Reflecting on Southeast Asia’s relationship with Western cultural powers, I encounter a paradox vividly embodied by Mekong 2030. This anthology film unites filmmakers from five Mekong nations to envision their shared future, yet it was conceived and orchestrated by Western organizers, with additional support from the intergovernmental Mekong River Commission (MRC).
This tension—between regional expression and reliance on external validation—prompts a critical question: who truly shapes and shares our visions of tomorrow?
In 2020, Mekong 2030 marked a milestone for Southeast Asian speculative cinema. Initiated by the Luang Prabang Film Festival (LPFF) in Laos—now evolved into the Blue Chair Film Festival under new leadership—this project brought together directors from Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam. Each crafted a short film imagining the future of the Mekong River, a lifeline for over 60 million people, now imperiled by climate change, dam construction upriver in China, and resource extraction. The anthology features five distinct narratives:

Kulikar Sotho’s “Soul River” (Cambodia): A poignant road movie set in 2030, where the protagonists, reeling from overfishing and climate-induced flooding, sell an ancient Khmer Buddha’s image head to survive. It critiques water privatization of China, cultural commodification, and ecological collapse.

Anysay Keola’s “The Che Brother” (Laos): Xe, who returns to his nearly deserted Mekong fishing village and intervenes in a family dispute over exploiting their elderly mother’s blood, valued by a Western corporation for a plague cure. The film delves into ethical dilemmas, the commodification of human resources, and the impact of global market forces on local communities, showcasing how desperation fuels exploitation.

Sai Naw Kham’s “The Forgotten Voices of the Mekong” (Myanmar): The story focuses on threatened indigenous traditions through the story of Charlie, a Mhong village leader negotiating with a mining company to modernize, opposed by an old grandma who warns of environmental harm and poisoned livestock. The narrative highlights the clash between tradition and modernization, emphasizing environmental preservation and the resilience of indigenous communities against external pressures.

Anocha Suwichakornpong’s “The Line” (Thailand): A video artist’s exhibition on animism and river ecology blurs art and reality, challenging scientific narratives with spiritual and animistic perspectives on the Mekong’s geopolitical stakes. But as she intellectualizes these topics for her creation, does she really know what she is doing?

Phạm Ngọc Lân’s “The Unseen River” (Vietnam): The film connects past and present through two interwoven narratives: a woman reuniting with her ex-lover at a hydroelectric plant and a young couple seeking a cure for insomnia at a temple, linked by a dog. It explores memory, time, spirituality, and human relationships with water, portraying the Mekong as a timeless entity binding these experiences.
The Mekong River, central to this project, is both a historical sustainer and a modern battleground, reflecting colonial legacies and development pressures. It emerges as a metaphor for the ethical stakes of environmental choices and the interplay of ecology, memory, and regional identity.
Mekong 2030 fosters a transnational dialogue, making abstract threats tangible by projecting them to the year 2030. It sparks discussions on policy, conservation, and cooperation. Yet, it has limitations. Despite acclaim at festivals like Tokyo, Locarno, and Sundance, it struggles to reach Mekong audiences. It travels more in international circuits but reaches fewer audiences within the region—a disconnect that distances its storytelling from the very people it portrays.
More critically, while Southeast Asian filmmakers helm the shorts, the project’s framework was shaped by Western leadership. LPFF secured majority funding from The Asia Foundation, Oxfam, Heinrich Böll Stiftung, and the Mekong River Commission. This dynamic positions external institutions as gatekeepers, echoing colonial patterns in cultural production.
I sincerely appreciate the efforts of LPFF (now Blue Chair) and its partners. Their screenings, workshops, and the Lao Filmmakers Fund have nurtured regional talent, while the Talent Lab (2016–2019), in collaboration with the Tribeca Film Institute, empowered Southeast Asian filmmakers to pitch projects and access global markets. Yet, I must urge us to look beyond these laudable initiatives. Why should we await external concern to tell our stories? Decolonization has shown that liberation—and by extension, cultural sovereignty—need not stem from the West. Our storytelling should not depend on it either. We can, and must, forge our own path by empowering regional cultural and academic initiatives including Purin Pictures Fund, SGIFF Film Fund, the Mekong Cultural Hub, Mekong Review, and Southeast of Now. These platforms prioritize our voices, resources, and networks, reducing reliance on foreign mediation. It is through such self-driven movements that we can truly claim our space in global speculative fiction and beyond.
To shape global dialogue, Mekong communities must build on Mekong 2030 with a locally rooted movement—joining forces to create networks of production, distribution, and engagement that reflect our own vision. Our future hinges on defining and sharing it on our terms.
Credits: Directed by Kulikar Sotho, Anysay Keola, Sai Naw Kham, Anocha Suwichakornpong, and Phạm Ngọc Lân; written by Kulikar Sotho, Ian Masters, Anysay Keola, Shunn Lei Swe Yee, Anocha Suwichakornpong, Paul Charbonneau, and Phạm Ngọc Lân; produced by Gabriel Shaya Kuperman, Alex Curran-Cardarelli, Nick Ray, Hang Sokharo, Anysay Keola, Soe Arkar Htun, Worarat Sawatdpisan, Phạm Ngọc Lân, Ngo Dai Trang, Tran Thi Bich Ngoc, and Christopher Larsen.
This essay belongs to the “Mek◊ng Sci-Fi” series by Vorakorn “Billy” Ruetaivanichkul, published in English (billyvorr.com) and Thai (TheMissionTH.co), completed under the 2024 ArtsEquator Fellowship. Views are the author’s own.