is an important story, and I’ve added the memoir to my reading list. But I don’t want to condone Jolie’s approach to telling it.

  17. Ramy says:

    Can’t wait to see the movie .what a powerful poster

  18. truth hurts says:

    The ones falling in to give a tired explainat ion about why they won’t watch. Will watch but won’t tell. Not for one minute caring about the casting process just want to talk.

    • Artemis says:

      We won’t know the actual numbers anyway as Netflix doesn’t provide that information so I suppose it doesn’t matter anyway.

      I watched the trailer and it’s good. The best one of all of her films! I don’t know if I will watch the film, mostly due to reasons people have already discussed on this thread but also because I don’t think I can emotionally handle these types of films. Unbroken was a hard watch and I hate it when films focus too much on the violence which is a trait of Jolie’s films. I’ll read the book for sure as I can take a break and process the story at my own pace.

      • truth says:

        Ok. I thinks she does these types of films for a reason. Her UN work and although it is a learning curve for her she dos quite well. The only downfall for BTS was she had on too many hats and should have had other actors. Her acting wasn’t good in BTS because she couldn’t concentrate on that difficult role. Her script could use a little tweeking but that is it. Unbroken was good. Blood and Honey I didn’t watch but it was all political. These are the fims she does intentionally.

    • Felicia says:

      In my case, I won’t watch it because I’ve already read the book. It doesn’t matter who directed the film, films are never as good as the book, imo.

    • V4Real says:

      Truth hurts, I won’t watch just like I didn’t watch Unbroken, it didnt interest me. I don’t have to lie.

      The trailer doesn’t provide anything for me. And AJ can join the rest of the,Hollywood directors who are criticized for being the White privileged director trying to tell the story and pain of a minority group.

      • Strwbrry says:

        Marya, I caught that and notice how Mike Leigh was sort of fed up with her when she went on and on about being a great mother or something. She was, in a word, completely grandiose.

      • Jeesie says:

        That roundtable was awkward. She really had nothing to add to the conversation at all, and it didn’t seem like she was even interested in discussing directing.

        I still find her an incredibly weird fit as a director. She used to talk so much about how she couldn’t even sit through a whole film, how she didn’t read scripts before signing onto films, how she wasn’t really interested in film-making and would soon move away from it. To go from that to directing, a role that almost always involves an unabashed fervour for films and their production…it’s an odd choice. Producing would have made more sense.

      • truth says:

        @Myra, I saw that as well and she was nervous and somewhat intimidated and the ole man was trying to be shady. Her work is not any different from any of the rest. Christoper Nolan was actually quite nice to her and asked about the movies she referenced, The Hill. I assume that is where he got his inspiration to do his latest film.
        I think she was trying to explain why she wanted to direct. Not every director gets technical training and there are 1/25 directing movies with no training so what is your point. Ugh
        She has 3 politcal films to her credit and 1 BP talked her into doing and they weren’t that bad. Just people who want to hate on her calls them bad. Because I can think of some bad films with every director sitting at that table so get a grip.

  19. D says:

    I won’t watch this movie, but that doesn’t have anything to do with Angelina. I will read the book though and I wouldn’t have known about the book without the movie, so there’s that.

  20. Jayna says:

    The poster is beautiful. The trailer started out great but got boring by over halfway through with only images.

    I’ll watch it.

  21. Bliss 51 says:

    Good timing on releasing the trailer with the little girl. I was in high school at the time of the regime and before that the Vietnam War. Those were the days of tv coverage of body bags holding the bodies of Americans who died in that war and GIs being treated by medics out in the field. & the My Lai massacre and the evil of the Khmer Rouge on the tv news daily and full color pictures of the dead in Life and Look magazines weekly. Why limit yourself to watching a movie when there are entire libraries on the subject and online with no movie strings to manipulate your emotions. Start here, http://www.killingfieldsmuseum.com/s21-victims.html.

  22. Strwbrry says:

    I like the music in the trailer. But this film doesn’t appeal to me for some reason, apart from the PR controversies, based on the trailer alone. I don’t like the sensual colours used, not for this subject matter, and the whole thing seems heavy handed. For these types of biopics and for “war films” I prefer a very light touch; otherwise my left brain takes over and starts telling me it’s corny and you’re being triggered to react in a certain way about an important, “real life issue.” Also the happy-family bits look a bit “Americanised.” I just finished watching Okja and the scenes with the little girl and her grandpa were super natural.

    • LadyT says:

      I didn’t get the hot pink big blocky font used. It brought to mind Austin Powers or Quentin Tarantino.

  23. Keaton says:

    I’ll definitely watch this film but now I’m even more curious about the book.

  24. Joannie says:

    She buys her awards is my guess plus she is the product of nepotism. How can she possibly relate to the issues of the poor by swooping in for a quick visit and photo op? One has to live it to appreciate the difficulties faced by those who do live it every day of their lives.

    • cara says:

      If a certain “other” actress couldn’t buy an award with bribery and “cupcakes”, you can be sure Angie did not “buy” any award.

  25. L says:

    Nah I don’t think she buys her rewards & she’s def not the best director by far, but she’s not bad either..I think the trailer was pretty good. Like I said, I cant wait to see it..so excited!

  26. Mildred Pierce says:

    Will watch.

  27. truth hurts says:

    Love Angie. Does a great job and works hard at everything she does. She doesn’t have to buy awards like Pitt. She got hers the ole fashion way..great acting. So stop the hating. She is getting better and better at this directing thing. Only 3 films under her belt and Unbroken was pretty good. The rest are political based. BTS was Pitts idea and it wasnt her best acting. Too many hats.

  28. cara says:

    This looks like a good film. The premise of the film is that it is told from a 5 year old’s perspective. As for Angie and this ridiculous “controversy”, I SMH at how gullible most of you really are. The young actress was not some dirt poor orphan living from hand to mouth, she has a family. Her Mother and sister were on set every day. This is not a “Danny Boyle” film, now that is a man lacking in any compassion or empathy.