Show Business

The Act of Killing will make you cringe. My facial muscles were sore from two hours of contortion in both anguish and anger. It’s a brutal, absurd, and eye-opening film.

The Act of Killing follows up with a group of Indonesian death squad leaders. This group was active in the mid-1960’s when they were supported by the Indonesian government to hunt down and murder ‘communists’ residing in Indonesia. Millions of Indonesians were dutifully killed by paramilitary groups commanded by these men in order to eradicate the country of the menacing specter of communism. Presently, these same odious death squad leaders are highly respected — or at least feared — officials in Indonesia living their lives as if the 60’s never happened. It’s baffling to see the way these murderers are treated. Citizens know exactly who these men are (the murderers of their parents), and yet, they treat them like long time neighbors.

The documentary’s director, Joshua Oppenheimer, noticed this peculiar dynamic. After interviewing several of these leaders, he found they were all heavily influenced by Hollywood cinema: how to dress, how to behave, and how to kill. He asked the leaders to make a film depicting how they viewed their actions from the 60’s — genocide through the eyes of the butchers. The Act of Killing primarily focuses on the lives of the perpetrators and the production of their movie. Very little is shown of the final product, however, what is shown is captivating and surreal in the most frightening way. There are scenes of idyllic fantasy with dancers wearing bright red dresses that give off a glow akin to Dorothy’s ruby slippers from The Wizard of Oz. On the other hand, there are scenes of incredible violence so realistic that actors faint from nervous exhaustion and children continue to cry minutes after the shooting is done. It is a devastating contrast that left me deeply affected.

The influence of Hollywood movies — gangster movies in particular — on these killers was one of the most striking aspects of the documentary. The killers happily refer to the paramilitary organizations they lead as ‘gangsters’, claiming the term comes from a Dutch word meaning “free man”. The influence of gangster films is seen not only in the way they dress, but in how they kill. One scene demonstrates how the paramilitary groups killed victims without spilling blood (too messy and stinky) by using wire, a classic gangster film weapon. Furthermore, even their social structures seem to be influenced by the gangster genre. At one point in the film a fascinating connection was made when one of the killers suggests to another that he go to a psychologist. The other replies “Psychologists are for crazy people. I’m not crazy” as if he were Tony Soprano himself.

As a lover of gangster films, I was forced to review some of my favorite movies and the amount of violence they contain. I had never thought twice about it; the entertainment of watching “Tommy gun” shoot-outs always outweighed my conscious. While watching The Act of Killing I was struck with the astounding grotesqueness associated with the gangster genre. That is not to say that I will never watch another gangster film again, or that I have to remake my Top 10 list of favorite movies because I don’t approve of their violent message. Rather, these reenactments and behaviors highlighted the incredible power that film — and art in general — has to influence its consumers, and not solely desensitize, like what has happened to myself and most of America.

The Act of Killing’s crux is Anwar Congo. Congo was one of the most feared leaders of the paramilitary groups. Now, almost 50 years later, his actions still haunt him. Some of the most powerful moments in the documentary come from Congo’s confessions to the camera. He admits to being frequented by those he’s killed in his nightmares and questions the morality of his own actions. While playing the role of the victim in one of the scenes of his movie, Congo has to stop the action to catch his breath; the emotion from the reversal of roles — culprit to victim — is too much for him. Despite this guilt, the following scene has him boasting and joking with his fellow ‘communist’-eradicators about how things used to be in their youth. Out of the group that The Act of Killing follows, Anwar is by far the most conflicted and, therefore, interesting. Some of the gangsters lie to themselves about their action, claiming they were necessary. Less repentant gangsters continue these same practices and regularly extort civilians like real life gangsters. Still others choose to ignore the past in an effort to wipe away their memories. It’s as if the lessons learned from Hollywood cinema have transferred to the psyche of the killers, which allows them to live happily in a dreamscape, and disregard the terrible reality they’ve created for others.

While watching the killers, I recognized that I’ve utilized some of the same defense mechanisms, albeit in much more banal circumstances. For instance, whenever I see a particularly disturbing video on the internet I have to laugh sometimes to counteract the unsettling shock. Other times, when someone does something that offends or annoys me, I make a joke about it rather than confront the issue. I doubt these practices are healthy, however they do ease the mind and allow me to escape confrontation either with myself or others. However, it’s difficult to imagine that these same mechanisms would hold up under the responsibility of the death of thousands of human beings. In fact, they couldn’t even withstand the film itself. As I walked out of the theater, all I could think about was how much I wish I had gone to see the documentary with someone else; I could have made a joke and had a nice, fresh laugh.