[1] The story is summed in some verses from an old Sanskrit language translation that the original writer had used at the end of the conclusion, accompanied by few ancient alphabet and words that reveals an educational tone for this popular traditional love story: The film starts with Tum, (Son Sophea) a talented novice monk, with his friend, Pich, who are going to a village to sing a classic song.

Meanwhile, Teav, (Danh Monica) the daughter of a rich woman in a village, hears some news about the handsome monk with the beautiful voice from her waitress (Kong Socheat).

Then Teav offers Tum betel nuts and a blanket as evidence of the feelings she had for him and prays to Buddha that the young monk will be with her for eternity.

Now as laity, they visited in secret the house of Teav, although she is "in the shade" (ក្នុងម្លប់), a traditional period of few weeks where young ladies are secluded at their home, especially far from the contact of males, in order to gain in virtue as a woman.

She feels ill and alone, but at the end creates a plan to lure Teav out of the Palace and, at her return to the village, to celebrate the wedding with Ngoun.

Tum brings the message alone and runs to the wedding, but instead of presenting the Edict, he drinks and becomes drunk, then singing in the party for Teav and kissing her in public.

At the end, due to the persistence of Tum to go back to the wedding, the governor plunges a sword in his chest, while telling him to stay away from the life of his son.

Tun dies in the field, under a banyan tree before the powerless eyes of his friend, who then runs back to the wedding to communicate the event to Teav.

Following the advises of his Royal Council, most villagers are condemned to die and the rest to be sold into slavery, while a wider area is crippled with heavy taxes.

Tum and Teav's story is originally based on the poem written by the Venerable Botumthera Som, but it was popularized by writer George Chigas and has been a compulsory part of the Cambodian secondary national curriculum since the 1950s.

However, in some versions the king in question is purported to be the Rea-mea who reigned in the mid-17th century, coming to the throne through an act of regicide and subsequently converting to Islam.

The most popular time period for the story is known as Lovek era, a former capital where King Naresuan of Siam had intruded and looted to the ground during 1594.

The main similarity has got to be its melodramatic ending, but what the two stories strongly share in common is the role of family participation which bonds a contention for the final dramatic and sad premise.

Compared to the dispute of Montague and Capulet which influence between their children matters, there are no accounts of the male protagonist's parent to be mention in the Khmer version.

[3] To the same case, Tum Teav also become a sort of Cambodian Tristan and Iseult, their narrative poem and death conclusion prove the claims.

It also examines the controversy over the poem's authorship and its interpretation by literary scholars and performers in terms of Buddhism and traditional codes of conduct, abuse of power, and notions of justice.

Nowadays, most Khmer families document it in the cultural education, so that people don't repeat the mistake that Teav's mother made.