I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

Suriyothai is a stunning film: Spanning 2 DVDs, and full of political intrigue, history, and glorious battle scenes. There are so many main characters, and all of them command a huge amount of weight, and against movie tradition, there isn't really even a traditional Hero character, even Suriyothai herself playing minor roles in much of the drama.Some have criticized the actress's acting as stiff and wooden, but I thought that Suriyothai was poker-faced intentionally, because she is a Queen after all. Most period pieces from any country have characters like this. I think you have look past her obvious cues and look for the more subtle ones, in order to appreciate her character: passionate about her country and her people, and devoted to her role.In fact there are many cards that other productions would have played, that this film doesn't, and much to its credit it stays away from many of the obvious manipulative narratives that are the mainstays for this genre of film, especially in the west. The film has a historical and legendary basis, and I am unsure exactly how closely it stays to that, but I found the film had the great level of depth and realism that only the best historical films attain.Watching hundreds of extras, alongside elephants, charge into battle, clashing swords and dodging cannon fire, is exhilarating. It's hard to see which army has the upper-hand until the final moments. There appears to have been a conscious decision to not fall for the trappings of making each battle into "hero's battle", so the action often stays away from focusing on main characters, and chooses to present to the viewer the sheer chaos of war.Oh, and it needs to be said: The elephants are awesome.If you are interested in this film, get at least the the 3 hour long version, as it is the closest to the way the film was intended (reportedly it was originally going to be a mini-series). While this longer edit of the film has a lot more political intrigue and dialogue, it that brings with it much more depth to the characters and situations. If you are not part of the "Attention Deficit Generation" bred by Hollow-wood, you can't go wrong with this REAL version.I can see why this film was edited down for the USA release. It is very long, and there is a lot of references and content that is probably assumed knowledge for most Thai people. However, while I can see the logic in removing parts of a film because of cultural barriers, isn't one of the reasons for watching foreign film, to find out more about other cultures? Granted, there is much that went over my head while watching this film, but I have to say that I didn't mind, and now I will find out more if I can about Thailand and its history: The Internet is a wonderful invention.Francis Ford Coppolla has some serious balls to have resold this film BACK to Thailand after he deleted most of it. I doubt he would take a film by Ridley Scott, and slice it to pieces. Faced with that particular situation, I am sure he would be all about "preserving the vision of the artists". It seems to be to be just another example of Hollow-wood being unwilling to let Asian Film compete on its own merits in America, and at least an ingrained xenophobia.Suriyothai is an amazing film. It is an epic that I have not seen bested by any other, and maybe even the mythical long edit of Tsui Hark's Seven Swords would have an near-impossible mission to dethrone it. The sheer size and quality of this production, together with the unique chance that it gives to see Thai history represented so gloriously and elegantly, are reasons enough to hunt down the Thai DVD.

I was not impressed. Whether because of FFC's re-editing, or because of the basic film, I can't tell. The acting is flat, which may be a peculiarity of Thai drama and/or film-making, but the flatness makes the emotional dynamics hard to pick up on. The characters are difficult to keep straight; and the main point of the story-the self-sacrifice of the main character-is there, but not emphasized enough to give the film any real narrative drive. Perhaps it was done that way because the principal audience-Thais at home in Thailand-was assumed to know all the characters and be familiar with the story?I have seen and appreciated films dealing with essential historical legends of Asian countries, so I know that it can be done effectively, and in such a way that non-asians can "get" the story. I know I'm supposed to be impressed by the money spent on it, the great costumes, the majesty of the story, and-yes-the elephants! But, at bottom, the story simply isn't told here in a way that delivers much of a punch for me.

I watched the shortened Coppola cut of this film on DVD, and on the whole found it to be a cracking good story that kept me engaged, and I particularly enjoyed the high production values, the exotic costumes, sets and props, and the beautiful cinematography. The elements of nations at war, political power struggles, palace intrigues, and murderous treachery in the royal family of Thailand seemed to me very reminiscent of "I Claudius," a great favorite of mine, and I found some of the comments below referring to the film as having no plot totally inexplicable. I tended to wonder whether the deadpan acting style frequently commented-on here might be a cultural artifact, as modes of expression can vary to some extent in different countries, but judging from the remarks of some Thai commentators this wouldn't seem to be the case. The bottom line for me, though, was that I thoroughly enjoyed all two and a half hours of this film.I do take issue with some commentators who declare without hesitation that a particular film is a complete waste of time, that you should "save your time," or "save your money," etc., and not even consider seeing it. Why on earth would these people presume to urge me (or anybody else) to reject this film sight unseen? One thing I've learned in the course of seeing hundreds of films is the absolute folly of trying to predict who will like which film. Those I've recommended to friends more often than not lay an egg with them, while they rhapsodize over stuff I couldn't care less about. I'm always interested to hear a variety of opinions on films, which is why I love the IMDb, but an opinion loses much of its credence for me when the commentator comes off as an opinionated blowhard.Anyway, for what my own opinion is worth, I see "The Legend of Suriyothai" as a damn good story, told effectively with exotic and stunningly beautiful visual elements. I don't in the least regret spending a few dollars and two and a half hours experiencing it.

I guess they gave it a shot. It's kinda like how Shiri was one of the first Korean movies to hit outside of Korea... but in comparison w/ films outside of the country it was JUNK. That would probably be the case w/ this film. I'm sure it was huge in Thailand, but in the States... "better luck tomorrow"... hahaha.. get it? hahaha... okay.. that's enough of that... The costumes and culture was probably the only thing going for the film. I don't know if everyone was a bad actor if if that's just the way the speak. Suriyothai was not developed enough or wasn't significant enough to be titled that way. It was like a huge history lesson in a sense. Poor editing, poor battle scenes, poor acting. I would usually give this film a 4 but I'm giving it 1 to balance out the other poor reviews.