What we discover is that when history is written bythe victors, we see something very frightening emerge: acceptance ofbrutality as not only necessary, but heroic. Suddenly, murder squads sprung up throughout the country and communistsand the Chinese minority were targeted for extermination. It'sreally hard to believe sometimes that people like these death squadleaders really exist and travesties like this really have and continueto happen. You can see behind me some of the actions you can take now to show your support for the victims and end the silence that has lasted for almost fifty years. This film absolutely blew my mind. What begins as a glimpse into the lives of a handful of former deathsquad leaders, Oppenheimer then invites them to help produce fictionalrecreations of their killings, recreations mimicking the style of themurderers' favourite Hollywood movies.
At a two and a half hour running time, the film is too long. While the filmmakers did not getinterviews with these higher ups, they did get others responsible forthe murders to be interviewed and even recreate the killings for theaudience! However, when Suharto deposed Sukarno in a coup, he ushered in an era of fascist-like repression. But once the actis over and the veil lifted, these men are revealed to be victims oftheir own acts, sickened by what they've done, who they are, and the'act' they've clung to in order to preserve their own sanity. It's hard to empathize or sympathize with someone who has killed 100+ defenseless people, but somehow those feelings do emerge. And, sadly, while the film shows evil up close, after a while it all becomes rather boring.
We enabled thesemen to kill so who are we to judge, and if the results coincide withour politics, do we even care? Himself archive footage uncredited Produced by. The massacres are so impinged upon the collective consciousness ofIndonesia, even today, that it appears to permeate every aspect ofevery person's life. It never pretends to be an exhaustive account of the events of 1965. Some of them, including themain character, Anway, started their criminal careers by scalpingtickets at a local cinema and were big fans of Hollywood films. Every scene was likea wave, with an entirely different idea, crashing over the previousscene and provoked a new thought in me.
It's bizarre on the highest order, and,though I wouldn't have thought of it, there probably isn't a better wayto treat the subject matter than the way this film does. Some of Anwar's friends state that the killings were wrong, while others worry about the consequences of the story on their public image. Like gangster Adi suggests, history iswritten by the victors and war crimes are defined by the winners. When you have a bunch of ignorant and ill-informed men self psycho-analyzing, using incorrect culture references and base human non-emotion to smugly explain or rationalize how and why they killed, and then to reenact the interrogations and murders in a cheapo Bollywood style, well it's ludicrous, not revolutionary. But all the communist excuses were biased and used only to do what they wanted and to kill whoever they think was communist mostly with no evidence at all. Now, decades later, filmmakers have come to Indonesia to interview folks who were responsible for some of these murders. I had to remind myselfthat they were still mass murderers.
It's not a shocking film like The Act of Killing, but it still was moving to me. Personal attacks or comments that insult, demean or threaten users will be removed and result in bans. . These squad leaders are still feared andcelebrated, and their actions are institutionally supported, so, as aresult, they get to run around patting themselves and each other on theback for their atrocities. With a slight editing, I would have scored this film a10.
Why risk it by interviewing genocide victims illegal in Indonesia or analysing the implications and effects of this historical event, when simply portraying pompous caricatures of the Pancasila as pompous caricatures of the Pancasila will do? Imitating what they saw in the western cowboy and Mafia's movies thinking they could be meaner and more brutal like it was just some scene in a movie. Do they realise they are sending a message out, that this behaviour is acceptable in certain circumstance, which generally means it will happen again. Did he find it comical? Oddly, they seemed very cooperative and smiled throughout--asif they were very proud of being mass murderers. Anwar is said to have personally killed 1,000 people. There seems to be a disconnect between these people and their feelings,as if all the violence had somehow rendered them numb. And, surprisingly, they find that not only are these folks rather unrepentant, but that the culture of murdering the opposition still thrives. Film Jagal bukan kisah tentang Indonesia belaka.
The executive producers were , , Joram ten Brink, and. What were they trying to achieve? I think the filmmakers felt that it wasn't necessarybut I am pretty sure younger audiences will feel a bit confused by whathas happened. Generally the recreations are mostly small scale, cheesy and repetitive. Mereka membantu tentara membunuh lebih dari satu juta orang yang dituduh komunis, etnis Tionghoa, seniman, dan intelektual. Either way, this is one of the most disturbing, difficult to watch documentaries I've ever seen.
Truth is truly stranger than fiction. Ketika pemerintah Indonesia digulingkan oleh militer pada 1965, Anwar dan kawan-kawan 'naik pangkat' dari preman kelas teri pencatut karcis bioskop menjadi pemimpin pasukan pembunuh. Yet I pitied them for being very uneducated and shallow. Jagal adalan sebuah cerita tentang para pembunuh yang menang, serta tentang masyarakat yang mereka bentuk. The advantage documentaries have over fiction is that theycan show us things so unbelievable they could only exist in the realworld. I was born in the exact city where this youth organization stronghold Pemuda Pancasila is based now and where all the killing had taken place in the past. And like that, the film kept on giving infinitely and its themescontinually deepened.
The genocide led to the killing of almost a million people, ostensibly for belonging to the local communist community. And, because of this it is invaluable and worthy of receiving the Oscar nomination for Best Documentary Feature. Each audience member will have their own individualexperience of the film's ideas and themes, because the film allows itso. I was so used to spoon fed opinions by narrated documentaries but all the director does here was ask simple questions. It disgusted me how they could live with such unbelievable crimes and told the story so proudly with no regrets and believed in their lies and excuses they made up only to justify their brutality in the past except Anwar Congo.