沉默之像

媒体稿，原载于Flux Magazine

http://www.fluxmagazine.com/the-look-of-silence-film-review/

The Indonesian anti-communist genocide of 1965-1966, which took the lives of more than 50,000 people, is rarely talked about in either Indonesia or the West. In his 2012 documentary The Act of Killing, director Joshua Oppenheimer met this challenge head on.

The film reenacted the mass killing with some of the original death squad leaders and allowed viewers to enter the uncomfortable inner world of the killers, who performed and fantasised in front of Oppenheimer’s camera; they told their own version of the events, rejecting to face any punishment.Now three years on, in its sequel The Look of Silence, Oppenheimer brings us back to the tropical North Sumatra village that had been the execution ground and is now home to both the perpetrators and their victim’s families. We meet optometrist Adi Rukun and learn that his brother Ramli was killed and subjected to horrendous violence during the anti-communist genocide. Like other victims’ families, Adi’s parents have lived in painful silence for half a century; the killers have become the dominators, instead of being punished. With the witness of Oppenheimer’s camera, Adi decides to break this silence and confront the perpetrators. The film records the powerful moments of these confrontations. We are shown what it is like to live in fear, and what happens when the unpunished murderers are forced to face their inhumanity.

Compared to the first film, The Look of Silence is more polished and consciously directed. The thoughtful cinematography shows us the beauty of the tropical Indonesian village, a setting that somehow, in its serenity, highlights the cruelty of its violent past. Oppenheimer explains that, to make the audiences maximally empathise with the victims, he chose to record and focus upon a single family. His strategy clearly works. In The Look of Silence, we are introduced to Adi’s next-of-kin – his hundred-year-old parents, his wife and two children. Oppenheimer’s portrayal is intimate. The clear affection between Adi’s parents and the laughter of his mischievous daughter trigger a loving emotion in us, the viewer. However, this sympathy for the victims does not damage the objectivity of the documentary. Oppenheimer was critised by some reviewers for being manipulative in his interactions with the perpetrators in The Act of Killing. This time, according to the director, it was Adi who insisted on confronting the perpetrators. This gives the film its ethical drive and makes it an unusually pure record of what happens when murderers, who are allowed the power to live in the present and ignore the violent acts of their past, are confronted by their reprehensible history and by the victims who, for so long, seemed powerless. It is interesting that, with the simple addition of a camera – the eye of Western viewers – into a situation, unjustified power becomes redundant.

Fear is an obvious theme of the film. The victims’ silence caused by fear is apparent. Adi’s mother keeps telling herself that “the past is past” but still hopes the killers will be punished by God. Adi’s wife worries about the safety of the family after learning that Adi is talking to the murderers. However, the perpetrators’ fear that exists behind the façade of their power and violence is even more interesting. When the perpetrators are showing off their experience of killing, they also mention that they had to drink human blood to avoid losing their minds. Every time Adi discusses his brother Ramli, fear creeps into their faces, and they seem desperate to escape from the conversations. We are also shown how fear is used by the murderers and the rulers in order to manipulate the victims. During the confrontation, the local head of legislature, who was a leader in the massacre, tells Adi to “let it pass” and threatens: “if you keep mentioning the past, sooner or later, it will happen again”.

As with The Act of Killing, it is the impact The Look of Silence will have on real lives in Indonesia that can’t be overstated. The film makes the victims’ voices heard for the first time. More than this, it helps the victims counter the dominant story of the massacre with a story of their own. This is key to Oppenheimer’s project; if the right to speak is only given to the perpetrators, the reality of the past will be forgotten and become, instead, a story of triumph and heroism, rather than murder. Only an open discussion, which has been started by these two films, can begin to provide relief for a society that has suffered from fear for half a century. It is also a needed assertive answer to the murderers’ threats. Talking about history will not take the killings back; on contrary, it is the only way to avoid the tragedy from happening again. As Werner Herzog said to Oppenheimer after the making of The Act of Killing: “…Art doesn’t make a difference, until it does.”

也许这就是纪录片特有的厚重感吧

第一次看人文类的纪录片
而今天入场之后就感受到了意外的凝重感 很感动 全程没有人吃零食发出卡巴声 在等待开场和转播的时侯 大家也都特别耐心

这是一场关于杀戮与被杀戮的的反思
Adi作为受害者家属、身处于权利弱势的一方，一家一户地去走访当年的杀戮者、实际执行者、监狱警卫… 我很难想象他是以怎样的心情 在看到Killer绘声绘色的比划着当年杀害自己亲哥哥的场景 而说出“他在笑是因为他对自己的行为抱有歉意和悔恨 才会更加卖力的表现出不在乎 从而使自己的心情得到宽慰”

在听到自己的亲舅舅说“我不是凶手 我没有杀Ramli 我不应该为此负责” 的时候Adi颤抖的嘴唇

Adi妈妈在见到另一个幸存者时遏制不住的哭泣

Adi爸爸完全失忆的第一天不断地拄着双手支撑着半瘫痪的身体在屋里无助的徘徊“救命啊 我走进了一个陌生的地方 我怎么会到这里来的啊”

不能不感受到沉重 不仅仅是因为人们在过去犯下的罪过 还因为那些犯下罪过的人 毫无悔恨 并且依然在以他们的影响力 一代又一代的威慑着他们的受害者 使他们依旧生活在水深火热之中

今天看的这场正好是Live Q&A 有全国直播的现场问答 在布莱顿的现场Joshua和Adi都到场了

印象比较深的有几个问题
“Adi 你现在原谅他们了吗”
Adi--“ 谈不上原不原谅 只是想还原历史本身的样子 但是我不想我的孩子们生活在来自于我父母的阴影 我的阴影和恐惧之中”

“海报上调试镜的意象是什么”
Joshua--“有两个隐喻，一是希望当年的杀戮者能够清晰地正视历史，反观历史带来的伤害； 另一方面是象征着我们想要给予历史以本来的面貌”
 

看到后面我才发现剧照原来就是 那些杀手的头目，这又是一部令人深思的纪录片，在如今这个和平的世界，居然还有地方会因为生死问题而担忧，刚开始我也被什么 共产主义 民主主义 总统制 共和制 君主制，虽然看了百科现在还是有点混淆，我也不晓得当年他们是怎么分辨谁是共产谁不是，我也不晓得现在印尼现在还有没有共产，我只晓得从片中看来，每个人都觉得自己没有做错，更甚至有人认为自己很伟大，要史书记载、要国家奖励，但是从他们紧张的表情，肢体动作看来，我认为他们绝对有过自责，有受过自己内心的谴责，他们之所以不承认错误，或许是因为喝过人血起了作用，又或者他们的人性本来就是恶的，又或者他们只是认为自己也是无辜的而已，做出了对自己有利的一面，甚至是做出了不够人道主义的行为，不过事实就是事实，做错承认，挨打站稳，我个人认为先不管事情还有立场是对的还是错的，做了这种不人道的行为，就应该对那些逝者、那些逝者的亲人道歉。找个时间把另外一部看了，貌似那一部讲述杀人过程会比较多。

过去的就让它过去吧。这可能是所有当事者自以为无懈可击的逻辑，然而并没有人告诉他们，过去从来不承认自己已经过去。
也许是为了让人们对眼前之物保有感觉，长久以来，阿迪为那些行刑队的队长们校验眼镜度数，选配镜片，然后将其装进镜框，再亲手帮他们带上。他选择与那些人聊起当年的杀戮时，我看到的是他扭在一起鱼尾纹，但我看不到的是他内心的挣扎。拉姆利死后，他们的父亲开始每天脱落一颗牙齿，母亲昼夜不停地向真主祷告，拉姆利被抛入蛇河两年之后，真主把阿迪赏赐给他们，真主果然按照母亲祈祷的那样，因为母亲说，阿迪几乎就是拉姆利的复刻。
当阿迪还在孕育之中，我想那时候的这个生命会不会也像是母亲手中那些躁动的虫卵，它们拼命往外看，拼命挣脱，拼命拼命。直到今天，当阿迪终于站在如今这个世界的当政者面前时，他发现，他们一如从前，他们的地位如此牢固，以至于时光都无法改变些什么。而他期待的悔过，看来也只不过是受难者的一厢情愿。过去的就让它过去吧，这是当事者给予眼前这个年轻人无比真诚的忠告。就是在这样诚恳的教导中，人们一代又一代地选择了遗忘。
遗忘，有人告诉我，那只是一种选择。因为，我们同样会选择一些东西，然后将其铭记。历史从来不会祈求我们记录下什么，他觉得自己身体上的每个部位都那么肮脏，虽然有人不停地洗刷过往，可我们还是沉默不下来，未经审视的生活毫无价值，未经审视的历史不值一提！