1 - Southeast Asian Independent Cinema - Independent of What

Copyright 2012. Hong Kong University Press. All rights reserved.
. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted
Southeast Asian Independent Cinema

Independent of What?
John A. Lent
To discuss Southeast Asian Independent Cinema is to encounter problems of

definition, first, in trying to delineate the region itself, and second, in setting the
parameters of independent film. Southeast Asia is a diverse mixture of many lan-
guages, cultures, and beliefs pulled together for political convenience; it is a colo-
nial, and later, Cold War construct of Western origins. The region and in turn,
its film, are not entities unto themselves; they are inseparable from their Indian,
Malay, Chinese, and other roots.
Similarly, a sole definition of independent cinema is not justified, with film-
makers and cinema scholars using the term in different contexts, varying from place
to place and time to time. Some, such as Indonesian Rudy Soedjarwo, director of
Whats Up with Love? (Ada Apa Dengan Cinta, 2002), define independent film
by what it is not: In Indonesia, the term independent has been bad, because its
meaning [is] you have to make a weird film, film that you cannot understand, and
thats wrong, because independent means youre independent. Its not about the
film, and the more people dont understand, the more its cool.1
Perhaps one way to try to understand independent film is to ask, independent
of what? Three answers come to mind here: government regulation and censor-
ship, big mainstream studios and traditional methods/styles of filmmaking.
Independent of Government Regulation/Censorship

under U.S. or applicable copyright law.
For decades, countries of the region operated under strong one-man rule (Marcos
in the Philippines, Soeharto in Indonesia, Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore, Mahathir in
Malaysia), periods of martial law and military rule as in the Philippines, Thailand,
Myanmar, and Vietnam, and the guided democracy concept, prevalent especially
in the 1970s. Before that, all of these countries, with the exception of Thailand, had
been colonized by European powers. As a result, many legislative acts and other
forms of regulation were levied against mass media, including film, and these regu-
lations often go back to the colonial period of the respective countries. In the past
decade, there has been a loosening of some of this control, with significant changes
EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 9/5/2017 12:18 AM via OPEN UNIVERSITY
MALAYSIA
AN: 437694 ; Baumgartel, Tilman.; Southeast Asian Independent Cinema : Essays, Documents, Interviews
Account: s2496442
14 John A. Lent
Copyright 2012. Hong Kong University Press. All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted
of government in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand. Though many

restrictions still apply, the overall atmosphere appears to be more open, which some
filmmakers have dared to test.
Even when Ferdinand Marcos ruled the Philippines, there were filmmakers
such as Lino Brocka, Behn Cervantes, Ishmael Bernal, and others who featured
subject matter considered out-of-bounds by the authorities. Brocka and Bernal
attempted to survive within and at the same time against the system. As Brocka
told me in 1986, When I made five [films] a year, four would be commercial and
one that Marcos would not like, that would enrage Imelda.2 He and others were
often vocal against censorship and other restrictions. In 1983, Brocka and screen-
writer Jose Lacaba formed Concerned Artists of the Philippines as a forum for
these objections. Because of their social activism, including participating in dem-
onstrations, the police detained Brocka and Cervantes.3
Particularly in Indonesia, after the end of thirty years of Soehartos New Order,
filmmakers have enjoyed more freedom, no longer heeding requirements to obtain
production or location permits and freer to use social criticism content that would
have been censored before. The group of independent directors spawned by refor-
masi (reform) challenged New Order constructs, and in 2000, thirteen of them
created I sinema, a manifesto included in this volume, declaring that within the
freedom of expression spiral, they would find alternative ways to produce and dis-
tribute film in an effort to end the stagnation of the industry.4
Malaysian independent filmmakers also have pushed the boundaries of
freedom of expression in recent years. Prominent among them have been U-Wei
bin Haji Saari and Shuhaimi Baba, both of whom indulge in social commentary
and intellectualize issues they expose. U-Weis Woman, Wife &... . (Perempuan,
Isteri &..., 1993) had its title modified when censors removed the word whore.5
Likewise, Amir Muhammads 6horts (2001) and The Big Durian (2003) pushed
the boundaries of Malaysian socio-political, critical, and creative expression.6
Because most independent films are not exhibited in theaters, they bypass National
Censorship Board approval and take on political themes. One area where indepen-
dents have had an impact is in subverting government policy that favored Malays
(bumiputra, or sons of the soil) over other ethnic groups as owners of film com-
panies. Bumiputraism came on strong in the 1970s with the dismantling of the
multiracial studio system, replaced mainly by independent companies financed
by Malays. Khoo Gaik Cheng predicts that the new independents will change the
bumiputra nature of the industry with more use of personnel of other ethnicities.7
Despite the general euphoria, there are plenty of independent directors,
such as Martyn See of Singapore, who remain pragmatic and cautious. See said,
Im independent as far as I do my own stuff, but Im totally dependent upon the
authorities and exhibitors. Theres no way you can be completely independent.8
MALAYSIA
Account: s2496442
Southeast Asian Independent Cinema 15
Independent of Big Mainstream Studios
A break-up of the big studio system has occurred in most parts of the region,
brought on at different paces and for varied reasons. The collapse of the main-
stream film industry of Indonesia in the 1980s and 1990s has been attributed
to the monopoly practice of the Subentra Group, a theater chain owned by a
President Soeharto-crony, which showed only Hollywood films, and the national
economic crisis which forced hard-pressed filmmakers to move into television pro-
duction. Independent filmmakers quickly filled the void, first with Kuldesak (1998),
produced without funding assistance, which inspired other young people to enter
the field. Since the demise of mainstream film, all filmmakers have been indepen-
dent, and furthermore, most of the leading producers, directors, and scriptwriters
are women.9
In Malaysia and Singapore, the big studios closed in the mid-1970s. As
already indicated, when Shaw Brothers and Cathay-Keris moved out of Malaysia,
room was made for the bumiputra entrepreneurs, causing what Khoo Gaik Cheng
has labeled a precarious situation for about 30 years.10 For example, by 1995,
627 independent film companies were registered with the National Film Board
(FINAS), but only ten were active.11 Shaw Brothers Malay Film Production and
Cathay Organizations Cathay-Keris suffered in Singapore as well, because of the
lack of sustained private investments, the creation of protectionist trade barriers by
neighboring countries, the popularity of television, video, and other home enter-
tainment, and indifference to the arts and culture by the Lee Kuan Yew govern-
ment.12 Thailands mainstream film culture also broke up, especially after the 1997
Asian economic crisis.
The Philippines, which has the longest tradition of independent filmmaking
in the region, saw the closure of its Big Four studios for reasons similar to those
of elsewhere in the region, a strike at Sampaguita Studio, and possibly the estab-
lishment of Deegar in 1953. Deegars mission was to encourage independent pro-
ducers to borrow money from its production fund, with which they could make
movies that were released through Deegars extensive booking organization.13
Using Deegar as financier, top artists and technicians bailed out of the Big Four,
started their own companies and attracted the top stars, having the advantage of
being able to offer bigger salaries, since they did not have the high operating costs
of maintaining studios. In 1958, about one hundred companies existed,14 most
producing low quality, imitative films in an attempt to recoup investments quickly.
In all these instances, the closure of the big studios led to the development of
independent film cultures.
MALAYSIA
Account: s2496442
16 John A. Lent
Independent of Traditional Methods and Styles of Filmmaking
The foregoing (independence of government control and the big studio structure)
played vital roles in the approaches to filmmaking that independents have taken
and the tactics they have employed to produce and exhibit their films.
It is worthwhile to reiterate here the way famous scriptwriter and film histo-
rian Clodualdo del Mundo, Jr. categorized filmmaking in his native Philippines to
better understand the purpose, thinking, and practice of independents. Del Mundo
gave the types of filmmaking as center of mainstream, outskirts (or periphery)
of mainstream, and outside mainstream. Center of mainstream treats film as
a commodity used to make money, following certain conventions tested in the
market. Filmmakers working on the outskirts aim to create something greater than
making movies that would make money; they use the mainstream structure but
give themselves leeway in choice of subjects and budget allocation. Del Mundo said
these films radiate the aura of art or, at least, of serious work, but they do not nec-
essarily negate the attraction of commerce.15
Del Mundos description of those working outside the mainstream is particu-
larly instructive relative to independents. He said these filmmakers consider film as
art; making money is not their aim, nor is designing a work for a certain audience,
the expectation being the film will find its audience. Del Mundo felt the develop-
ment of a truly Philippine national cinema lies outside the mainstream, in what he
called an open space where he saw increasing numbers of independent films and
videos being made.16
In the Philippines, the 1970s saw the emergence of filmmakers working at all
three levelsBrocka alternatively within, on the periphery, and outside the main-
stream, the latter when he started his short-lived company, CineManila, supported
by like-minded financiers. Also on the outside, Bernal was helped by a group of
friends to finance his first feature, At the Top (Pagdating sa Dulo, 1972). Others
have worked completely outside the mainstream, some for as long as more than
three decades. For example, Kidlat Tahimik (Eric de Guia), with his silent Bolex
16mm camera, made Perfumed Nightmare (Mababangong Bangungot) in 1976
and other works since then. Tahimik described his experimental filmmaking as
the cup of gasoline approach, explaining to Clodualdo del Mundo, Jr.: I compare
myself to someone driving a car, and I have a cup of gasoline. Then I scrounge
around for the next cup of gasoline, and on and on until I get it all together.17
Other Filipinos defying mainstream practices have been Raymond Red, with his
Super-8 shorts and his feature length movies Bayani (1992) and Sakay (1993) that
were shot on 16mm and became popular at international festivals; Mike de Leons
Third World Hero (Bayaning 3rd World, 2000); Lav Diaz with his five-hour Batang
Westside (2001), Manny Reyes, Nick Deocampo, and others. These artists used
alternative storytelling techniques, dealt with subjects the mainstream avoided,
MALAYSIA
Account: s2496442
sometimes relied on outdated technology such as Super-8 and experimented freely

in all areas of the film process.
The new generation of independents in Indonesia after the omnibus film
Kuldesak (1999) had their own ideas on how films needed to be made, distributed
and exhibited. Nia Dinata, Mira Lesmana and Riri Riza simply said they make their
own kind of film, from our hearts, and not just for entertainment. Some indepen-
dents set up multi-tasked companies, while others worked on an individual basis
or as members of communities. As Riri Riza explained, And we work in a commu-
nity; we always communicate with each other. We go to the festivals together. We
arrange our films together. Everything for the good of Indonesian cinema.18 The
aforementioned group I sinema is an example of one such productive community;
until 2006, the thirteen members made four films.
Indonesian independents learned to make do with what was available. Riri Riza
said none of the cast or crew of Kuldesac was paideverything was for free
and overstocks from previous productions were used.19 Director Rudy Soedjarwo
defined independent film, as about borrowing your familys handicam and shoot-
ing, thats it and, well, if you dont have lighting, shoot it when its light.20 Funding
for independent films came from diverse sourcesprivate investment, family and
friends, and pre-sales rights. Increasingly, the films are shot in digital formats.
Distribution and exhibition are also within the purview of the independents who
often rent a projector and a small theater, and sell tickets.21 Exhibition has been
helped by the wealth of film cultural activity in metropolitan areas, particularly
those with major universities. Scores of short films and documentaries are shown
in alternative theaters, cafes, at independent film and video clubs, and festivals that
mushroomed around university towns.22 Exemplary in the areas of film appreciation
and exhibition is the work of Dimas Jayasrana, who at the grassroots level has started
a film festival, film communities, and film screening projects such as Kultur Visual.23
Elsewhere in Southeast Asia, independents operated contrary to normal film-
making practice. In Malaysia, independent cinema has meant making very low
budget, digital, video productions (under RM$100,000 or around US$ 25,000)
that reject mainstream genres and the Malay ethnic/cultural focus (including the
use of Bahasa Malaysia, the official language of Malaysia) of the dominant sector.24
The new wave of 1990s filmmakers, such as U-Wei, Shuhaimi Baba, Adman Salleh,
and Mahadi J. Murat, were uniquely Malay in issues and themes; others followed
them, such as James Lee, Amir Muhammad, and Yasmin Ahmad who delinked
the ideology of race from film. Amir Muhammads Lips to Lips (2000) showed
the multi-racial nature of Malaysia, while Yasmin Ahmads controversial Sepet
bravely tackled the subject of inter-racial romance between a Malay Muslim girl
and a Chinese boy. Spinning Gasing (2000) by Teck Tan, for which he raised the
big budget privately, was initially banned in Malaysia because of its portrayal of
sex, race and religion.25 In most cases, Malaysian independents make movies out
MALAYSIA
Account: s2496442
18 John A. Lent
of their own pockets or by funding from small production companies, friends and
family members. The works are not made for exhibition in local theaters; the alter-
native and arts-oriented films have their own channels and distribution network,
playing on university campuses, and at private institutions, clubs, and art galleries
to small middle class audiences and international film festivals abroad.26
Eric Khoo, Royston Tan, Kelvin Tong, and a few others spawned a revival of
Singapore cinema mainly through self-initiative. Khoo drew on family money to
launch the independent movement with Mee Pok Man in 1995, followed two years
later by 12 Storeys (Shier lou, 1997). After forming his own company, Zhao Wei, he
produced the first Singaporean DV film, Stories about Love (2000). Tan, a protg
of Khoo, used his S$15,000 (or about US $10,000) savings to make the twelve-
minute docudrama 15: The Movie (2002).27 In Thailand, new companies have been
started recently by independents such as Nonzee Nimibutr or those directors sup-
porting the work of the new filmmakers, including Pen-ek Ratanaruang and Wisit
Sasanatieng. A few directors entered the profession through experimental film and
video, including Pimpaka Towira and Apichatpong Weerasethakul. As elsewhere
in the region, independent film has benefited from direct-to-video technology and
the upswing in film festivals, such as the Thai Short Film and Video Festival, where
works can be shown.
Figure 1.1 Royston Tan, seen on the set of his movie 4:30 (2005),
was one of the young directors who spawned the recent revival of Singapore cinema.
Source: Zhao Wei Films
As said at the outset, defining independent film can be elusive. Simply stating
that independent filmmaking is oppositionist to government policy and to main-
stream commercial is not enough, for, as we have seen, filmmakers sometimes work
MALAYSIA
Account: s2496442
within the system (and even with government funds as in the case of the Marcos-
supported Experimental Cinema of the Philippines in the early 1980s) to create a
new cinema, or they start out as independents but eventually enter the mainstream.
For these reasons, a volume such as this is important, drawing together numerous
diverse examples of independent filmmaking in Southeast Asia.
MALAYSIA
Account: s2496442
MALAYSIA
Account: s2496442

1 - Southeast Asian Independent Cinema - Independent of What

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

1 - Southeast Asian Independent Cinema - Independent of What

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Copyright 2012. Hong Kong University Press. All rights reserved.

Southeast Asian Independent Cinema

To discuss Southeast Asian Independent Cinema is to encounter problems of

Independent of Government Regulation/Censorship

of government in Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand. Though many

Independent of Big Mainstream Studios

Independent of Traditional Methods and Styles of Filmmaking

sometimes relied on outdated technology such as Super-8 and experimented freely

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen