Much a do about film thing
Much a do about film thing
The censorship board's failure yesterday to decide whether to
withdraw True Lies, an American film now circulating in this
country, is understandable.
The ban was requested by the Indonesian Ulemas Council (MUI),
an influential non-governmental body, which sees the film as
degrading Islam.
The main reason for the board's ambivalence seems to be
because it is understandably hard for the censor to annul its own
decision with the clear absence of any strong reason to do so.
It seems that the ulemas have not been able to provide that.
The film, a banal comedy, has been showing in domestic
theaters for about a week and is reportedly attracting a huge
number of people, particularly since the controversy emerged. And
strangely enough, none of the viewers has come forth to say that
they perceive any scene as abasing Islam.
Film lovers here are apparently quite aware of the reality
that mockery has long been part of the products of America's film
industry. In many of their products the filmmakers have severely
criticized their own government, but since this has been done in
a comic way it is easy to write off to humor.
So, in this particular situation, the censorship board is
being very cautious out of fear of confusing the public and
tarnishing its own credibility in the eyes of the film business
people.
MUI's request is legal since it was submitted directly to the
right authority, but the ulemas have fallen short of pinpointing
exactly which part of the film they think degrades Islam.
True Lies is clearly purely fictional. And it mocks a non-
existent guerrilla group which the storyline bases in the Middle
East. The only Islamic element to all of this is that the group
is called "jihad" (a holy war waged as religious duty). The rest
has nothing to do with religious beliefs or practices in any way,
shape or form.
We tend to believe that MUI has proposed the idea in an effort
to protect Moslems from what it perceives as the influence of the
negative ways the West -- or at least the filmmaker -- views
Islam. But in this case the reasoning is not very convincing
because a film is a cultural and commercial product, which might
or might not have a social impact.
And it is not very clear whether the council took the logical
step of consulting sociologists, psychologists and film critics
before submitting the proposal for the banning to the censorship
board.
It is also not very clear whether the representatives of the
MUI and the Ministry of Religious Affairs in the censorship board
opposed the passing of the film or whether they failed to get
their message across.
We tend to believe that this film problem is too trivial a
matter for MUI to be fussing about. After all it has its high-
profile mission to protect the ummah (Moslem community) from any
serious threats to Islamic laws and morality to worry about. It
was MUI that played a major role in the campaign to ban the
notorious SDSB lottery and MUI which is now issuing licenses for
halal food products in an effort to protect Moslems from anything
inedible under Islamic law.
If the ulemas council is, indeed, trying to set itself in
place as a moral watchdog, its potential area of observation is
certainly large enough since we are now living in a fast changing
world. However, although it is true enough that the negative
impacts of modernization have long caused concern among many
segments of our society, it is unnecessary and unwise to
exaggerate this fear. Oversensitivity towards insignificant or
borderline matters can be perceived as springing from a lack of
self confidence.
We are of the opinion that MUI should pay greater attention to
more serious challenges to public morality such as the excessive
violence showing on TV on a daily basis and the lurid sex scenes
currently flashing across the screens in the cinemas across the
country.