The Act of Killing - Performative Documentary Style - Movie Review Example

The Act of Killing - Performative Documentary Style The Act of Killing is a documentary film directed by Joshua Oppenheimer, with co-direction done by Christine Cynn as well as an anonymous individual from Indonesia. Titled Jagal in Indonesian, which means “Butcher”, the film revolves around a few of the Indonesian mass-murders, who were responsible for the 1965 massacre of more than 500,000 members as well as supporters of the Indonesian Communist Party (PKI). What started as a Docwest project of the University of Westminster, the film had theatrical release, earning critical acclaim as well as number of prestigious awards. It won 2014 BAFTA award for the best documentary and was also nominated for the 2014 Academy Award for Best Documentary Feature. It was also widely discussed in political circles as well as among the human rights activists due to the atrocious and even callous nature of the content, with the individuals behind one of the gruesome genocides ‘boasting’ their killings, and were not indicted for their crimes even now. This boasting part was primarily due to the style of documentary making adopted by Oppenheimer. He shot The Act of Killing in performative documentary style, where visuals and content were presented to the viewers in such a way, so they themselves can make interpretations and form opinions. The other key aspect of performative documentary style, which was visible in this film, is the way how the individuals featured in the documentary are made to perform or reenact certain portions. Thus, focusing on The Act of Killing, analysis will be done regarding how it falls in line with the performative documentary style of filmmaking. The mass killings of the communists and even Chinese immigrants in mid 1960s was so widespread and ghastly, “CIA study of Indonesia described the anti-PKI massacres as "one of the worst mass murders of the 20th century.” (Whyte). Although, officially estimated death toll in the massacre was around 500,000 unofficial figures could go over million lives, as the Communist party, his members as well as followers were totally exterminated. With this massacre going all over Indonesia, in the state of North Sumatra, two gangsters Anwar Congo and Adi Zulkadry were put in charge of the notorious death squad to kill the communists and even Chinese immigrants. The documentary mainly revolves around these two individuals, as they carry on with their daily lives without any punishment for the crimes, and in the film, they go to the extent of reenacting their crimes and also “pride” themselves for their inhumane actions. “The Act of Killing probes the imagination and psychology of a group of ageing killers, who he films as they reenact their crimes and reminisce about their "glorious past" – the good old days when they maimed and murdered, with impunity and without conscience.” (Whyte). This reenactment of their crimes, their emotional attachment to it, etc., reflect the performative documentary style of filmmaking. Quite contrast to traditional style of filmmaking, where the filmmaker will present or even ‘spoon feed’ particular content to the viewers, in performative documentary style, the filmmaker will just present the content in a ‘non-oriented’ manner thereby allowing the viewers to make interpretations. In traditional style, the filmmaker will pose a problem and then provide solution or set of solutions, through ‘transmission” of the facts that are relevant and applicable to the target audience, thereby “inducing” them to think in a particular expected way. ‘Transmission to’ and ‘induce’ are the two key words here, “because the difference between deduction/induction and transmission/reception are at the core of what differentiates performative documentary from traditional documentary”, as performative documentary viewers are facilitated to “receive” the content and then “deduce” themselves. (Little 2007, p.22). That is, the filmmaker would come up with images and content, without incorporating any agenda, so the viewers can judge it as well as interpret it. Little (2007, p.22) defines performative documentary style on those lines by stating that it is a form of filmmaking “with an examination of the perceived visual text, and the viewers’ interpretive strategies that allow the viewer to be induced to conclude or perceive the text’s meaning.” Little further add to this definition by pointing out “regardless of any message the film might inadvertently transmit, the real goal of a performative documentary is for the viewer to derive meaning and message from the film, for the viewer to be the receiver.” (Little 2007, p.22). When one views The Act of Killing through this definition and perspective, it appears that Oppenheimer fulfills it to the maximum extent. That is, basically Oppenheimer did not favor or side with either of the involved parties (the alleged mass-murderers or the “victims” of the massacre), and so presented the issue in a balanced manner. Although, it might appear that he has maximally brought out the “boasting” side of the two key individuals of Anwar Congo and Adi Zulkadry, it is not the fact, as he balances it with details of the crimes committed by them, and also brings out their repentances as well as remorsefulness towards the end. Thus, this balancing act of Oppenheimer allows the viewers to view and imbibe the visual and content in a realistic way, thereby giving them the opportunities to judge who was wrong or right. However, when one analyze the perspective that performative documentaries will allow the viewers to interpret and even question the content, then the film fulfills that perspective as well. Because “The Act of Killing brilliantly does what documentary does best: it asks uncomfortable questions about our world. It also does what the best documentaries do: it raises troubling questions about itself.” (Whyte). The other key tenet of performative documentary style is it “acknowledges the emotional and subjective aspects” of the individuals involved. (Bruzzi 2011). Oppenheimer was able to do that in an effective manner, as he brings out the emotions of both the mass murderers as well as the “victims”. Towards the end of the documentary, through the feeling of repentance by Anwar Congo, Oppenheimer brings out the emotional side. On the same lines, he brings out the emotional side of the victims, when the villagers kept on crying even after the reenactment shot of the massacre was over. That is, while shooting for the reenactment of the massacre, the villagers, who might be relatives of the people killed in the massacre, were instructed to exhibit emotion and cry till the shot gets over. However, “as we watch the reenactment of a village being burnt down or a reenacted interrogation scene we sense the actors tears are real and detect a whiff of the scent of the fear Indonesians have been living with for decades.” (Whyte). Thus, as the documentary brings out the emotional side of the characters, it is in line with the performative style of documentary making. The other facet of performative documentaries is, it is not concerned with evidences and order of events. (Little 2007, p.22). Oppenheimer does that exactly as he does not devote much time to provide facts about the massacre and other historical issues, and instead focus on the issue in hand. He importantly wanted viewers’ deep and even emotional attention to the feelings, which the individuals in the film openly and subtly express. Oppenheimer acknowledges this aspect in an interview, where he states, “If people only have time for two and a half hours for the Indonesian genocide, and if they dont get their primer or précis in my film, theres something wrong with the economy of our attention.” (Whyte).The performative documentary also includes and stresses the frequently hidden or ignored aspects of documentary production (in traditional documentary filmmaking) such as “failed interviews, aborted phone calls, informal exchanges between filmmaker and subject.” (Bruzzi 2011, p.2). Oppenheimer satisfies this aspect as well in many scenes particularly in the film’s opening scene. The scene features luxuriant musical sequence with the tune of “Born Free” playing and praising Anwar Congo. In the scene, the viewers could overhear a director shouting at his female dancers to exude, “Natural beauty! This isn’t fake! Peace! Peace!” (qtd. in Whyte). This scene implies how certain aspects are “made up” to create an atmosphere of supposed glory and power. One of the key facets of performative documentary is, it gives prominence to performance along with the presentation of issue. This definition or perspective of performative documentary was validated by Little (2007, p.23), who stated, “Performative documentary underscores a paradox that is troubling for traditionalists - the marriage of performance to document”. He further adds that this type of documentary is designed in such a way it allows the viewers to assemble the meaning of historical events through the collected “evocations, icons, impressions, intimations.” (Little 2007, p.23). Oppenheimer was able to do that by not only making the two murders to dress, make-up and even cross dress, as if they are starring in some Hollywood movies they adore, but also by making them reenact or evocate how they killed their victims. They acted and thereby reenacted to the camera, how they went about killing communists with string tied around neck. As the key individuals performed according to the ‘direction’ of Oppenheimer, it is clear that his filmmaking complies with performative documentary style. From the above analysis, it is clear that the director of The Act of Killing, Oppenheimer has presented the issue of 1965 massacre and the key persons involved in it, in a balanced manner, thereby allowing the viewers to make interpretations and even raise questions. Furthermore, he incorporates the emotional aspects of the individuals as well as the hidden or ignored aspects of filmmaking to provide deeper perspectives to the viewers. Oppenheimer also avoids focusing on facts, and instead stressed on presenting the issue as well as the related emotions. Importantly, he also brought performances from the individuals, as he made them to reenact. Thus, Oppenheimer by incorporating all the above discussed aspects complies with the key tenets of performative documentary filmmaking style. References Bruzzi, S., 2011. Documentary, Performace and Questions of Authenticity. ZHdK. Little, JA., 2007. The Power and Potential of Performative Documentary Film. Montana State University. Whyte, J., Sympathy with the Devil. Available from http://www.cineoutsider.com/reviews/films/a/act_of_killing.html(accessed on April 26, 2014) Read More