Intimacy with fear

April 2022-01-22 08:01:30

This article is very long, detailed, and serious. Enter it with caution!

——Talking about two documentary works that analyze human nature, "Deduction of Killing" and "Silent Image"

Zhu Xiaowen

Note: This article was originally published in "Swiss Museum"

1. "The problem with Eichmann (a former high-ranking official in Nazi Germany) is precisely because too many people are like him, neither perverted nor sadistic, but extremely ordinary."

"Forgiveness is the only way to change and freedom. Only forgiveness can reverse the irreversible trend in history."

——Hannah Arendt

2. In recent years, there have been two films, which are documentaries to be exact, or to be more precise, documentaries combined with news and documentary combined with video art. To be more precise, it is difficult to define the existing film categories because they appear in the world documentary. The film industry shocked experts who were accustomed to industrialization, processization, scripting, and structured knowledge. The two films actually belong to the same project, and some critics believe that it is difficult for the second film to separate from the first film in terms of art. Although I disagree with this view, the nature of their interdependence cannot be ignored.

Of these two films, the first is called "The Act of Killing" and the second is called "The Look of Silence." They investigated and reproduced the tragic millions of massacres in Indonesia’s history just 50 years ago. In 1965, a military coup took place in Indonesia. The communist-oriented government was overthrown by forces supporting Western forces. Thereafter, the commander of the Army’s Strategic Reserve Forces Suharto led an anti-Communist purge that lasted for a year. In addition to the execution of a large number of Communists and Chinese regarded as the Communist Party, a large number of leftists and intellectuals were also labeled as "Communists" and invested in concentration camps. Massacre. Just like the Rwanda massacre in 1994, the villagers who were originally neighbors were divided into "good people" and "bad people" by the army. Under the planning of the coup leader, the "good people" had weapons and were Granted the power and responsibility to kill "bad guys", although in reality, many "good guys" are gangsters and gangsters, while "bad guys" are mostly innocent victims.

In this one-year killing, the specific death toll is believed to range from 1 to 3 million.

3. What is the significance of historical materials, survey data, and display and reproduction to movie audiences?

Every nation in the world has its own version of the history of blood and tears. The director Joshua Oppenheimer, a Jewish-American, learned from his childhood the destruction of his ancestors during World War II, and the aforementioned killing of the national generals The massacre in Rwanda, with a population of 20%, was only 20 years ago. Some historical mistakes are defined as historical mistakes, so they are treated as human lessons to reflect and learn. But if the makers of historical mistakes are still in power, and the source of their power is the crimes against humanity they once committed, then they must spare no effort to protect their power and prevent the possibility of history being reproduced in reality.

This is the status quo in Indonesia when Oppenheimer decided to shoot "Deduction of Killing". The army chiefs who used street hooligans and civilians to kill millions of people have become the current leaders of the government. Although it is known as a "democratic" society, it is actually a warlord dictatorship that is half army and half bandit. The government used fear to control the people, so the truth about the Holocaust was always distorted before the film was shot.

In an interview, Oppenheimer introduced the Indonesian people’s views on the massacre before the filming:

People in different parts of Indonesia are aware of the tragedy that occurred in 1965, especially in North Sumatra Province, where the film was filmed. Because the assassins were recruited from the underworld and have been in power since then, they are happy to show off their previous "winners." The massacre was not banned in North Sumatra, and they even showed off their murderous deeds on TV talk shows. In other parts of Indonesia, the killers come from student groups and religious groups, and sometimes the military does it themselves. These groups do not intend to show off what they did back then.

Oppenheimer’s original intention was to expose the long-distorted truth, which triggered recognition, discussion, and redefinition of historical events both internationally and in Indonesia, because only by acknowledging the existence of the event and unearthing the truth of the event can it be defined. Its nature also triggers the correction of errors. The significance of this correction lies not only in the fairness of history, but more importantly, how we can avoid similar crimes against humanity no longer occur anywhere in the world.

4. Oppenheimer's father was a professor of political science, and his mother was a labor rights activist. Many of his grandfather’s family members were mutilated in concentration camps during World War II. The Jewish-American generation of Oppenheimer born in the 70s still has a deep emotional connection with the historical trauma experienced by his grandparents and parents. For Jews who are good at thinking, the question they are most concerned about is: How to make the Holocaust crime that killed more than 6 million Jews last forever?

Dialectically speaking, for most Jews, "eternal determination" is how to prevent this tragedy from happening to Jews again. When the Jewish community constantly studies, emphasizes, and promotes this point, unjust massacres and cruelties It still happens all over the world, including the difficult situation of Palestine facing the power of Israel. Oppenheim acquiesced that this is precisely a kind of "tragic" and "hypocritical" belief, because only when fairness, justice, and benevolence can be applied to all mankind, slaughter and mutilation will be "eternally determined".

Therefore, when he started filming "Deduction of Killing", his biggest concern was not what happened in the past. Although the appearance of the film was like this, what he was most concerned about was how historical tragedies have affected people today. What kind of impact should it have, and how we face, understand, and evaluate not only the experience and position of the victim, but also the experience and position of the perpetrator. Because "Although we can slander Hitler as much as possible, he is not a monster, he is a person. This is the real scary place."

The movie "Deduction of Killing", through the analysis of the experience and feelings of the perpetrator, makes every audience realize that the atrocities are not all carried out by cruel and evil monsters, but mostly by selfish ordinary people. Empathy for victims is easy for every audience to do, because we are all willing to believe that we are kind and good people, but empathize with the perpetrators and realize that we and them are both selfish human beings. This is A movie can really evoke the power of actual change.

5. In terms of the plot and performance of the film, the director invited the executioners who actually participated in the massacre in North Sumatra to re-interpret the scenes of the killing of the victims in front of the film, including Anwar, who had killed people like hemp and passed away. Gangoler, Ibrahim Sinic, a news publisher who acts as the party’s mouthpiece and shows a seriousness, Anwar’s friend and attendant, and a face full of rogue Herman, the captain of the firing squad, Adi, and a half army. The leaders of the Five Rings Youth League of the bandits and their party members.

Most of these former executioners confessed to their actions, whether it was the wire hanging invented for efficient killing, the bloody interrogation scenes, or the various ways of killing relatives, friends, and babies that were insensitive to relatives, friends, and babies. They praised their own examples of "heroism" and "righteous destruction of relatives."

Anwar Gangole, who is over the past few years, has always been a loyal fan of Hollywood movies, especially tough guys such as Marlon Brando and John Wayne. He will teach young grandchildren in the backyard to be kind to small animals, and he is also full of fascination with his experience of killing people. Not only did he learn from the Hollywood gangster movies to use wire to hang people to kill people without seeing the blood, but also well versed in terrorism that destroys victims both physically and mentally.

He and his friends were a group of street gangsters and gangsters who became military executioners out of their desire for power and money. In a killing performance, he carefully pointed out the position and posture of the victim to the camera lens, and told Oppenheimer how the victim was knocked to the ground, and then his neck was pressed against the corner of a heavy table, Anwar and His friends swinging their legs, sitting on the table watching the street scene and singing, their mood seemed happy and laid back. When it was almost time, they looked down, "Did you die?" "Oh, early death." Then they jumped off the table and dealt with it. Dead body.

In front of the camera, they not only tirelessly told about the murder experience, but also participated in watching the material and constantly made suggestions for improvement. They always regarded Oppenheimer as a collaborator, even a trusted friend, because they did not feel that they were confessing a crime. They believe that history is written by victors, and because they have won, they can also become the incarnation of justice. It is precisely because it relies on the protection of power, and the highest power of the country is protected by the United States, so when Joshua Oppenheimer from the United States interviewed and filmed them, they thought it was a positive propaganda for themselves. And be proud of it.

Therefore, when the director was shooting the first film, in a way that did not need to confront the executioner, he invited them to guide and perform the scenes of torture and murder. From the beginning, the simple explanation, the extravagant actors to play on the spot, to the later studio. With bloody makeup effects, props lighting, full devotion to exhaustion, and panic, Oppenheimer seems to have always been a very professional photographer, working professionally with the executioners and patiently discussing the plot with them. , To meet their requirements for the lens, but also pay special attention to the various suggestions they made when viewing the material.

He explained how he worked with these subjects as follows:

It is actually very easy to gain their trust . I just need to be normal, be friendly, willing to listen, and treat them as ordinary people. They can feel this natural attitude. The army that led the massacre in North Sumatra has never been punished. Their power is so great that they can overwhelm the sky, and the source of their power is actually to create fear for the people. All vocabulary related to the massacre has been brainwashed into "heroism" or with the meaning of "glorious". For example, the term "eliminate" means "eliminate the Communist Party" to them, which is a commendatory term. In this context, I can ask them very directly: "Tell me, how did you eradicate the Communist Party?" As long as I don't show my actual emotions, it's difficult.

6. During the seven years of filming, Oppenheimer, who was not a documentary background student, not only learned the various techniques of documentary filming, but also learned to speak Indonesian from the victim’s family because he did not want to make a traditional, filming film. A research documentary with a security barrier between the subject and the subject-after all, the stacking of historical data, the presentation of survey data, and even the visits of real people will only make you accustomed to viewing movies as consumption (both material and spiritual levels) After being "shocked, uncomfortable, and stunned," the audience applauded their three views, and then returned to the real life of "fortunately these have nothing to do with me".

Oppenheimer believes that only by placing ourselves on an equal footing with the subject, even if they are executioners, terrorists, or murderers, will we discover the commonality of human beings—a kind of selfishness built on them. Primitive evil tendencies. After spending seven years with these executioners, Oppenheimer discovered that they were not a group of people with any ambitions to conquer the world. Before filming Anwar, he had interviewed 40 executioners, who, like Anwar's friends, were extremely selfish, vain, and highly honorable. If you want to say that they have the biggest common ground, "then it is selfish." Oppenheim acquiesced, "Taking a person's life is a very selfish act. We can call it bestiality or mania, but the use of these words is nothing but In order to distinguish ourselves from those people. But in fact, the economic system we live in currently strives to praise selfishness as a kind of virtue-in fact, the so-called competition is such a thing. So, unless we believe that the current whole The economic system of China is a kind of bestiality or mania, and we cannot use the same words to describe those executioners because they are selfish. Of course, I hope I am not so selfish. But selfishness is human, not animalistic. ."

The director regarded the executioner as a part of human nature, and also regarded the Indonesian massacre as a theme that is still very relevant to our global political and economic life today. Because people are selfish, only when we realize that tragedy is closely related to ourselves, will we really feel, know, and want to do something.

It is obvious and simple to sympathize with victims, just as any behavior that makes us feel that we are "good people" is obvious and simple, but how much courage do we have to face the evil of human nature and realize the distance between us and "bad people" It's not as far away as we think. This is the practical question Oppenheimer wants to raise with his seemingly subjective and surreal movie presentation technique.

7. After the release of "Deduction of Killing", Oppenheimer quickly achieved great success. Oscar nomination for best documentary, British Film Academy Best Documentary Award, Berlin Film Festival Best Documentary Award and other honors came one after another. The MacArthur Foundation awarded him a "genius bonus". The German director Werner Herzog, who he admired in his youth, and the American documentary master Ereel Morris, not only acted as the producer of the film , And continued to help him complete the production and shooting of the second film "The Silent Image".

A true artist has a lifelong pursuit. This pursuit can be a work that is handed down to the world, or it can be a certain eternal spiritual state. By the time Joshua Oppenheimer was still young, he seemed to have achieved a pursuit worthy of being called a lifetime. But we can't ignore his 21-year-old graduating from Harvard University and came to Indonesia on the grounds of a short-term project. However, he discovered another extremely important subject during this period and devoted his entire youth to the exploration process.

As mentioned earlier, "Deduction of Killing" is not a documentary in the traditional sense, and Oppenheimer is not a film director in the general sense. In the first few months of his arrival in Indonesia, he participated in filming a story of a British plantation worker who tried to organize a union to fight for better treatment. During this period, he spontaneously organized several film workshops to teach the workers to use cameras for them. Screening of Herzog and Fernando Solanas films. These two film masters are committed to exploring human nature through their works, and at the same time full of passion and lonely fantasies. Oppenheimer borrowed magical realism in many scenes in "Deduction of Killing", such as the dancing beauties in Anwar's fantasy world, emerging from the surreal perch-shaped buildings, and the Qingshan Waterfall. Earlier, the two victims of that year took off the silver wire killing tool from their necks, took out a golden medal, hung Anwar's neck, and chanted: "My benefactor, thank you for sending us. Go to heaven."

Absurdity and surrealism are the safest way for these murderous executioners to understand reality. Only in this way can they not go crazy. From the perspective of filming, only by not confronting the executioners and cooperating with them in a friendly and open manner can they be so frank and open.

Oppenheimer told the media more than once that if you want to really understand the film, you must watch the director's cut version that is 40 minutes longer than the official version. In this version, there are even more shocking content. In fact, Oppenheimer is not a rational wise man. During the seven-year shooting of the first film, he suffered from severe insomnia. The mental torment he has suffered is indicated in the director's cut version.

There is a scene in the studio where Anwar interprets the scene of a child being stabbed to death and scratched with a knife in front of an interrogated person. During the filming, Anwar had unknowingly fell into a state of madness. Oppenheimer saw his fear and intense inner suffering, and was deeply affected by it. If he considers his position, maybe he should stop shooting immediately, because by this time he is not only a film director, but also a victim of the whole incident. But he didn’t stop shooting, because Anwar’s madness reflected his being destroyed by sin. Although he laughed and joked and was proud of his murderous deeds, he could not avoid the chasing of nightmares, “as if part of his life, He was also killed with his sin.” As Oppenheimer continued shooting, Anwar suddenly stopped to look at him and said to him: “Joshua, what's wrong with you, you are crying. "

At this time, Oppenheimer touched his face with his hand, only to realize that he was indeed crying, but he didn't feel it at all. That night, he had a terrible nightmare. For the next 7 months, he could not sleep because he was afraid that the nightmare would continue to accompany it.

8. When asked whether it was dangerous to film "Deduction of Killing", Oppenheimer said that because of the official characterization of the Holocaust and his American identity, no photographer thought he was exposing them, even if he followed the local gangsters. When blackmailing Chinese businessmen, shooting is easier and safer than everyone thinks. But the psychological torment of people during the filming process is very extreme.

It was against this background that Oppenheimer returned to Indonesia in 2012 and began shooting the second film "The Silent Image". At this time, the editing of "Deduction of Killing" has just been completed, and the honors have not yet come, so Indonesian officials are still unclear about his creative standpoint. At this time, he had known and filmed a victim's family member Adi (not shown in "Killing Interpretation"), who had known him for many years, and proposed to him that he was going to confront the executioners.

Oppenheim's initial reaction was that this would definitely not work. The victim confronts the persecutor who is still in power, which has not appeared in any documentary. But Adi insisted repeatedly, because for him, only when the executioners confess their crimes can he separate people from their crimes and can forgive them. "Forgive" has always been Adi's original intention. This middle-aged man with a mild temper and a medium body has never mentioned revenge, but the pain he endured was immense, and the courage he showed afterwards proved this.

After much deliberation and deliberation, Oppenheim agreed to shoot. Although this is dangerous, he considers that "Deduction of Killing" has not yet been released, so Indonesian officials do not know his motives, and to actually complete this work, there must be no only the rhetoric of the executioner. The crime of the massacre actually caused ordinary people. What kind of damage can only be revealed through the explanation of the victim.

As a result, we were able to see a more simple and humane work "The Image of Silence" that is both tear-jerking and full of power.

9. Unlike "Deduction of Killing", which interviewed and filmed a large number of executioners, "Silent Image" basically only showed the story of the Adi family. Oppenheim believes that an intimate movie must be subjective, and an important movie must be intimate. Although telling about 10 families can show their own misfortunes, how can the audience establish a truly intimate relationship with each family that only takes more than ten minutes? Therefore, he chose to photograph only one family, that is, to show the most misfortune of this family.

Adi is an optometrist. Oppenheim very strategically created such a setting: He told the interviewees that for those executioners who had directly or indirectly participated in the persecution of Adi’s brother, Adi would give them free optometry and at the same time start a discussion about the massacre with them. discuss. Oppenheim let them know the names of the bigwigs they had interviewed, so these interviewees believed that the filming was officially licensed and supported. The director also said that Adi may have different views from theirs, but hope they can discuss it calmly.

In this setting, we saw the frontal portrait of the executioner wearing color refraction glasses and slightly funny at the beginning of the film. This picture has appeared many times in different scenes. In addition to the obvious symbolic meaning, it also constantly emphasizes that although the person who talks to Adi is guilty, he is also an ordinary person of flesh and blood.

Among these people are not only the rascals in the first film, but also drama teachers who were promoted and made a fortune because of their participation in the massacre, retired elderly people who justified the killing in the name of religion, and senior commanders who directly led the massacre. Wait. Facing the camera, they have less pretended heroism than the ruffians, because they are not asked to dramatize the truth, but describe the murder in a straightforward manner.

In the first half of the film, on the one hand, the executioners’ descriptions of the killing process, on the other hand, the fear and grief of Adi’s elderly parents facing the pain of losing their children. In the second half, Adi confronted the executioners more and more directly, sometimes pushing them into a corner completely morally. Some of them, once they heard that Adi was actually the victim’s family, would just change their words and shirk responsibility; Some people become angry and threaten; some pretend to be deaf and mute, trying to escape; others show fear, but use strong words.

Adi, a seemingly gentle optometrist, has a harmonious relationship with his parents and is full of love for his young daughter. He is a hero who is very unlike a hero, but he has faced the executioner time and time again, even when he discovered that his uncle had once When serving as a prison guard, he ruthlessly questioned his uncle's conscience. His mother began to worry about him, because those in power who had been in power through killings would desperately protect their power, and Adi, a civilian, was nothing but a stubble to them.

But even in the face of the administrator's threats: "Do you want something like this to happen again? If you continue to ask, it will inevitably happen again." Adi is reluctant. In fact, what the administrator said is against common sense, because only when the dusty topic is opened and the crime is exposed, the same tragedy is unlikely to happen again.

In the film, the mother takes a bath for the father, the mother talks with Adi, and the daughter and father laugh together. They are all images full of love and hope. Another place that seems disturbing, but actually full of hope, is the only one who sincerely apologized to Adi, the daughter of a certain executioner. She was first shocked by her father's straightforward explanation. When her father boasted about how she drank the victim's blood to avoid going crazy, she had to pretend to be calm, and defended her father: "He did that to not go crazy." And when Adi calmly told her brother, her brother When it was one of her father's dead souls, the executioner's daughter shed tears, and the executioner on the side began to pretend to be crazy and look around, while the daughter stared at Adi in a daze, and finally apologized to him sincerely. Adi couldn't stop the tears, because a sincere apology meant more to him than life. He embraced the executioner’s daughter and also embraced the executioner, expressing his forgiveness. In reality, they are all villagers in the same village. They can't see their heads up and see their heads down, hatred cannot be reduced to grief, and forgiveness is the beginning of hope. The director said when talking about this scene, I hope to show a kind of hope through "The Silent Image", both of us will eventually die, but if our ending is in addition to death, there is love, then our life is full of hope. of.

11. The power of "The Silent Image" cannot be reproduced through the narration of the plot. However, there are two stories outside of the video that can show the true power of the work from the side.

One is the end of the film, the family that Adi faces. His father has passed away, he directly participated in the killing of Adi’s brother, and once at the killing scene in front of the camera, he described the murder of Adi’s brother in high spirits. At the same time, because of his outstanding performance in the massacre, he was promoted from a school teacher to a local official. He portrayed his killings as a picture book, vividly shown in front of the camera. At this time, his still-built wife and two sons who are about the same age as Adi talked to Adi in front of the camera. However, the three of them quickly became angry and resolutely denied that they knew any information related to the massacre. The sons said that we were all children at the time, and the father did not tell us anything that we were innocent. what do you want? Do you want revenge?

In the actual shooting, Oppenheimer and the family have been together for three months. He knows all the history, his mother and two sons also know all the history, and they know how well Oppenheimer knows. However, in front of the camera, facing the real family members of the victims, they were scared and could only use pale denial as a prevarication. In the end, even if the director showed them the evidence that their father was in front of the camera, they refused to watch the response. The younger son even called the police, and this was the only time Oppenheimer had to run away in panic in all the shooting.

The director thought this passage was useless, but only realized when editing that the denial itself, in fact, directly pointed to the whole meaning of the film.

Second, it is the only piece of material shot by Adi in the film. Oppenheimer once gave Adi a camera to record the life of his family at will. One day, the family got together to celebrate the Indonesian New Year. However, on the same day, Adi’s elderly father lost his memory completely. He has long been unable to walk, so he can only sit on the concrete floor, supporting his dry upper body with his hands, and moving forward step by step. Because he couldn't remember his home and no longer knew his family, he fell into extreme anxiety. He kept asking himself: Where am I? Where am I? Please let me go home.

This scene touched Adi greatly, because he realized that his father had become a prisoner of fear forever, and he had no chance to talk about the trauma again. He could only feel the deep fear, but could not understand the reason, because He never had a chance to face the truth.

It was this scene that allowed Adi to persuade Oppenheimer to agree to confront him with the executioners.

12. In terms of visual language, "The Silent Image" is very cinematic, and even has many beautiful pictures. Compared with the roughness of "Deduction of Killing", this is more in line with its human nature. The two films have the same opening introduction, with three concise text summarizing the historical background of the 65-year massacre. "Deduction of Killing" is already a masterpiece, and "The Silent Image" has its own greatness. However, the collection of the two films explored the distance between human nature and sin from both sides. If the first film is an external reconstruction of memory, then the second film is an internal investigation of the emotional vortex brought about by memory.

Adi is a real hero, even though he is different from the executioners who call themselves heroes, he doesn't boast about it. But he puts his demands for justice above his own safety, which is exactly the opposite of sacrificing the lives of others for personal gain.

Oppenheimer is a great artist. When talking about the contrast between optimism and pessimism in the film, he said: “ For me, art is not a comforting medicine, otherwise, I might as well go for a walk! Or find someone more interesting than sitting in front of the camera. Things to do, such as chatting with your lover. The meaning of art is to disturb people’s nerves. So artists must be pessimistic, or what you do is not art. But if art is just pessimistic, why can I? Persevering for 7 years? Because I still have a part that is optimistic. The optimistic part can move people, and it can really bring about some changes in Indonesia. This change has already begun. Only this kind of pessimistic and optimistic combination of creation can May stimulate this change. "

13. Speaking of the actual impact of these two films on Indonesia, "Killing Interpretation" was officially released by Indonesia, but at the same time it was listed as a banned film by the film department. The result of this contradiction is that thousands of people can see the film , But not through public screenings. "Silent Image" premiered in Jakarta, the capital of Indonesia. The 1,500-seat cinema was crowded with more than 3,000 people, and the theater had to temporarily add another screening.

The content of the film can be said to be a household name in Indonesia, but 65 years later, this is the first time that people can talk about this historical event publicly without being threatened by centralized terror. After "Deduction of Killing" was nominated for the Oscar for Best Documentary (we all know why it could not win the award), the President of Indonesia, under pressure from international public opinion, finally admitted for the first time in history the error of the Holocaust, but he also said: "Although Indonesia will reflect on it, we don't need to remind us through such a movie."

14. Joshua Oppenheimer said on more than one occasion that the two films described "story of our time." In "Killing Interpretation", we can see the executioners’ worship of American culture. In "The Silent Image", the most critical of international politics is probably not the paragraph "Barry Island has become more critical after the eradication of the Communist Party." The American news material of "Beautiful", but the factory of the Good Year Rubber Company of the United States quietly stands on the execution ground where hundreds of innocent people are ruining their lives.

As an executioner advertised: "The United States has taught us to hate communists. They should invite us to visit and travel. If there is no special plane, cruise ships are fine."

In fact, Oppenheimer even interviewed the diplomat who was the US Embassy in Jakarta at the time. The diplomat had retired and lived not far from Oppenheimer’s home in the United States. He admitted that he had listed hundreds of intellectuals under the command of the U.S. government and handed them to the Indonesian military. When these people were "eradicated", the military would tick the names after the names. Return the list to the U.S. Consulate. When asked what he thinks of what he did at the time, the retired diplomat said that fortunately, this did not happen in his hometown.

15. Oppenheimer's two masterpieces are not without controversy, but I believe that all good works of art will cause controversy. From the age of 26 to 40, his best years are dedicated to this work. In response, the director said:

I feel honored to be able to dedicate my youth to this film.

Note: The original words quoted in this article are from FilmComment’s interview with Oppenheimer Interview: Joshua Oppenheimer by Nicolas Rapold on July 15, 2013. The narrative content is quoted from the director's dialogue at the premiere of "The Silent Image" at the Centre for Contemporary Art (ICA) in London, England.

View more about The Look of Silence reviews

Extended Reading
  • Christy 2022-03-26 09:01:12

    Another film about the Indonesian slaughter from the director of "Deduction of Killing". It is still shocking to let the murderer and the victim narrate separately. To be able to talk about the murder process with relish without any remorse, has surpassed the moral bottom line of human beings. But for a country like this that lacks basic civilization and is mixed with two equally extreme and violent cultures, this is normal.

  • Peter 2022-03-15 09:01:08

    Escape from flashing gazes, triumphant smiles, plausible excuses, straightforward threats, unconvincing lies, they are historical sinners, but they have no reflection, no remorse, and no trial. How to feel desperate for a country? A string of anonymity in the end of the credits.

The Look of Silence quotes

  • Himself, brother of murdered Ramli Rukun: Tell me about that madness.

    Himself, former leader the village death squad: Some killed so many people who have gone mad. A man climbed a palm tree, every morning, to call for prayer. Killed too many people. There is only one way to avoid it. Drink the blood or go crazy. But if you drink blood, you can do anything.

    Himself, brother of murdered Ramli Rukun: [Testing the eyeglasses] What do you think...

    Himself, former leader the village death squad: Salty and sweet. The human blood.

    Himself, brother of murdered Ramli Rukun: Pardon?

    Himself, former leader the village death squad: Human blood is salty and sweet. I know from experience.

  • Himself, former commander of a civilian militia: I'm not Rambo. I was Secretary General of the Komando Aksi.

    Himself, brother of murdered Ramli Rukun: Or is it so great a crime that you did not want to admit?

    Himself, former commander of a civilian militia: No, I do not think that's great.

    Himself, brother of murdered Ramli Rukun: But a million people died...

    Himself, former commander of a civilian militia: That's politics. Politics is the process of achieving your ideals.

    [laughing]

    Himself, former commander of a civilian militia: In many ways...