Sketches of Jakarta in Indonesian films

1

It has been said that the cinema and the city are inseparable. First of all, the cinema as an institution had been born in an urban context, not rural. The advent of cinema, in the sense of a paid moving-image show, took place in a cafe in Paris—a metropolis in the early twentieth century, and still is a metropolis even today. Since then, the cinema has grown to be a part of the urban lifestyle, although in the rural areas, the cinema had also left a significant mark as a propaganda tool.

Second, it is important to note that the cinema matures alongside the urban growth. Electricity, trams, the separation of working and residential areas, and other basic urban developments, were improved while an important narrative instrument, i.e. the montage, was also being developed. The shift from one shot to another in a film, variations in the point of view and camera movements—all resembled a journey in a city on a tram. Sights would change, from the views of a narrow alley to a skyscraper, from foreign human faces, store windows, to a sight of a green and expansive town square—this resembles an editing process in a film production. Early on as the cinema was maturing, it could be said that it was impossible for someone to understand edited films, if he or she had never experienced urban living.

The city, then, enjoys a special place in the cinema. The city can serve as a stage on which the filmmaker introduces his or her characters and creates events. Like setting and other cinematic elements, the city can play a role in the plausibility of the story. The city is connected to the people and events through a series of causative relationships that make up a story’s universe. The city, therefore, might not be important at all, and replaceable.

However, the city, albeit being a mere stage, invariably presents a variety of allures for filmmakers. Some of them view the city as a stage with which they are personally connected. See, for example, how Frederico Fellini treats Rome in his movie, Roma (1972). Others take the city as a threat or nuisance to something that is original, pure, and chaste. Here, the city is seen as an ultimate form of modernization; which many find as menacing and threatening. The city (and modernity) is thus taken as lowly and modernity is viewed as a degradation of noble values.

Such view has been dominant in developing countries. The city grows along with capital flow, and this calls for adaptations in the social and cultural lives in the city. Phenomena such as social-cultural dislocations, the loss of identity, and the inability to be competitive can be taken as being the result of such structural adaptations. These adjustments rarely happen voluntarily, and the government officials serve as the agent who imposes such adjustments. Governments take such actions as eviction or spatial reorganization to make space for the structural adjustments of the city and her inhabitants, in the context of the incoming capital flow that changes the city’s visage.

These adjustments are not always understood. Superficially, what appears is a tough and uncompromising world, inflexible with its suggestions. If the city inhabitants do not follow these “suggestions”, they should be prepared for cultural dislocations, loss of job, or even more fatal consequences. It is this superficial phenomenon which some Indonesian filmmakers have observed. They have certain sensitivity to see Jakarta and turn her into a significant setting for their cinematic expressions. Jakarta is indeed a threat; but one that gives rise to ideas and creative concepts.


2

The view that considered the city as a threat that came along with modernization could be observed in the movies from the 1970s. In that decade, Indonesian modernization entered its early transitional phase. The economic boom from the oil bonanza had not come about, and modernity (please interpret this term yourself) was still suspected of being a degrading influence or at least a distraction to the simple and naive life. In the 1970s Jakarta was in an early stage of the rift, in which the two sides failed to reach a resolution and fell short of living in peaceful co-existence.

One of the strongest examples of such stance toward urban growth could be seen in the movie Si Doel Anak Modern [Doel, a Modern Lad] by Sjumandjaja. In the beginning of the film, the word “Anak” [Indonesian for ‘lad’] in the title was scrapped and replaced with “Sok” [which has the sense of “purporting to be”, as in “purporting to be modern”], signifying Doel’s failure of being truly modern, as what Doel (played by Benyamin S.) actually did was mimicking an image of modernity as presented by the antagonist in the movie (played by Achmad Albar).

The story in Si Doel started off from a “harmony” in an urban village in Jakarta. Doel’s routine was distracted as a foreign element entered into the harmony, coming from the modern side of Jakarta. The foreign element here was found in the form of a woman, Kristin a.k.a Nonon (played by Christine Hakim). The woman represented modernity, the new Jakarta. She had been Doel’s childhood friend, but one who had been educated and worked as a mannequin (think about what the word means now). The new Jakarta had become used to a form of modernity (read: urban living) that was foul, sly, mischievous, with a scent of narcotics and sex (both were evil), as well as a distracting world of fashion (remember that Kristin worked as a model—or a mannequin). When Kristin met Doel, she became enchanted by another reality of Jakarta, an exoticism that arose from the two faces of the metropolitan Janus in its infantile stage.

It was this disruption to harmony [1] that Sjumandjaja used as a source for social criticism. He showed the irony in the inability of people like Doel to retain their self identity as they tried to fulfill the criteria that modernity dictated. Even worse, the criteria that Doel responded to were artificial ones (long hair, bell-bottom trousers), making the failure even more ironic.

Seeing that Doel was a young man from the Betawi ethnic group,[2] Sjumandjaja wanted to convey his concern regarding the inability of the original inhabitants of Jakarta to adapt substantially to the growth of modernity, which went hand-in-hand with the growth of the city. The critic JB Kristanto [3] says that this signifies Sjumandjaja’s special attachment to Jakarta; because besides Si Doel Anak (Sok) Modern, Sjumandjaja also directed Si Doel Anak Betawi and Pinangan—the latter being an adaptation from a play by Anton Chekov, which had been modified with traditional elements from Betawi and theatrical approach of the lenong, a form of folk theater from Betawi.


3

Jakarta then grew in frenzy. The increase in the world’s oil price due to the Iran – Iraq War in the 1980s created an oil bonanza. The economic boom was then followed by the strengthening of state ideology and corporations. The 1985 Political Acts Package made political repressions even more palpable and diminished the space for freedom. Control on film production was felt even more keenly and the state became involved in an effort to create national myths through films, by producing films through the hands of the State Film Company (PFN), which at the time enjoyed a strong financial position.

Due to such ideological strengthening, criticism in Indonesian film was no longer conveyed the way it had been done in the 1970s. The confrontation between ideas of modernity and tradition no longer took a central stage, clashing the way they were in Si Doel Anak Modern. Indonesian films after 1985 showed a softer attitude toward reality, albeit still with a series of obvious objections toward Jakarta.

Within such an outlook, the depiction of the city was no longer black-and-white. The city was indeed still “cruel”, degraded, and hypocritical, but the people portrayed within were no longer like Doel, who rigidly opposed the city as depicted in Si Doel Anak Modern. Characters in movies made after 1985 were more accepting toward Jakarta, treating her as an inescapable fact and adapting to her. Objections of the filmmakers toward Jakarta were then turned into parodies; or ironies devoid of bitterness.

There have been at least two strong movies in the early 1990s that employed such approach.They were Oom Pasikom (Mr. Pasikom, directed by Chaerul Umam, 1990) and Badut-badut Kota (City Clowns, directed by Ucik Supra, 1993). Oom Pasikom (with another title—put between brackets—of Parodi Ibukota or Parody of the Capital City) obviously conveyed strong criticism toward the urban lifestyle in Jakarta, but with a tongue in cheek. The movie took its inspiration from the cartoon in the Kompas daily and presented sketches of lives in Jakarta, seen from the eyes of an eponymous wanderer. The movie served as a social commentary that treated the surrounding reality like snapshots, just as a single-panel caricature in a newspaper would. The film was rife with sketches and insinuations toward the urban lifestyle in Jakarta, which was seen as hypocritical and insolent.

In Badut-badut Kota, Jakarta appeared even less friendly. In Badut-badut Kota, Jakarta was seen as a jungle, where the principle of ‘survival of the fittest’ reigned. The movie told of a young married couple in Jakarta, Deddy (played by Dede Yusuf) and Menul (played by Ayu Azhari) with their only child, who went to an elementary school, called his father “daddy”, and often reminded his father with the hybrid phrase of “Don’t forget, ya, Dad...” They lived in a small rented house whose landlady was an extreme miser. When the young couple could not pay their rent, the landlady grabbed their old furniture as collateral.

Deddy was a university graduate who worked as a clown in an urban recreation center (along with ten other university graduates who worked there while waiting for some better jobs). It was, however, not truly a job, as it hardly helped the couple survive in Jakarta. Eventually they succeeded in getting a loan to open a small diner. Gradually the young couple managed to find their feet, eventually made it big with their restaurant, and became one of those who successfully conquered Jakarta.

The movie Badut-badut Kota had depicted Jakarta well, using the city as its stage. The existence of recreation centers in the city such as the theme parks of Taman Mini Indonesia Indah and Dunia Fantasi, and the strengthening position of these recreation centers, had created semi-informal jobs that served as a temporary accommodation for the educated inhabitants of Jakarta. The presence of high-rises with their car-call systems (whose calls could be heard all the way to the lobby) was used as a unique element in the story. Deddy always used the system to call “Mr Deddy from the restaurant of Mrs Menul”, to make free promotions of his restaurant in the grand buildings, which in the early 1990s (after the banking deregulation of 1988) were one of the most prominent phenomena in Jakarta.

Sketches in Oom Pasikom and Badut-badut Kota revealed a change of attitude in confronting Jakarta. While in Si Doel Anak Modern Jakarta had been viewed in a sharp and harsh perspective, in the two latter movies, the harshness disappeared. The sharpness still existed, however; albeit packaged in a parody, a tongue-in-cheek irony.

As has been mentioned above, this was a result of the growth of the city of Jakarta, which became even more sharply divided. Jakarta was like two-faced Janus, who invariably got rid of the poor and took the side of the economic development. After the oil bonanza took place, the government launched the October 1988 economic package which made it possible for banks to be opened with relatively small capitals; thus liberating the banking industry. Public funds were collected through banks and this was followed by the channeling of credits to business enterprises (which were often in the same group of the banks that were giving the credits) and to the property businesses. This had the result of drastically changing the visage of Jakarta, as well as bringing with it large-scale conflicts regarding land-rights in Jakarta.

Unsurprisingly, Badut-badut Kota and Oom Pasikom both presented low-angle shots, depicting the grandness of the BCA Bank building, which symbolized the encounter of the two significant phenomena in Jakarta in the beginning of 1990s; i.e. the high-rise property boom and banking liberalization (both would then lead to the vulnerability of the Indonesian economy as the country confronted the economic crisis in 1997).


4

The mid-1990s were characterized with a further powerlessness on the part of the filmmakers’ vis-à-vis Jakarta. Such incapacity arose from the drastic change within the film industry. The film exhibition network had to be re-formulated with the arrival of the big capital in the 21 Network, which diminished the producers’ comfort as they created their films. Many producers changed their approach and became highly pragmatic, accommodating popular craving for the erotica.

With the movie Gadis Metropolis (Metropolitan Chick) starred by Inneke Koesherawati, Indonesian films entered a phase that is now seen as stagnant. At the time, Indonesian movies offered scenes that are mockingly called “show-a-thigh” and “round-the-breasts”. The fact is, however, these movies had nothing to offer. Their narrative elements were very weak, while the erotic elements within them could never satisfy the audience. After the boom of Gadis Metropolis and Gairah Malam (Nocturnal Passion), the audience became dissatisfied and lost their appetite. Then, in 1998, the economic crisis hit Indonesia and film production was virtually brought to a standstill, with only five productions per year.

In the mid-1990s, due to the absence of movies with a critical attitude toward Jakarta, the city was present merely as an insignificant stage in such quasi-erotic films. Here, her presence is very much replaceable. These movies generally view Jakarta as a place in “moral degradation”, and they coyly celebrate it. An effort or two to portray how Jakarta is such a cruel pool that corrupts the fish within can also be seen in films such as Kenikmatan Tabu (Taboo Pleasure, 1994) and Akibat Bebas Sex (The Consequence of Free Sex, 1996, distributed in a VCD format under the title of Sex & Masalah Aids—or Sex and the Problem of Aids).[4] The real “moral message” that the films purportedly convey, however, are precisely in contradiction to the images they offered.


5

There have been very few Indonesian films in the year 2000s that deal with Jakarta with adequate intensity. One that has been most responsible in its depiction of Jakarta is Eliana, Eliana (directed by Riri Riza, 2002), which made Jakarta as a specific background. The film tells of Eliana, a girl who stays in her friend’s place in Jakarta. Eliana’s mother picks her up and demands her to fly home the next day. Eliana tries to elude this demand, and at the same time Heni, her friend, is missing from home. Eliana then goes around Jakarta at night with her mother, trying to find Heni.

The film managed to present an integral portrayal of Jakarta, albeit in sketches. Since the beginning, the film depicts the Janusian face of Jakarta, represented by Eliana’s character. The twenty-something woman is being pressured by the metropolis and forced to live in the back area of the city, a subsistent area that provides support for people like her. The problem of generational gap, as well as clashes between traditions and changes, are well-portrayed through personal and intense conflicts.

Once again, however, Jakarta is a given. The characters are fish swimming within the pond, pushed around and unable to change anything about the pond. It nevertheless appears that Eliana, Eliana, like Badut-badut Kota and Oom Pasikom before it, is able to present Jakarta as an intact stage, with hope and without fear.

Another film produced within the decade of 2000s that presents Jakarta in an intensive proportion is Kamulah Satu-satunya (You’re the One and Only, directed by Hanung Bramantyo, 2007). The film portrays Jakarta from the point of view of someone who just came to Jakarta. A teenager named Indah wants to go to a concert by her favorite band, Dewa, in Jakarta. Her grandfather, however, would not let her, as Indah’s mother had gone to Jakarta and never returned. Indah eventually runs away to Jakarta and witnesses how Jakarta is a tough and tricky city. Jakarta is an evil city, but there is a deux ex machina in the film, emphasizing the two faces of Jakarta from the point of view of a newcomer like Indah—or like Hanung, the director.

The film Kamulah Satu-satunya depicts Jakarta through sketches, just like the movie Oom Pasikom. The film touches upon the many decorations of a stage called Jakarta, such as the raid conducted upon some magazines by a robe-donning group that resembles the group Forum Pembela Islam (FPI, or Defenders of Islam),[5] the hijacking of a city bus by protesters,[6] people standing in the middle of the road asking for donations to build a mosque, soccer supporters, etc. These decorative elements seem to have been ill-prepared and thus fail to present the characteristics of Jakarta as the director may have wished. In the film, Jakarta becomes something generic, similar to any other big city; the depiction of Jakarta resembles a series of snapshots, without a true understanding of the city. The movie fails to capture the essence of Jakarta, and makes the decorative elements dominate the story that the movie tries to convey.


6

The way Indonesian filmmakers see a city changes according to their perceptions of the city, especially Jakarta. Today Jakarta has become a rather important determinant for the thematic choice of the movie. See, for example, the films that employ Jakarta’s urban legends as an important part of their narrative element. Movies such as Hantu Jeruk Purut (The Ghost of Jeruk Purut), Terowongan Casablanca (The Tunnel of Casablanca), and Rumah Pondok Indah (The Haunted House of Pondok Indah) have used specific areas of Jakarta—Jeruk Purut, Casablanca road, and Pondok Indah—in their titles, with the hope that the audience will relate to the urban legends.

Such borrowing, however, does not go further. This has been done before, for example in the movie Blok M (Bakal Lokasi Mejeng) in 1990, which depicted juvenile lifestyle since the mid-1980s, with a special emphasis on their fashion statements. Like the horror movies of the 2000s, however, the director did not use the city as the corpus of the film and the theme, and merely borrowed superficial matters such as the popular lifestyle at the time. Movies with the specific place-name in the title are merely produced to explore market possibilities and do not try to make any commentary on Jakarta.

Therefore, the capability of the filmmakers in capturing their environment becomes an all-important factor. As the filmmakers express their understanding of their surroundings and use it as the stage for their films, a creator’s sensibility and capability to represent his or her surrounding is duly revealed.

At this stage, it seems that the middle-class background of the Indonesian filmmakers still plays a dominant role in shaping the representations that they produce. In most cases, Indonesian filmmakers of today depart from an urban middle-class background and do not undergo a long process of initiation before they eventually make their own films. It can be said that they are not social climbers who come from outside Jakarta and start their career from the bottom rung. This becomes one of the contributing factors that result in the inadequate understanding about the people from the lower classes of the city, as well as the minimal involved-observation about them, which can then be presented in the stage that is the city of Jakarta.

See, for example, the depictions in the lives of Jakarta’s urban migrants (a long-standing problem that has become one of the biggest issues since the era of the Governor Ali Sadikin). The problem of a migrant (albeit only a temporary one) in Jakarta is the desire to watch a concert by a favorite band, rather than the problems faced by the migrants who go to Jakarta to find a living—which has been a serious and chronic issue in Jakarta. Kamulah Satu-satunya depicts a girl of a middle-class background from one of Jakarta’s satellite towns, who actually has enough money to watch a band concert, but whose grandfather forbids to do so. Therefore, the urban problems and experiences in Jakarta are matters of family and artificial experiences that are separate from the real experiences of urban lives in Jakarta.

Jakarta has thus not been well-represented in the Indonesian movies of today. As a stage, Jakarta seems to be devoid of problems and does not influence the paths of lives (read: the paths of the story in the film) of the urbanites. Filmmakers who grew up and have lived in Jakarta might owe us this; they must be in touch with Jakarta and tell us about her—like what Sjumandjaja had done with his love and hatred toward Jakarta.




Jakarta, November 2007
Translated by Rani Elsanti




ERIC SASONO was born in Jakarta and graduated from Department of Politics, Faculty of Social and Political Studies, University of Indonesia. He is now active as a member of the editorial board of the site www.rumahfilm.org, which he founded along with some of his friends. Eric received the Citra Awards for the best critic in 2005 and 2006, and has returned his awards along with other filmmakers, actors, and film musicians who then formed the Masyarakat Film Indonesia (Indonesian Movie Society). He has also received an award as best critic in 2005 from the Jakarta Art Council.