Not Me is undoubtedly one of the best Thai series ever made and it's a product of an incredible amount of care. as i said in the title of this review, Not Me is a love letter to the people of Thailand by the producers, the writers, the actors, and everyone else that was involved in the production of this show. it is a poignant love letter to Thailand's queer community, their revolutionaries, the Thai proletariat, and everyone else who is marginalized by the system, written by people who clearly care a lot and want better for their country and their people.

besides having an incredibly well-written, complex, and layered scenario; intentional and complementary sound design; creative, boundary-breaking, and emotional cinematography; this show addresses a lot of important societal issues, such as labor rights for disabled people, class differences, educational opportunities based on class, privileges and social/cultural capital, the idea of law as justice, corruption, nepotism, police brutality, workers' rights, the “right” ways of the revolution, the luxury to protest, and many more. this show is very unapologetically anti-capitalist AND very unapologetically queer; what better way to communicate its messages than through one of Thailand’s most influential soft powers? a BL.

one thing that particularly impressed me was how the show did not hold back at all; as much as they were unapologetically anti-capitalist and pro-revolution, they were not afraid to explore the gray zones and they were not worried about getting everything "right." the variation in different characters' different approaches to the "revolution," or radicalism in general, the ambiguities in their ideologies, the different ways they all approached the cause based on their lived experiences; it all added so much nuance to the show and showed how the writers/producers took their audience seriously and wanted us to grapple with these ideas.

the quote i added in the title is from Dolemite (1975) and the context is Black people's liberation; it says, "revolution was never meant to be easy [...] it's not a matter of color. freedom is everybody's business." i added this in because while Not Me takes place in Thailand, the issues addressed are universal and freedom is everybody's business, which includes yours and mine. since solidarity was also one of the points the show emphasized as being very important for any sort of societal change, i believe it is worthwhile to make a point out of this.

furthermore, i loved how the gang were portrayed as frequent readers who constantly engaged with radical material. i loved how the characters participated in discourse, as in there was actual dialogue written for different characters going back and forth, about the issues addressed by the show. i particularly loved Nuch's input & their discussions with Gram. i loved how all of these characters approached the fight in creative and unique ways. there were expressionist dancers, expressionist artists, readers, those who fought by protesting, those who made signs for protests, those who organized on social media; there was space for all.

ACTING -- as strong as the scenario of this show is, the acting performances of the whole cast need just as much praise. starting with Gun, who had the hardest job of all yet delivered phenomenally, his acting is never really over the top but always nuanced and intentional. the way he played White, the way he played Black, the way he played the White that was pretending to be Black, and the way he played the Black that was pretending to be White, were all different and easily identifiable just by his gaze. it was almost like the look on his face reflected the lived experiences of the character he was playing; his gaze was cold, controlled, and firm when he was Black, whereas he looked inexperienced but passionate, innocent but not dumb, and filled with so much hope when he played White. Not Me also had Off's best acting. i never thought Off gave any particular outstanding performances in his previous work that i've seen or i've never seen an OffGun show and said, "yeah, Gun is great but look at Off's performance," until i watched him in Not Me. Off's performance in Not Me very much stands out and is proof that a good script and director can bring out very different skills in an actor. he did a great job at portraying Sean's grievances, his pain, his anger, and his shortcomings. additionally, i thought OffGun had so much more chemistry in this show than their other shows together, which also shows chemistry can be cultivated through writing & directing and it is not static between two people. lastly, First also gave one of his best performances in Not Me. he was doing a lot of eye-acting and i particularly loved how he interpreted Yok's disappointment when he found out he had been betrayed.

POLICE BRUTALITY -- at first, i thought it was weird that they wrote Yok's love interest as a cop, who are agents of the state, tasked with stopping revolutionary efforts all around the world by any means necessary. however, this was one of the gray zones they explored, which did, in fact, serve a narrative purpose. Dan represented the people who understood what was wrong with society but fell victim to the idea that they can change things through becoming a part of the system. he became a cop and the very same system he thought he would be able to change by doing this made him complicit. he was given authority and power over the people simply by becoming a cop and he was given a deadly weapon, as well as the authority to shoot whenever he felt "threatened." eventually, he ended up becoming a well-working part of the system and reinforcing the same conditions he hoped to change through becoming a cop.

despite appreciating Not Me addressing how systems of oppression cannot be changed from the inside, i thought the show really dropped the ball when it comes to Dan and his police brutality storyline, especially considering the global political climate at the time this show came out, as well as them mentioning the Black Lives Matter protests. despite the heavy, heavy guilt Dan felt, which Gawin beautifully portrayed, i found it very hard to feel sympathy towards him after he revealed how he "accidentally" killed a presumed-to-be-guilty yet unarmed person (not that it matters) who was running away and faced no consequences other than his conscience. he detailed how he did this, how his coworkers covered it up, how he felt so guilty that he changed stations, yet he never quit his job (until later). yet, he never found the family of the man he unlawfully killed and apologized. he left Sean without a father, took someone's partner from them, while exercising (abusing) his state-appointed power. he saw Sean seeking justice years ago yet he only went to him when he couldn't carry the guilt anymore. even worse, when confronting Sean, Dan says it was an accident, which shows that he still doesn't get it. this is how the system operates. he would not be in that position at all, with a gun in his hand and the power to direct it at someone, if he hadn't chosen to become a cop and a part of this system. he said it was an accident but he never really took responsibility. he killed a man but he never was judged by the law.

furthermore, i was really disappointed with Yok's reaction to finding out what Dan did, especially because he knew Dan for so little yet was friends with Sean for years and saw how traumatized and radicalized he was by his father's death. i felt like he really didn't feel the weight of what he did beyond how it made Dan feel. it was sort of this romantic, opening-up moment, which felt odd to me. i felt like all the things Yok said were wrong and lacked empathy for Sean; he said Dan was now making amends by fighting against Tawi when he never even took responsibility for what he did or even apologized so how could he be making amends? on whose terms? to who exactly? in what ways? i really didn't think he deserved to be comforted, especially by Sean's very own friend.

while watching the show, i said, "unless Sean kills Dan and takes his revenge or is able to get him charged with murder, i won’t think they handled that storyline fairly and it will just be (some cops are good but they make mistakes) copaganda to me," but the actual confrontation between Sean and Dan was so much worse because they made Sean look unreasonable for wanting revenge and it felt like he was forced into resolving this issue within himself for the comfort of everyone else. Yok was yelling at Sean, saying "he's trying his best to make it up to you" for, literally, killing his father through state-legitimized violence. on top of the fact that they kept referring to him making amends, which somehow did not involve the actual victims at all, i just felt crazy watching this particular scene. everything Gram said was even worse. he said, "don't take revenge, what are the laws for?" yet the laws clearly didn't do anything? in fact, the laws were in place to protect and empower those like Dan who protect and serve the state. if the law was there to provide justice to citizens, would Dan get away with killing someone just because he was wearing a badge? Gram said to punish the ones who really did wrong, which, he is right, because police killings are political and directly related to structural oppression and this is not a problem of individual shortcomings of one cop. yet, no form of "justice" was served for Sean and his family and Sean didn't deserve to be made to feel like his feelings weren't valid, no matter how impulsive. of course, i didn't actually want him to kill Dan and get himself in that predicament with the law, cause unlike Dan, he would be charged, but he wasn't wrong to want revenge.

NON-VIOLENCE -- one other area where i thought the show dropped the ball was their focus on non-violence in the context of the revolution, or simply, as it relates to societal change. it reminded me of all the people who were more worried about the looting of luxury stores, damage to property, or respectability politics during the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests, than the people who have been victimized by the police state for far too long, when we know all revolutions in the past have been won through using violence back. in Blood In My Eye, George Jackson says, "revolution builds in stages; it isn't cool or romantic; it's bold and vicious [...] the power of the people lies in its greater potential violence."

Not Me, in many ways, addressed how the law itself is not justice nor is it always just or correct. they acknowledged it is there for a reason but also showed the characters struggle with its limitations. they even openly said how the law exonerates the elite who use it for corruption because it’s made by them and for them. we often saw White question this; he said, “fair competitions only result from fair rules. what if the rules aren’t fair? is it right to break them?”

while they did address both sides of this spectrum, there was a focus on non-violence, especially portrayed by the main character White, who seemed to be in the middle of everything yet saw and acknowledged both sides. this focus on non-violence, which goes against the radical nature of the show, was disappointing but kind of expected. i was surprised at how honest and fearless the show was in addressing certain political and social themes that i thought they would not fall victim to the liberal notion of non-violence in the context of the revolution. also, them mentioning Martin Luther King Jr in the context of nonviolence was very on point because anytime someone wants to criticize revolutionary efforts, which, of course, can involve violence, they will quote MLK and how he advocated for non-violent protests. Not Me does the same and it's not surprising why they don't bring up other Black revolutionaries, like Kwame Ture, who said, "in order for nonviolence to work, your opponent must have a conscience." furthermore, MLK is always remembered by his most famous sayings about non-violence, yet his other words, such as, "one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws," go unmentioned.

it felt like maybe they intended to focus on unity and the positives to give people hope and make the idea of the revolution more palatable (then again it is a tv show), but diluting revolutionary efforts through notions of non-violence or more palatable and comfortable ways of revolting excuses the violence suffered by the people. both in Sean's case and in general, i think the expectation to stay calm through abuse is where the violence lies. it is almost offensive to ask people to contain their anger, to act respectable, to not use force, when state-sanctioned violence is normalized and millions live in poverty.

WHITE'S PRIVILEGE -- finally, i want to address White as the main character. i mentioned the show focusing on nonviolence before, and this focus is mainly established through White's character. before White took Black's place in the gang, they were already using different forms of violence to fight back.

when White first comes in, we see him as this rich, privileged, sheltered guy, and when he joins the first mission, he’s obviously dumbfounded. in a way, White represents the elite in juxtaposition to the rest of the gang, he doesn't have the same life experiences, he hasn't been burned by the system the way they have been because he's been on the other side, and he has little to no lived experiences with any forms of oppression. yet, he leads the conversations. he represents neutrality, intelligence, and logic while those like Sean or Black, who are rightfully angry, are portrayed as rabid dogs who lack civility and only know violence. White represents the elite's understanding of conflict and revolution and i don't like how him being the main character made it so that his point of view, one of neutrality, was emphasized.

however, this was also White's journey of understanding his privileges and his own position on this chess board, he said, “ [...] if the privileges i’ve had in my entire life come from exploiting others..” which very directly addresses capitalism and wealth inequality. the fact that White had an easy life where he did not have to think or act about the structural problems of society and systems of oppression is because he had the privilege not to. in the end, the show made it seem like it was White, who did not live in Thailand until recently, had no direct experiences with poverty, oppression, or state violence, and lived an overall privileged life, who would bring reason to the group and their actions against those like Tawi. in a way, it was White's neutrality and "logic" that diluted the revolutionary efforts of the gang, which were much more strong and radical when Black was leading them. the show made it seem like these guys, like Sean, who were radicalized through their direct experiences with injustice, were akin to savages acting on pure rage.

i'm emphasizing this point because it was so painfully obvious; even when they found out about the cop's betrayal, White was the one who could see both sides of it. while others were mad or disappointed, White, once again, represented reason and could immediately sympathize with Dan and did not seem to be as emotional about their efforts being ruined. however, what the show doesn't directly tell us is that White can afford to be neutral about this BECAUSE he is privileged. even his capacity for sympathy towards Dan demonstrates how privileged he actually is. he isn't as angry as others because he can afford to be. he hasn't been hurt and damaged by the system the way others have been. he doesn't have the same grievances despite believing in the same cause. yet, he was made to be the voice of reason, which everyone followed. he got to criticize, direct, and change the ways the gang went about the revolution and we were just supposed to believe he somehow knew better and was better, which seemed condescending. for example, when in EP6, White did not follow Sean's plan and assumed he knew better, it showed us that he did not value the experiences of the people who were actual victims of oppression, unlike him who only learned or read about these things. it seemed like the show created scenarios that made the gang look impulsive and thoughtless while White was always written to be the voice of reason and intelligence. as Attica Locke wrote, “you didn’t make good choices, you had good choices,” and that's how privilege operates.

IN CONCLUSION -- no matter my stance on some of the focus points of the show, i loved how they addressed the gray zones in a lot of the issues in the plot. they never claimed to be right or know everything about everything. they tried to acknowledge and explore as many viewpoints as possible, which made for a very enjoyable and educational watch.

most importantly, my favorite part of the show was how they made so much space for love throughout it all. we need so much of it. we need love for each other because that's how we build community. societal change can't come about if people don't care about each other. we need people like White to care about people like Sean. we need people to care when there is nothing in it for them. we need them to care even when it doesn't serve them. this is why i love how they didn't end the show with some unrealistic portrayal of a successful revolt or something. they ended it by emphasizing the most important point: solidarity, solidarity, solidarity. they ended with, "not me, not you, but everyone," emphasizing the importance of the collective over the individual.

and the fight continues.