MovieChat Forums > Falang: Behind Bangkok's Smile (2007) Discussion > Ethics of Documentary: Bangkok Girl

Ethics of Documentary: Bangkok Girl


It is perhaps inevitable that tragedies will occur when anyone can now buy a video camera, get some bucks together, and make a documentary. Taking courses on the many aspects of documentary film making is not necessary these days, it seems. But one of the things that is often discussed in classes, or should be, is the ethics of documentary film making.
Jordan Clark's film, "Bangkok Girl" (2005) was broadcast on the CBC last night (October 3rd). From the beginning I was horrified, not only by the obvious elements of the exploitation and sad social conditions of the girls of Bangkok but by Jordan Clark's unbelievable naiveté regarding the danger he was obviously placing his subject in. By publicly filming Pla in the streets of Bangkok, surely he must have realized that over time her employers and the men who depend on the sex trade at all levels from bar owners to the corrupt police and politicians (the trade is one of Thailand's main sources of income) would find out that this film was being made and that it was taking a negative and critical view of the sex trade. He also seemed to be completely oblivious to the fact that these girls are completely expendable; there is an inexhaustible supply of them. Was Pla was murdered as soon as Jordan Clark left the country to serve as an example to any other girl who might participate in a foreign film critical of Thailand and its multi-million dollar sex industry? Did Jordan's choice to publicly film Pla sign her death warrant? Did he really expect that there would be no response from the powerful criminals who exploit these young women? Such ignorance is the result of turning young film makers loose on the world without sufficient training in the ethics of their trade. There are many potential circumstances in which subjects' lives can be endangered by participation with western filmmakers or journalists. Most journalists know that they must protect the identity of their sources. Jordan Clark failed to do this, even while he was trying to do good. Young film makers must think about the possible dangers that their subjects might find themselves in if exposed to those forces that might feel threatened by such an activity. Clark should have interviewed Pla in secret and kept her identity secret, not in plain view in the streets of Bangkok where information flows freely. In both his earnestness and vanity, Jordan Clark may well have caused the death of his subject in his attempt to "save" her. When Clark reveals Pla's death to us at the end of the film, he exploits the requisite pathos for dramatic purposes, but fails to address the obvious question of WHY she was murdered.
As the documentary boom continues and more young would-be filmmakers are travelling the world in search of the popular "subjected peoples" and "social injustice" genres, the ethical and practical problems of documentary filmmaking, especially in foreign countries, must be debated in the open so as to make everyone aware of the potentially disasterous consequences. The camera can kill.

reply

Pla lived a tragic life and died a tragic death, the memory of her will forever remain in my heart. I also watched this on CBC and was compelled to tears.

I think it would be excellent if Clark can directly address your accusations himself. Why don't you consider writing him an email or something? The opinions of professional documentary makers on this issue concerning ethics would be nice.

You bring up some very interesting points langdale-1.

If it was the authorities who murdered Pla because they didn't want any other girls to participate in revealing too much about the sex trade and inadvertently damage Thailand's image, why would they kill her before Clark left Thailand?


When Clark reveals Pla's death to us at the end of the film, he exploits the requisite pathos for dramatic purposes, but fails to address the obvious question of WHY she was murdered.

Did you expect him to 'speculate' on WHY she died and in effect add even more drama to his documentary? Wouldn't this be even more unethical?




reply

[deleted]

I strongly suspect that she is not dead. She probably disapeared because the film maker was annoying her and wasn't paying her to be filmed. Bar fines without pay would piss off most bar girls. Since he couldn't film her anymore, he most likely cooked up the death angle in order to end his film and create emotion for the audience.

Jordan Clark is a fraud.

reply

I don't know. I think there is so much fraud throughout Bangkok its hard to tell completely with this film. I disagree that the subject stopped hanging around the filmmaker becasue she wasn't getting paid. I suspect she was - or the camera wouldn't have been turned on at all. In any case, I live in Bangkok and have put out the word for more info on Jordan Clark and this film. I don't feel as much contempt as the previous comments because the unsure, deceiving nature of the subject and the film is VERY accurate to what the Bangkok bargirls and bars are like. I think there is more than meets the eye with this film. I'll post back when I hear something - shouldn't take long.

reply

Jonathon Clark strikes me as someone who knows little about Thailand, but has plenty of preconceived notions and a penchant for melodrama.

There is no attempt to check the veracity of any of the stories presented here, he just accepts them all at face value because stories about poor downtrodden prostitutes sell.

Unlike Jonathon Clark I have a lot of experience in Thailand and can spot when a director is BS'ing in order to sell a story.

reply

Why don't you make a film then? Also, if you are going to trash a film at least spell the director's name right (let's see if you figure that one out). Didn't the girl tell the stories in the film? If she was BSing then she missed a great opportunity to tell the truth. I think this film (true or not) makes male sex tourists (self proclaimed nice guy or not)answerable to people when they come back. Is that so bad? - maybe they have to think twice before treating a girl like *beep* or a piece of meat - oh wait, the guys take the girls shopping, to a movie and buy them meals - so they are allowed to pretend that it is more than just sex. Get a reality check - you are condoning the *beep* in Thailand, yet trashing anything other than your approved facts.

reply

Who is Jonathon Clark?

reply

Pla is alive and married to a farang. Clark is a big liar. She never died. He never showed any proof of her death. He just said it to make more money out of this movie. Canada is an even worse country than Thailand...

reply

I watched this doc last year and again last night.

Very compelling and poor Pla. Couldn't help but fall in 'love' with that innocence.

I too worried about her safety and was horrified when I discovered that she had died while making this film.

reply

There is definitely more to this story.

In the film he makes reference to his equipment being seized. So it's obvious people were well aware of what he was doing.
They knew it just wasn't home video.

They also probably reviewed his film and saw who he was talking to.
This may have been avoided if he had applied for the proper permits.

By NOT having permits he allowed his equipment to be seized and his subjects identified.

I feel the OP of this thread makes some very valid points as to what possibly has happened.

It never crossed my mind that his film was the reason why she was murdered, but
it starts to sound very ominous when you consider she has survived in that enviroment long before he filmed her. Too coincidental & extremely troubling.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

This is a poor review because it doesn't really review the film. Instead, langdale goes off attacking the filmmaker. Ironically, he questions Clark's ethics while it seems to me that langdale's unwarranted attacks are themselves unethical.

I agree with langdale that Clark does seem somewhat naive. So what? Clark nonetheless made a moving documentary. And I think the suggestion that Pla was killed by organized crime because of Clark's film is wildly speculative and not at all convincing. I can't see what her employers would gain by killing her - and these guys are all about gain. In fact, lots of Americans and Europeans film the girls in Thailand. Just check YouTube. What Clark did with Pla wasn't hurting anyone's income stream and therefore was not a problem.

I'm not really sure what to believe about Pla's demise. Was Clark misinformed? Did she commit suicide because Clark made her confront the hopelessness of her existence? We, the viewers, just don't know.

langdale seems to criticize for the thrill of criticism. For example, langdale says Clark was attempting to save Pla? When did Clark claim this??? langdale is just inventing stuff so he can criticize it.

langdale also has a rather paternalistic attitude toward Pla. He says Clark shouldn't have questioned her openly and should have kept her identity secret. If anyone in this drama knows the workings of Bangkok's redlight district it would be Pla. She made the decision to be part of this documentary. Does langdale discount her own role because she's young? Female? Asian?

Regardless of how Pla died, and whether she died at all, I don't believe Clark was unethical. In any case, he made an interesting film that allows the viewer to make their own moral judgments.

reply

Clark nonetheless made a moving documentary.


He certainly did and I was devastated that Pla later died. From a woman's POV though, I was uneasy throughout the documentary because I felt that the director, too, was exploiting Pla. He told us he paid her bar fine so she could take a day off work, but did he pay her at least something for the privilege of filming her? Not to mention asking loads of personal questions (some of which she was very reluctant to answer, especially about her father and her scalded hand). When she needed money to pay for medical bills for her mother, the director told us he was sad she did not ask him for the money, which leads me to believe that he was paying her nothing.

reply

This documentary was shot in 2004 or 2005. Who alerted the cops, and why the big show at Clark's hotel? They didn't just notice him filming in the street! And why did the cops seize the video footage?
Just to get a bribe over a missing piece of paper? Maybe, but then why bother seizing the footage, instead of just grabbing the money and leaving?
Well, that gave them the opportunity to see everything Clark shot, unedited.
It includes footage at the party, where drugs were flowing. It also includes whatever we didn't get to see in the final version: maybe "embarrassing" customers (i.e. officials), maybe unrelated footage he took in other bars before he found Pla. Maybe drug-related transactions. We'll never know.

The drug scenes alone (at the party), with any suggestion that the cops were turning a blind eye and getting bribed are already problematic. At that time, 1000s of civilians were arbitrarily murdered at the height of Thailand's drug on wars, and many of them were innocent (wrong place, wrong time!).

So the OP has a point! Maybe some cop wanted to discourage further digging (or wanted to make sure some scenes wouldn't be seen). Maybe the cops seizing the film got the "drug/prostitution" mob worried. Maybe some cop leaked/sold a copy to some rival mob, which saw something they found objectionable. Basically, it's not far fetched to think that whoever was behind the murder simply saw Pla's death as a "cheap" way to send a message.
Or, for all we know, she could have committed suicide or she could have been killed by a crazy customer (like the creepy English teacher, or the guy who bought her virginity) but the timing is quite disturbing. A healthy 19 year old doesn't just die of a heart attack, unless she overdosed (i.e. was made to overdose, since she never appears high in the documentary).

Eleven years have passed, and if Pla was still alive, someone would have produced a video, a picture, a paper trail, a facebook account, something. So these unfounded rumors are just that: unfounded rumors.

Meanwhile, it's very disturbing that Clark (or someone else) didn't follow through to answer the many unanswered questions about Pla's death. Was he or Pla's family threatened? If so, he should have disclosed this piece of information. And if he wasn't threatened, he should at least have asked Pla's mother or relatives, her friends, her coworkers about her death, if only to figure out if he played a part in it.
I could understand if he had and if the family had requested the details to remain private, but then he could simply have said so. Letting all those rumors that Pla's still alive go on for over a decade is also unethical!

reply