Riri Riza: Don't let standardization shackle you!

Gie, which is still playing in theaters in the country, has been praised by many critics as the most important film to be made by the nation's film industry this year. The film is about Soe Hok Gie, an idealist and student activist who died young in the late 1960s. Certainly. there are many aspects of him that could make his life an interesting film.

He is a Chinese Indonesian who joined the student demonstrations against the old regime of Soekarno and the communist party and helped bring Soeharto to become the President. He was also among of the first to criticize and make public the massacres of the communists in the first years of the New Order regime. What makes him remembered to this day is mainly his diary, which was later published as a widely- read book titled Catatan Seorang Demonstran (Notes from a demonstrator).

The following is an interview by contributor Iwan Setiawan with the film's director Riri Reza

Question: What viewpoint do you employ when interpreting Soe Hok Gie's life story and turning it into a film?

Answer: The spirit of this film is how to arouse many people with the story of a young man that is continuously in search of a way to remain honest and consistently reject any effort to draw or persuade him to enter a particular circle. He believes that it is truth and humanity that must be defended. This is what grips my heart.

Employing this viewpoint, I have gathered many things about Gie, ranging from a library of research material to records of interviews with Soe Hok Gie's friends. Then I drew up phases of Gie's life: his childhood, the situation where he and his family lived, his readings, his attitude from the time when he was a child up to a time when he rebelled. I have also included a description of the relevant political situation, matters related to his romantic side such as his hobby of making an adventure, poetry writing and his love story.

So, Gie that is featured in this film as a figure that wants to struggle to be pure and therefore destined to befriend loneliness.

Is it the choice of this particular viewpoint that has made this film, with a running time of 150 minutes, longer than other films in general?

At first, this film had a running time of 240 minutes, but finally we decided to shorten it to "only" 2.5 hours.

Right from the time when the film script was written, I had made a plan that this film would never have a running time of one or one and a half hours, like most local films. However, it would not be realistic to make a film about a very long and important era laden with romanticism in just a short time. Finally, the present running time of 2.5 hours was decided upon.

Are you not afraid that the viewers will get bored and then won't be able to fully enjoy this film?

No, because I trust what I have made, starting from the story, the way the story is narrated to the nuances presented throughout the film. In viewing something, we should not let the general standards, such as a film intended for the general public having a running time of 1.5 hours, shackle us. We should not hastily conclude that the public will find it difficult to accept a film with a long running time. I believe our society is smart.

What difficulties did you encounter during the making of this film?

If you liken filmmaking to painting, then my difficulty in making this film lay on the width of the canvas on which my painting had to be made. This is not a film about a figure, but about an important era of a great nation. It was in the midst of this important era that Soe Hok Gie lived and waged his struggle. Another difficulty was related to the visualization technique as it forced me to bring to life again the atmosphere of the 1960s in a detailed manner, encompassing the sound, the property, the vehicles, the houses, the clothes and many other things. In addition, I also had to conduct a lot of research about the political and social situation of that period.

What actually do you want to get across in this film?

There are three things that I want to get across in this film. First, I would like to explore an important period in this nation that has very rarely been exposed, let alone discussed.

Second, I would like to talk about the role of our youth in as much as they have always played a key role in the making of Indonesia's history. From 1908, 1928 to 1966, the period when Soe Hok Gie became an activist, the youth always played a major role. What makes it extraordinary is that this is depicted through the figure of Gie, someone who came from a highly vulnerable social group, Indonesians of Chinese origin. I have found that since I was eight and was still living in Makassar, Chinese-Indonesians have often been victimized by many groups. I have witnessed how the houses belonging to them have been destroyed. Even when a Chinese-Indonesian beat his housemaid, all Chinese-Indonesians had to bear the brunt. Gie came from this circle and this is important to understand.

Is the making of this film your political statement?

From the very start I was fully aware that a decision to make a film about Soe Hok Gie's life had to touch on politics. I did not deliberately make this film a statement of my political stance. My original intention was just simple: I only wanted to tell the story of someone that we believe must be told to the broader public, particularly the younger generations.

Have you decided to cast Nicholas Saputra as Gie because youngsters were the target audience of this film?

I fully understand the controversy that may arise about Nicholas Saputra playing the role of Soe Hok Gie. Not many people understand what considerations must be taken into account when making a decision in the making of a film.

First, Soe Hok Gie was not someone that made a fuss about one's background, ethnic origin and so forth. Neither had he ever joined the struggle put up by the Chinese ethnic groups.

I did not use an actor of Chinese origin, not because I don't see any talent and capability on the part of actors of Chinese origin. I put up posters and employed other ways to find actors that would be suitable to play the role of Soe Hok Gie. It turns out that Nicholas was the best.

What has made him the best?

Every decision that I have made in this film is based on several things, namely the artistic, quality, credibility, enthusiasm and commercial criteria. Nicholas Saputra meets all these criteria. He is good not only in artistic or commercial terms.

While a film is still a mere conception, its commercial aspect is an important thing that will make this idea survive and later be translated into a film work. Aside from meeting artistic and quality criteria, a film must be commercially good. Soe Hok gie is not a mere historical film laden with artistic merit as it is also a film that is screened in 35 cinemas in 10 cities. It has been made at a cost that is quite huge for the standard of this "poor" country.

This is something that people, even those from the film circles themselves, both film workers and film critics, do not quite understand

How do you measure the success of a film?

For me it is very important that a film should be seen by many viewers. In this way, the message of the film can be conveyed to the public. This is the most crucial thing. To this end, a film must be made, among others, with a full sense of responsibility and valid data and must possess strong argumentation. A film is a mass medium that is very likely to be viewed by many people and can influence them.

Once, I was involved in the making of a film that was later viewed by up to 2 million people, I have also participated in a film that was just seen by some 20,000 people. In the final analysis, every film has its own audience.