nst replies 2 - a question of degree
Second comment
Sepet struck me as a personal movie by Yasmin Ahmad. She was re-living the experiences of her younger days. It is not a complete portrayal of today’s Malaysians. Everything in that movie reminded me of the 70s. The old government house (why did the family remain there when the father had retired?), the furniture, etc. And what’s with the main character’s obsession with the baju kurung? We live in the 21st century and even in remote kampungs, we do not see teenagers in their baju kurung. This is not a true reflection of present-day Malaysians. Sepet struck me as a personal movie by Yasmin Ahmad. She was re-living the experiences of her younger days. It is not a complete portrayal of today’s Malaysians.
I would like to point out that I wasn't solely referring to the visual aspects of the movie when I concluded that Sepet is a good and honest potrayal of Malaysian life.
Rather, I was referring to the issues raised and tackled in the movie, the plot of the movie, the dialogue and dynamics between the characters in the movie.
I couldn't care less whether the Malay girl was wearing a baju kurung, cheogsam or skirts throughout the movie or whether the furnitures look like they are directly transported from the 1970s. To me, the locations, props and costumes used are merely a vehicle for the filmmaker to present her story.
Granted, the props and costumes might have been choosen to add a local touch to the movie, to enhance the visual quality of the film or to enable the audience to readily identify with the characters and locations, hence allowing them to fully immerse themselves in an environment which closely resembles a Malaysian setting.
But what matters to me was the essence of the movie and the issues it chooses to tackle.
In addition, I had mentioned in my original article that I admit some parts of the movie might have been 'enhanced' to ensure a smoother transition to the screen and I didn't recall saying that the movie was a 100% accurate potrayal of Malaysian life.
No movie could ever completely captures the subject which is meant to be central focus of the movie, no matter how faithful or meticulous the moviemaker might be. There are bound to be some aspects of the movie which deviates from the original subject matter - that is to be expected.
Therefore, I believe the question of whether Sepet is an exact potrayal of Malaysian life or not should not be asked in absolute terms - it is not a question of 'yes, it is' or 'no, it is not' i.e. the issue is not simply black or white. To even think of phrasing the question in that manner reflects a lack of in-depth analysis and simplistic thinking.
Besides, if we are to subject all movies to the same strict criterion, I doubt not many movies will be acknowledged as an accurate potrayal of whatever it is they intend to potray in the first place.
Rather, the question as to whether Sepet is an exact potrayal of Malaysian life or not is a question of degree. And when one judges a movie, one should find that some movies are much better at capturing the real essence of their subject matter compared to others and precisely based on this fact that we should provide our verdict on Sepet.
In short, the question is not whether or not Sepet is an accurate potrayal of Malaysian life; rather, it should be to what extent Sepet accurately potrays Malaysian life. The distinction between the two is subtle but makes a whole lot of difference.
Personally, compared to other stereotypical local movies, I believe that Sepet does a good job at portaying Malaysian life; note that I said Malaysian not Malays.
I mean, how close to the realities of Malaysian life are other local movies such as Sembilu, Puteri Impian, Senario the Movie etc.? Besides, since when local filmmakers strive to potray the issues of Malaysian life rather than making films solely to appease the whims of the movie-goers or to make lots of money?
And if you wish to talk about visual accuracy, since when the Javanese palaces during the time of the Malacca Sultanate used modern bricks for their buildings such as potrayed in PGL? How about the kungfu-like fighting scenes in the movie?
In addition, who have the authority to decide whether a movie is cinematic enough or not? Is it proper to impose one's criterion for cinematic quality on someone else without understanding the context of the movie?
Even though not a filmmaker myself, I believe one should not blatantly sacrifice faithful potrayals in a movie just to increase the film's cinematic quality or to make it cinematic enough.
But then again, that's a personal remark.
I would like to point out that I wasn't solely referring to the visual aspects of the movie when I concluded that Sepet is a good and honest potrayal of Malaysian life.
Rather, I was referring to the issues raised and tackled in the movie, the plot of the movie, the dialogue and dynamics between the characters in the movie.
I couldn't care less whether the Malay girl was wearing a baju kurung, cheogsam or skirts throughout the movie or whether the furnitures look like they are directly transported from the 1970s. To me, the locations, props and costumes used are merely a vehicle for the filmmaker to present her story.
Granted, the props and costumes might have been choosen to add a local touch to the movie, to enhance the visual quality of the film or to enable the audience to readily identify with the characters and locations, hence allowing them to fully immerse themselves in an environment which closely resembles a Malaysian setting.
But what matters to me was the essence of the movie and the issues it chooses to tackle.
In addition, I had mentioned in my original article that I admit some parts of the movie might have been 'enhanced' to ensure a smoother transition to the screen and I didn't recall saying that the movie was a 100% accurate potrayal of Malaysian life.
No movie could ever completely captures the subject which is meant to be central focus of the movie, no matter how faithful or meticulous the moviemaker might be. There are bound to be some aspects of the movie which deviates from the original subject matter - that is to be expected.
Therefore, I believe the question of whether Sepet is an exact potrayal of Malaysian life or not should not be asked in absolute terms - it is not a question of 'yes, it is' or 'no, it is not' i.e. the issue is not simply black or white. To even think of phrasing the question in that manner reflects a lack of in-depth analysis and simplistic thinking.
Besides, if we are to subject all movies to the same strict criterion, I doubt not many movies will be acknowledged as an accurate potrayal of whatever it is they intend to potray in the first place.
Rather, the question as to whether Sepet is an exact potrayal of Malaysian life or not is a question of degree. And when one judges a movie, one should find that some movies are much better at capturing the real essence of their subject matter compared to others and precisely based on this fact that we should provide our verdict on Sepet.
In short, the question is not whether or not Sepet is an accurate potrayal of Malaysian life; rather, it should be to what extent Sepet accurately potrays Malaysian life. The distinction between the two is subtle but makes a whole lot of difference.
Personally, compared to other stereotypical local movies, I believe that Sepet does a good job at portaying Malaysian life; note that I said Malaysian not Malays.
I mean, how close to the realities of Malaysian life are other local movies such as Sembilu, Puteri Impian, Senario the Movie etc.? Besides, since when local filmmakers strive to potray the issues of Malaysian life rather than making films solely to appease the whims of the movie-goers or to make lots of money?
And if you wish to talk about visual accuracy, since when the Javanese palaces during the time of the Malacca Sultanate used modern bricks for their buildings such as potrayed in PGL? How about the kungfu-like fighting scenes in the movie?
In addition, who have the authority to decide whether a movie is cinematic enough or not? Is it proper to impose one's criterion for cinematic quality on someone else without understanding the context of the movie?
Even though not a filmmaker myself, I believe one should not blatantly sacrifice faithful potrayals in a movie just to increase the film's cinematic quality or to make it cinematic enough.
But then again, that's a personal remark.
posted by wanaimran at
3:38 PM
1 Comments:
I have to agree that this person totally missed the point of the movie. I think he/she missed the big picture. If these aspects were more important, than PGL should have won more awards than Sepet.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home