Day
140 The
Act of Killing [2012]
Director Joshua Oppenheimer
Cinematography Carlos Arango de Montis, Lars Skree
& Anonymous
Subject The
film follows some of the perpetrators of the mass killings of Communists in
Indonesia in 1965-66 as they re-enact their crimes in the style of their
favourite movies.
Production Final Cut for Real, DK
IMDb 8.2/10
Rotten Tomatoes 96%
I
have been wanting to watch this for so long as it’s been recommended to me
multiple times and I’ve read a lot of good reviews. I mean when you’ve got
Errol Morris and Werner Herzog exec producing you know it’s going to be worth a
watch. The premise behind it is shocking. Oppenheimer is speaking to real life
murderers, who themselves brag about how many people they killed and the way in
which they did it. None of these men have ever been punished and they all live
a happy life as heroes of the corrupt government. And what’s worse – they are
gaily making a movie about the atrocities they committed with little regard for
what they’ve done or who it may affect. I think Nick Fraser raised an
interesting point about this film and his opinion is certainly worth listening
to when it comes to documentaries (read it here). The point of his that I
understood the most was this: imagine someone making a film like this with Nazi
SS officers and their actions during the holocaust. Would that be allowed to
happen? Would it receive critical acclaim? I think it’s highly unlikely. It’s
the old problem of statistical numbing, for example that we care far more about
one friend dying of cancer than about the genocide of millions of people, and a
version of nimbyism, that proximity to death (both emotionally and
distance-wise) affects how much we care. Not that it takes away from their
actions at all, but I thought one of Anwar Congo’s (the lead killer with over
1000 kills reportedly) fellow death squad members made a goof point. Oppenheimer
asks him about the Geneva Convention and the International Criminal Court as to
whether he thinks what he did was a war crime. He replies to Oppenheimer in
saying that the winners decide what is a war crime and what is not, by winners
he also means the powerful. More than once they use America as an example of a
country that gets away with war crimes constantly, and I’m afraid to say that
he is not wrong. It sadly can’t shock us that these men were so ruthless in
their actions, when the US and Britain supported them at the time, furthermore
both Western countries have caused or contributed to the deaths of millions of
people in what I will call justifiable war crimes. Justifiable in their eyes at
least. With politics aside, the documentary is a good one. Oppenheimer for the
most part just keeps filming, and the men are all too happy but to talk about
what they did. In that way it’s a very pure form of documentary, as Oppenheimer
isn’t necessarily trying to make a point or form a story. He is just documenting.
It’s necessary to watch, but I won’t go as far as saying it’s one of the best
films ever, as so many seem to.
Subject
Matter 3.5 / 4
Shock
Factor 4 / 4
Production 3 / 4
Music 1 / 4
HWF
rating 3.5 / 4
Comments
Post a Comment