What Is Indonesian Motion Pictures’ Identity?

Motion picture has been around with us since the end of the 19^th century. It has made some big impact both in the entertaiment industry and the world of art. Without our realisation, we are part of that big impact; What we dress; How we speak; How we think - were the result of those pop culture in movies. You can’t deny about how you dress these days without the influence of James Dean or Marlon Brando. My lecturer, Kusen Dony Hermansyah M.Sn, told me that motion picture has a genre which will represent a certain theme so the audience will picture themselve with the characters in the movie; they follow the emotion at a certain scene; they felt embarased when a character did something stupid; we cry when we see the father died and the child hugs him helplessly. This means that motion picture can be considered as a “mirror” to the audience.

Each message in motion pictures comes from different filmmakers’ mind. Filmmakers come from different countries, which each country has its own common background; In German, we see German Expressionism in the 1920’s; In Italia, we see The Italian Neo-Realism in the 1940’s; In France, we see The French New Wave in the 1960’s; So each country has its own uniqeness and common style or perspective, which I like to call identity (Indonesian: Jati Diri).

I live in a developing country called Indonesia – the biggest country in the South East Asia. I grew up watching Hollywood movies, which influence me throughout my career. Indonesia has this censorship thing between the 1980’s until the end of Suharto’s reign (1998). The only thing Indonesia people watch were Pengkhianatan G30S/PKI (1984). Then, we had a hard time to distribute celluliod film stocks. And most of the motion picture had to be distributed outside Indonesia. So the film industry went down in the rest of the 90’s. In 2004, some filmmakers of Indonesia started making motion pictures again. But back then, it was pretty bad to consider it as a movie. We made some bad horror films and/or love stories. But the great thing about this is that we finally made a progress.

The progress didn’t stop there. As of 2016, Indonesia has made some incredible movies with incredible efforts – some of the filmmakers agreed to be paid only 50,000 Rupiahs (about 4 US dollars) per day. But we aren’t making a movement. We don’t have any certain style. You will see some diversity of style happening in Indonesian movies, which leads to our inconsistency of what theme or message what we wanted to present to the audience. This is what we are facing right now.

Today we developed stories mostly from our culture. But Indonesia isn’t called Nusantara for nothing. Nusantara means a thousand islands, so Indonesia is literary consist of thousands of small and big islands. Because of this condition, we have hundreds of tribe developing everywhere which has its own culture. You can say that Indonesia can be called plural society. Diversity is the problem here – half of us agree at something but the other half disagree. That’s why we are still a developing country. But, I found something interesting – something that connected us as Indonesian.

The answer to the big question above is simplicity or kesederhanaan in Indonesia. Kesederhaan defines pretty much our style. Indonesia is still learning the process of filmmaking. Indonesia can’t make big movies such as Hollywood’s. We have limited supplies of human resources and system – most of filmmakers in Indonesia are independent, which means we are not controlled by big studios or whatsoever, so we make (what Hollywood standard would say) low budget movies. Another thing to remind you is that big cities such as Jakarta and Surabaya are still rare if you consider how big is Indonesia. So modern things are still hard to be reached by most people. I know you can consider us as stingy or often cowards – doesn’t want to make big budget movies (well we wanted to). But that’s okay! We are MAKING movies, and that’s something!

In the next 5 years or so, we will see a more complex version of Indonesian motion pictures. And in ten years, I can assure you that filmmaking in Indonesia will be very competitive with Hollywood movies.

This article is truly my opinion, which I have gathered from informations from many of my experience over the years. If you disagree with this (and that’s alright), you can always tell me how you feel in the comments below and also, thanks for reading!

Kreativitas v. Uang: Masalah yang Dihadapi Para Pembuat Film (An essay about filmmaking in Indonesian Language)

This post will be written in Indonesian. I haven't translated them into English. I don't know whether I will translate it or not. But keep updated with my blog, maybe I will post the English version some day!

This essay was written for my last exam on the 1st Semester at Jakarta Institute of Art. I hope it will bring my fellow filmmakers to think deeply about my argument, so in the future we would have a better mind set than what we've got today.

Manusia merupakan ciptaan Tuhan yang paling sempurna. Dalam agama Kristen atau Katolik, diajarkan bahwa manusia diciptakan melalui Citra Allah manusia itu sendiri. Lalu apa yang membuat manusia lebih hebat daripada ciptaan lainnya? Yang pasti adalah akal budi. Akal budi membantu kita untuk berpikir, bekerja, dan berkomunikasi kepada sesama. Akal budi tentu saja tidak akan jauh dari kreativitas. Menurut KBBI (Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia), kreativitas adalah kemampuan untuk mencipta.  Kreativitas membantu kita untuk menemukan ide atau hasil, yang nantinya akan membantu kita untuk melakukan sesuatu dengan cara baru.

Sedangkan uang, menurut KBBI, adalah alat tukar atau standar pengukur nilai (kesatuan hitungan) yang sah, dikeluarkan oleh pemerintah suatu negara berupa kertas, emas, perak, atau logam lain yang dicetak dengan bentuk dan gambar tertentu. Uang digunakan untuk kehidupan sehari-hari, seperti membeli kebutuhan hidup. Uang pada saat tertentu juga memudahkan kita untuk mengerjakan suatu pekerjaan. Contohnya adalah ketika kita akan membeli kamera, yang pada dasarnya memiliki banyak versi – ada yang canggih, namun ada yang lebih canggih lagi. Tentu saja yang menjadi permasalahannya disini adalah jika mempunyai banyak uang, kita mendapat kesempatan untuk memanjakan diri dengan membeli kamera yang lebih canggih. Inilah permasalahan yang membuat kehidupan manusia menjadi rumit.

Terkadang, manusia lebih baik menutupi masalah variasi kamera diatas dengan membeli kamera yang lebih canggih. Namun, uang yang harus dihabiskan biasanya sangat membuat sang pembeli kerugian; Apalagi jika pembeli tersebut tidak mengerti dengan apa yang ia beli. Sang pembeli berpikir bahwa dengan membeli kamera yang lebih canggih, semua masalahnya akan tertutupi begitu saja. Ini adalah pemikiran yang salah. Kita tidak boleh berpikir bahwa uang menjadi jalan keluar dari semua masalah, padahal uang hanya akan menyelesaikan masalah jangka pendek. Jika kita hidup mengandalkan uang, kita akan menjadi egois, sombong, dan “bodoh” secara bersamaan. Lalu, jika kita tidak bisa mengandalkan uang, apa yang kita harus andalkan dalam kehidupan kita? Jawabannya, kreativitas.

Kreativitas merupakan jalan yang terbaik untuk menghadapi sebuah masalah. Harus diakui, dengan mengandalkan kreativitas ada beberapa kriteria yang harus dipenuhi: kita harus memiliki energi yang lebih untuk melewati rintangan; Kreativitas harus dibantu juga dengan semangat berjuang atau yang biasanya disebut “niat”; Untuk mengembangkan semangat berjuang itu sendiri butuh dilatih mentalnya; Belajar juga menjadi hal utama dalam mengembangkan kreativitas. Namun, dalam jangka panjang, kreativitas sangat sehat untuk diri kita – dimulai dengan tersedianya uang cadangan dalam rekening bank kita atau bahkan bertambahnya uang karena kreativitas kita.

Masalah kreativitas dan uang sudah menjadi pokok utama dalam kehidupan, apalagi dalam dunia perfilman. Banyak orang yang berpikir bahwa dengan besarnya dana, maka kualitas film akan semakin tinggi. Pernyataan tersebut memang ada benarnya, tetapi sebagian besar salah. Untuk pengelolaan uang itu sendiri kita membutuhkan kreativitas supaya uang yang dikeluarkan bisa menghasilkan sesuatu yang efisien.

Sekitar dua bulan yang lalu, saya berbincang dengan (tanpa menyebut nama) salah satu asisten dosen di Institut Kesenian Jakarta. Dalam perbincangan tersebut, Beliau membicarakan tentang pengalaman Beliau dalam proses pembuatan Ujian Tugas Akhir – Sarjana 1. Beliau, bertiga dengan teman sekelompoknya, menyewa kamera yang sangat canggih atas usul dari cinematographer kelompok Beliau. Namun Beliau begitu sibuk dengan pekerjaannya sehingga Beliau tidak bisa mengikuti proses produksi (kebetulan Beliau adalah editor). Ketika Beliau harus membayar jasa sewa kamera tersebut, Beliau sangat kaget karena Beliau harus membayar 20 juta rupiah. Total biaya produksi tersebut mencapai 60 juta rupiah. Yang lebih mengganggu Beliau adalah hasil rekaman kamera tersebut tidak diproses dengan baik oleh orang-orang yang ada di belakang kamera. Beliau mengatakan bahwa penyewaan kamera tersebut hanya sekedar untuk harga diri – alasan yang dianggap Beliau sangat bodoh.

Di dunia perfilman profesional, kreativitas juga digunakan untuk membuat hal yang besar, contoh yang paling tepat untuk dibahas adalah film Whiplash (2014) yang disutrdarai oleh Damien Chazelle. Chazelle telah menyiapkan skenario filmnya sejak tahun 2012 dan menunggu para investor untuk datang mendanai filmnya. Setelah lama menunggu, sayangnya, tetap tidak ada investor yang mau mendanai filmnya. Namun, Chazelle menarik perhatian para investor setelah ia mengubah 15 lembar skenario filmnya menjadi sebuah film pendek. Film pendek tersebut, yang dikeluarkan dengan judul yang sama, diputar pada festival film Sundance di tahun 2013. Film tersebut mendapat reaksi positif dan Chazelle mendapat dana untuk pembuatan film panjangnya. Dana tersebutpun tidak banyak, hanya tiga juta Dolar Amerika (dianggap sedikit dibanding film-film blockbuster yang diproduksi Hollywood). Proses produksi film ini juga mengalami rintangan-rintangan, antara lain: waktu shooting yang tidak lama dan Chazelle mengalami kecelakaan. Namun, Chazelle tetap datang ke set walaupun terluka-luka. Whiplash akhirnya mendapat lima nominasi di Academy Award (Oscar) dan memenangkan tiga di antaranya. Keuntungan yang didapati oleh film ini hampir enam belas kali lipat dari dana sebenarnya! Menggiurkan bukan?

Maka dari itu, utamakan kreativitas daripada uang. Sebab kreativitas dapat menghasilkan lebih daripada uang, bahkan dapat menghasilkan uang itu sendiri. Yang lebih penting dalam penggunaan kreativitas adalah kepuasan batin. Kepuasan batin, tentu saja, akan melebihi emas, harga diri, dan nafsu dunia.

Sumber:

http://kbbi.web.id/uang

http://kbbi.web.id/kreativitas

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiplash_(2014_film)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damien_Chazelle

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2582802/

Rekomendasi buku:

“Steal Like An Artist” oleh Austin Kleon.

“Rebel Without A Crew” oleh Robert Rodriguez.

“Making Movies” oleh Sidney Lumet.

“Make Your Own Damn Movie!” oleh Lloyd Kaufman.

The 5th Wave (2015)

The film stars Chloe Grace Moretz. I personally like this film…. Wait, am I seriously reviewing this film? This is the #cough# worst #cough# film of the month. Alright let’s get to the next film.

THE HATEFUL EIGHT (2015)

#guns_shooting_to_the_air#

#Rossini’s_Finale_playing#

#the_”N”_word_spoken_aloud#

Quentin Tarantino’s back guys! Turn on the motherforking music and jam baby! The motherforker is in the town, BEACH! The last film he filmed was Django Unchained (2012) – a western action film about a slave saving his wife. This time he’s back with another western film. With many ensembly cast, such as Samuel L. Jackson, Kurt Russell, Jennifer Jason Leigh, and Tim Roth. The film was shot with the Ultra Panavision 70 – using an old 65 mm film camera which produced a 2.76:1 aspect ratio – which was handled by Robert Richardson.

Tarantino always plays with his movies – just like Jean-Luc Godard. Well you can say that Tarantino is Jean-Luc Godard in steroids… and red bulls… and cocaine… you get the point. But, I think this film was using the same formula as Resevoir Dogs (1992) – that broadway/theatre staging. He added a lot of things so it became something new. I was happy to see a film like this, but surely the motherforker can do more than just this. I mean, he only adds a western genre in it and it became a new film. Seriously?

The next thing I want to talk about is the cinematography. The set was basicaly set like a theatre stage, because you can count how many ‘stage’ there were. It was a talkie film – so it didn’t have to worry about the visuals very much. The film was also narrated as well – by the motherforker himself. So why did they want to worry about what they were shooting with very much? Clearly they used the old Ultra Panavision 70 – which is not cheap and rare. Damn! Even the last film who used the format was Khartoum (1966). I didn’t see any great views or whatsoever. But, Tarantino said to the American Cinematographer Magazine, that the use of the format was for the faces, so the emotions can be preceded fully. I don’t think I can agree with that.

Casting Samuel L. Jackson was a great decision. I like how he acts and reacts. Kurt Russell was great too. As well as Jennifer Jason Leigh. But what I like was the secret character. It made me laugh and surprised. I’m not gonna tell you the secret character.

And the last forking thing I want to talk about was the scoring, which was made by the master himself, Ennio Morricone. That son of a beach composed the scoring for The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly (1966). You know the cowboy western duel theme song, yep, he made it and he’s BACK!

I don’t hate this film, actually I like it. The thriller, the mystery, the black-comedy, the staging, the cast, the scorng, and of course, the dialogue. The film still is a Tarantino film. You can’t deny that Tarantino haven’t entertain you in some ways, right? But still, it’s not his best film.

The verdict:

Tarantino can do better than this, but surely it was great to watch and feel the suspense – IF YOU CAN!

Sorry for having some words altered, because I have to keep this fucking review PG.

The Big Short (2015)

“THE TRUTH MUST BE TOLD!” is the message of the entire film. But, the content of the film is what you need to worry about. It was about some guys (played by Steve Carell, Christian Bale, Ryan Gosling, and Brad Pitt) who knew the economy will collapse in the near future, which was in 2008.

The black-comedy film is a talkies film, but what makes it special is that the film has a big charisma for its way of saying or explaining things. For example they broke the 4^th wall – which means basicaly some characters in the film started to look at the camera and interact with us. There are moments also when I was smiling all the away in a whole scene – it was so funny that only I in the theatre laughed alone (so sad). This is really a true black-comedy film.

The content of the film was really hard to be followed. But, I think they had already made it as simple as possible. For me, I really should watch it again when I have a time. The film is very educational. It’s very different than the usual stock market drama. Some people said the film is like Sidney Lumet’s Network (1976) – I agree with them.

This is Adam McKay’s first serious film. Before this, he made some movies with Will Ferell in all of it. The movies are bad to be watch.

The cinematography of the film is pretty obvious – it was made like that to create realism. The motivation was strong. It wasn’t for the mood, because the content of the film IS the MOOD.

The ensemble cast were superb. They acted very well suited for the characters. I was shocked when Steve Carell became mad and then suddenly cries – he had a reputation of a comedian rather than a serious actor.

The Big Short is a film for good listeners. If you are not a good listeners, I recommend you to watch a more action movie. Because this movie is all about talking good, bad, and goods.

The verdict:

A black comedy with a hard-to-follow content but with the impact of the 2008 economy collapse was with us – it became more and more interesting than your girlfriend’s chat in your phone.

Ip Man 3 (2015)

The last of the trilogy. Starring Donnie Yen as Ip Man (again) and Mike Tyson as his debut on action film. The film was full of action sequences – many of them were showing of the power of Kung Fu. But more than that, it was just a crappy film.

The films lacked the narrative side. After I saw this film, I thought I was watching two movies – the first half and the other half of the film. I can’t decide which theme the filmmakers were trying to tell us. The movie started with the struggle of fighting gangsters, but ended with the theme of love. I really don’t get it. The 2 big themes didn’t match each other – or you can say the filmmakers didn’t mix it right.

Mike Tyson finally showed his punches in movies. When I first saw his punches (in the movie), I was amazed. He was so strong, and the exposition was right for him. But, the filmmakers didn’t use his characters with such passion, which made Tyson’s character just forgotten for the last half of the movie. Such a waste of good opportunity.

The film also featured Bruce Lee. When I first watch this trailer, I thought this film would be showing us the relationship between Ip Man and Bruce Lee, but it was just for the gigs – no such thing happened (alright maybe 3-5 minutes of it, but that’s just that). It would be great if the filmmakers explored this relationship. We would watch it with a better theme and many inspirational moments. I mean look at Rocky – from zero to hero!

I think this is a good Chinese-Martial-Art movie. Look at their history of tradition in the world of cinema. China/Hong Kong have a good reputation on martial art films. Even Hollywood, sometimes, tries to copy the sense of thrill on martial art films – I’m looking at you The Matrix Trilogy!

The verdict:

You better watch this movie for the action and not for the story!