Excellent but underrated film

Don't listen to the negative reviews

Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

The 1960's saw great political upheaval in Indonesia, with then- President Sukarno being overthrown by Suharto, and the Indonesian Communist Party finding themselves the subject of a widespread propaganda smear campaign. Death squads were created to systematically wipe out the Communist party and anyone suspecting of sympathising with the organisation. Between 1965 and 1966, it is estimated somewhere in between of 500,000 and 1 million Indonesians were murdered in a massacre widely ignored by Western countries. Shockingly, the heads of the death squads still hold power and influence in their country, with many now employed as high-ranking military officers.A straight-forward documentary covering the topic would have no doubt been a powerful and upsetting experience, but director Joshua Oppenheimer, along with co-directors Christine Cynn and somebody listed as 'Anonymous', have rejected this approach and, with The Act of Killing, have subverted the genre entirely. Obviously appalled at the countries failure to highlight the atrocity and punish those responsible for the crimes committed, Oppenheimer has instead opted to give the killers the opportunity to tell their own story. Yet rather than talking-heads juxtaposed with archive footage, Oppenheimer gave them a film crew and the freedom to depict their acts in a movie of their own making. The results, quite frankly, are utterly astonishing.Portraying their war crimes in a variety of genres that range from musical numbers and film noir to westerns and bizarre dream-like sequences, their cinematic vision is naturally cheesy and poorly handled, complete with bad acting and stodgy dialogue, with one gangster over-eager to dress in drag in an effort to lighten the tone (and succeeding in the process). However, Oppenheimer isn't interested in the final product (which we don't get to see), but how the film-making process affects those involved. At first, these killers, rapists and torturers are utterly loathsome, demonstrating absolutely no remorse whatsoever about their actions. One, Anwar Congo, gleefully displays his efficient method of murder, which involves strangulation by wire, while another boasts to his friends about the delights of raping a 14-year old girl.Yet Congo, who is viewed as a sort of celebrity in his country, starts to reflects on the pain and suffering he has caused. In one scene, he plays a victim being interrogated while tied to a chair. When the wire is tied around his neck, the experience has a profound affect on him, sitting motionless in silence as his friends look concerned and baffled. He later watches it back, transfixed, and starts to break down. The Act of Killing is careful not to sympathise with its subjects (Oppenheimer quickly points out to Congo that his victims' experience would have been far worse), but at least tries to understand them. It's less about the atrocities Indonesia experienced than the act of killing itself, and what could possibly drive anybody to such cold-blooded barbarity. It's a powerful and moving experience like no other movie I've ever seen, and it is no overstatement to hail this as one of the greatest documentaries ever made.

Like many viewers of the documentary I had zero knowledge of the events that are remembered here, and on a fundamental level it has already succeeded by bringing its topic into the public sphere. It is of course political; on a secondary level Oppenheimer seeks to reveal it to the American public and their deeply hidden involvement in the mass killings. But I am struck by how little this agenda exists on a surface level; Oppenheimer seems to be not immediately concerned with the objective of unearthing deep-seated remorse from these subjects, if there is any. Filming took reportedly 8 years - there is patience behind the camera, as if the filming is guided by the killers themselves. This is our chance to show ourselves for who we are, they say. And yet they are so freely depicted discussing what to omit from the film, and their greed and corruption, and how they are revered in the public sphere. Such a confidence and reputation is baffling to the western viewer. So Oppenheimer follows them and their pursuit; from their journey as low tier ticket scalpers all the way to death squad leaders. Their history has influenced them, and they re-enact their past in the vein of their adored movie stars. One scene has them dressed in traditional gangster outfit, torturing a victim while an eerie green light bathes the background. Another has the killings symbolically via a grotesque tribal sacrifice/meal. In the most vivid of their stories, victims, perpetrators and dancers alike are dressed in the most lurid costumes, the sunlight is deliberately overexposed to give the scene a heavenly aura, and Anwar Congo himself wears a glimmering gold medal and is praised for his past actions. Oppenheimer freely props these glorified dramatisations up; or rather he allows the killers to rewrite their own history. More disturbing is the freedom with which they boast and tell their stories with pride. There is still a deep running sentiment of anti-communism and political corruption everywhere they go. They casually talk of their killings while playing golf and drinking, recreate their brutal methods with pride, and even gain the approval of political party members. One story Oppenheimer relays is the reality in which Herman would shake up the Chinese shopkeepers without fear and keep the film rolling, and then secretly he would go back and compensate the owners for their money lost. There is a powerful sense of complicity and responsibility that is owed to Oppenheimer for capturing this act. Does it veer into artifice? Perhaps once, as he captures the fiery re-enactment of a takeover of a village where the camera hovers nervously and close-in and the sound is cut to heighten the brutality of the images. And then they shout Cut! and it cuts back to a wide shot and everyone is all smiles. Well not everyone - the children don't quite understand, and even the director admits it is not a good look. The most talked about scene is the last one - a revisit to the rooftop by Anwar where he carried out so many of his reported 1000 kills. It has been paradoxically deemed both horrific and upsetting as well as artificial. But the beauty of documentary is that both interpretations are equally valid. We see throughout that Anwar is increasingly struck by his past actions. He attempts to shield himself from this realisation: he imagines his victims thanking him for killing them, he props up his young grandchildren and is happy to see them denounce the video as 'boring', and offers up a cheap confession as if he has now fully learned exactly how his victims felt before the death blow. And he tears up, and retches repeatedly, uncontrollably - whether genuine, or played fake to appear remorseful, it is ultimately shallow. Oppenheimer feels no need to comfort him because the full experience can never be recreated - not with talking heads, not with dramatic re-enactment, not with feigned acceptance. Those blindly grabbing for catharsis or redemption need to realise this.

I cannot help the urge not to write something that I could say I truly know and familiar with. I was born in the exact city where this youth organization stronghold (Pemuda Pancasila) is based now and where all the killing had taken place in the past. I am no stranger to all the crimes they did back then or do now.Back to where it all started on the 30th of September 1965, which marked the rebellion by the Communist Party. Seven of the highly ranked military generals were kidnapped, tortured and murdered then piled in an old well by what the history said to be the communist starting coup d état. (No evidences of torturing as accused, only military style execution resulted from the autopsies of the remains and also no evidence it was done by the communist party member till now).The name Pemuda Pancasila (Youth of Pancasila) was then known since youth started to march on the street yelling Pancasila (our nation's philosophy) resisting and seeking for revenge by annihilating communism to its root. Both government and military gave full support resulted in uncontrolled anarchy mob led to man slaughter and in present day, an organized crime.My Mother was 13 and witnessed their brutalities would tell me the horror with fears still could be seen in her eyes. Her brothers would run and hide for their lives in a rice field when Pemuda Pancasila arrived with machetes in military trucks yelling "Pancasila" as their slogan to find and execute anyone who was involved in communist. But all the communist excuses were biased and used only to do what they wanted and to kill whoever they think was communist mostly with no evidence at all.She witnessed her neighbour accused as one of the member of "Gerwani", woman communist organization, being raped, then dragged to the street and beaten to death as an example for others who resist. They looted, ate, drank, and destroyed what they could not take in my mom's store. One word or eye contact showing disrespect would find her ended up beaten to death. Dead bodies and body parts scattered everywhere on the street was a normal view. Not one day went by without anyone getting killed at night. Many were victims of the unproven accusation, poor farmers who received fertilizer or farming tools from the communist party would be considered communist while they did not even know anything about what communism is.I felt really sick watching this movie yet at the same time I was very thankful finally the whole truth about how this crime organization started and is hiding behind a youth organization now be told. It disgusted me how they could live with such unbelievable crimes and told the story so proudly with no regrets and believed in their lies and excuses they made up only to justify their brutality in the past (except Anwar Congo). Some even considered themselves as heroes. Yet I pitied them for being very uneducated and shallow. Imitating what they saw in the western cowboy and Mafia's movies thinking they could be meaner and more brutal like it was just some scene in a movie. Are they qualified as human beings?Ps. If you are interested in finding more about their brutalities and violence, you can find videos in youtube recently, they are involved in a riot with other organization and Police.

I was really looking forward seeing this movie, due the topic, part of the planet I don't know much about as well the historical evens, which was also very unknown to me.So I was in front of a story about the terrible time in Indonesia during a960's when dead squads, composed of local crooks and gangsters systemically exterminated thousands and thousands 'enemies' and 'communist demonstrates how he and his cohorts slaughtered hundreds of 'enemies' in 1965. The plot intended to bring the story closer from the perspective of executioners – the free and well respected killers are both the actors and directors, having the freedom to plot the story and tell it from their perspective. So the butchers are the main characters, acting like a children nostalgically remembering 'good old naughty days'. While the concept might be successful, here is total failure.Instead of learning something, I was just tricked, left with so few facts that I didn't felt the need to even dig more. Instead of feel the tragedy, I was faced with childish group of pathetic figures, which woke nothing except stupidity and shallowness. Instead of being pulled on the chair as the tragic history would imply, I was bored to dead with repeating and repeating scenes, where showing it perhaps once would be OK, but even twice is too many.Finally movie left me empty, having celebrated the infantile beasts acting childishly convinced that they are even more superstars now than before. It left me with faceless and anonymous victims who are mentioned purely as an 'superstars' toys – nothing more than objects. It left me with boredom, and I must give credits for that – you really need to be real talent to lest the watcher with that impression, having the material so powerful.