Al-Kautsar, Gadis Marathon, Titian Rambut Dibelah Tujuh, Hati yang Perawan, Kejarlah Daku Kau Kutangkap, Bintang Kejora, Keluarga Markum, Joe Turun ke Desa, Boss Carmad, Oom Pasikom (Parodi Ibukota), Nada dan Dakwah, Ramadhan dan Ramona, Fatahillah, and recently Ketika Cinta Bertasbih are films directed by Chaerul Umam. His name echoes in our film industry universe. During an occasion, I had a chance to have a conversation with him. He uttered his comments regarding the complexities of our film industry in general: his views on the journey of Indonesian films, the industry, the themes he chose for his films, censorship, and also the rapid growth in the field with regard to the presence of communities and technological advances nowadays. From his comments I learned that his views on the film industry’s constellation are as complicated as other fundamental issues this country has. Especially when five months ago, the Parliament ratified the draft on Film Regulations into legitimate law. His views, however, are not in line with the ideology he’s known for when making his earlier works. He fosters the status quo in observing the rapid growth of our film industry. On one hand, he has concerns over the lowly taste the industry still feeds to the public, while on the other, he has apparently overlooked the dynamics of the industry’s infrastructural and suprastructural bases, especially the hardships undergone by film communities in establishing the foundations of our film industry. Moreover, the quality of films he directed during post-reformation era has declined drastically.

Chaerul Umam was raised in the film industry by Asrul Sani. He succeeded to shape Chaerul Umam to become a notable director, as proven by his debut Al-Kautsar being nominated in the 23^rd Asia Film Festival in Bangkok, Thailand on 1977. For almost every film written by Asrul Sani, Chaerul Umam was sure to be appointed as director. Such authority was legitimately carried by Chaerul Umam for being able to translate Asrul Sani’s ideas from script to screen with his distinct style. In 1982, Chaerul Umam directed more religious-themed films and went full fledge by directing the first Islamic film in Indonesia, Titian Serambut Dibelah Tujuh which was written by Asrul Sani in 1959. In this film, Chaerul Umam successfully gave his gold touch, earning praise from critics. Praise also came from the mastermind himself, Asrul Sani. Titian Rambut Dibelah Tujuh surfaced as a fascinating religious film through Cherul Umam’s ability to give each character a heartfelt intensity in articulating the problems undergone by each character. Other than that, the film has strong stylistic elements and Chaerul Umam’s name immediately soared for this ability to combine all constructive elements of a film successfully. A similar success was repeated when Kejarlah Daku kau Kutangkap hit the box office with 166.734 viewers, a fantastic figure for the time. This film unwaveringly fulfilled market’s expectation of a smart comedy about life problems of a married couple. A number of Citra Award, Antemas Award and a predicate as Jakarta’s bestselling film in 1986 have rewarded the film. His achievement didn’t stop there, but was continued to his next films. His films attracted audience’s attention for their precise depiction of the society’s real problems and proximate experiences. Moreover, it was wrapped with illustrative comedy as in Oom Pasikom which was an adaptation of the comic strip Oom Pasikom printed in Kompas daily. A story of society’s life fragments, it articulates the tale of marginalized people as a result of the faulty objectives of the New Order regime’s governmental policies.

^{Ketika Cinta Bertasbih (trailer)}

Looking Up to Chaerul Umam Today

The regime’s dethronement in mid 1998 apparently has its impact in Chaerul Umam. After he directed Fatahillah in 1997, his career as film director dimmed. During the time, he preferred to direct sinetron (television soap opera). His decision was understandable considering the film industry being dormant. The adage that implies the flight of filmmakers to television industry apparently applied for him. His first sinetron was entitled Bengkel Bang Jun. For a decade during the post-reformation era, he did numerous religious sinetrons which were highly consumed by the market then. Maha Kasih, Jalan Takwa is to name a few. Later in 2008, Chaerul Umam made his comeback to filmmaking. Ketika Cinta Bertasbih was an adaptation of Habiburrahman el-Shirazy’s novel by the same title. It basically has a similar pattern with a film of the same religious theme made earlier, Ayat-ayat Cinta. The novel was a hit bestseller, thus the film gained huge commercial success. Observing the market’s potentials, Chaerul Umam seized the opportunity to immediately film the novel. As predicted, the film drew a large number of audience although not quite as successful as the phenomenal Ayat-ayat Cinta. And not unlike sinetron, the film was to be continued to Ketika Cinta Bertasbih II. The all-star cast and glamorous ambience of the film seemed to contradict the character Azzam, an Al-Azhar University student who strived to finish his study. The film was trapped in soap opera archetype and did not deliver any political statement—to speak of it that way, differing greatly from the films he made during the 70-80’s that brilliantly captured social reality. Of course, different times have different matters. We may say that, but we also have to reconsider how, narratively and stylistically, religious films need to be reviewed. Long beforehand, Gus Dur has warned that Islamic films should free themselves from uniformity, in terms of religious formality. According to him—cinematically, as well as non-cinematically—there has to be diversity of faces and freedom in form, just as he mentioned in his essay 28 years ago, Religious Films; In Need of Diversity of Faces and Freedom in Form. Nowadays, reality unfolds a different truth: religious films do not function as agent to social transformation just as neatly delivered by Chaerul Umam’s earlier films Al-Kautsar and Titian Serambut Dibelah Tujuh. Partially, Islam is staged as a tool to solve domestic problems.

We may soon find out Chaerul Umam’s current position as nothing but his naivety to participate in producing kitsch culture in order to fulfill the producer’s ambition to gain maximum profit. His position clearly denotes how all filmmakers, in the end, have to generate income, so he said when I asked about the wake of our film industry for the past decade. It is highly regrettable how his naivety falls into a sectarian perspective by hurting his career as a director. He said that, for his religious films, the cast has to be moslems, the scenes have to stay within sharia requirements, as well as in cinematic composition; an actress doesn’t have to unveil her hijab if she does wear one. Obviously, Chaerul Umam has fallen into a certain mentality that belittles religion into a narrow-minded interpretation. Such mentality cinematically limits the room for creativity in filmmaking and turns into a closed reading—that’s how I term a condition where cinematic language is read in a closed-minded manner.

^{Ketika Cinta Bertasbih 2 (trailer)}

Not only that, the change in Chaerul Umam places him in a status quo position. His views on censorship, the growth of film communities, film industry, technology and film themes; all was taken coldly. He feels that censorship is still needed in this country with the consideration that our society is not yet ready if one day censorship is annihilated. For him, the mistake is liable not to the institution, but to the men behind it. He added that, institutionally, censorship system needs to be strengthened due to the unstoppable, massive production of audio-visual products such as DVD, etc. The option to switch censorship institution to film classification institution is, to him, a manifestation of overruling democracy fought by minorities.

His view on censorship is indeed partial. Censorship is seen as a moral issue, similar to the way colonial government sees the colonized society as lagged and morally uneducated. The analogy applies to Chaerul Umam’s view on censorship, that the society’s unpreparedness is a strong ground why censorship is still needed. Our society lives in false democracy. All moral regulations are explicitly contained in law regulations, regional regulations, etc. Yet and again, hypocrisy seeps into numerous elements of the country’s administration, including the film industry. Back then, censorship is required to filter subversive works, to maintain order and stability. While today, censorship gets its hands on moral playground to assure that everything is in line with moral criterion of the government and mainstream interest. This is where censorship fails to tackle the problem of the industry where—quite the opposite to its ideals—the hotcake themes are, sadly, horror+comedy+sex. How can it deliver its function if, in fact, x-rated films are available for viewing? Doesn’t it seem like he’s eating his own words? I should think that Chaerul Umam is cornered in the whirl of moral apparatus who think that they have the authority to guard the society’s moral standard. It’s very ironic of Chaerul Umam, who’s previously known as the director of high-standard films that neatly and genially depict the real problems of society.

Does Islam serve as a justification? To Chaerul Umam, yes of course. His views on Islam as translated into his preferred theme leaves off particular problems. First, he may as well be regarded as betraying Asrul Sani. Why? Asrul Sani took Chaerul Umam under his wings and helped him earn a respectable place Indonesian film industry. Undoubtedly, Asrul Sani’s views have influenced Indonesia’s cultural sphere where he reverberated the spirit of universal humanism that implies human’s universality in expressing themselves. Asrul Sani had a clear standpoint, he strongly opposed status quo that deterred Islam. His views are stored in the footprints he left in the texts he wrote and of course also in his ‘teachings’ to his pupils, including Chaerul Umam. Second, by making Islam as his sole justification, Chaerul Umam has placed religion in exclusivity. Islam is juxtaposed in a binary opposition context that sees matters in black and white, right and wrong, Moslem and non-Moslem, rich and poor, and so on. Third, Chaerul Umam failed to translate the vision of Islam as a religion pro to social transformation, as Saiful Bahri—the main character in Al-Kautsar—did. Ibrahim the school teacher—the main character in Titian Serambut Dibelah Tujuh—with his istiqamah* attitude transforms Islam more essentially than Ketika Cinta Bertasbih which placed Islam in religious formality. This is where I’m convinced that the Islam Chaerul Umam resonated has failed to represent Islam as an agent of liberation and social transformation. Fourth, Chaerul Umam is inconsistent in translating Islamic values in his films, where in his earlier films namely Al-Kautsar, Titian Serambut Dibelah Tujuh, Nada dan Dakwah, and Fatahillah, Islam is the inspiration of the era and the people’s moral force. In Ketika Cinta Bertasbih, however, this tone resonates less since it emphasizes Islam more in individuals’ private sectors and the homogenization of religion. And lastly, in his statement, Chaerul Umam has truly implied Islam as a rigid and institutionalized religion, a very exclusive one. Islam is comprehended as a dogmatic, anti-dialogue, narrow-minded, and jumud (orthodox) religion. He placed Islam as a sectarian religion, including in his cinematic language where scenes not in accordance to Islamic sharia are prohibited. He also mentioned how a Moslem woman should always wear her hijab to conform to sharia—even in shots taken inside her bedroom, she still has to wear hijab. I see this as a ridiculous scene terminology. In reality, a women will not go to bed inside he own room wearing a hijab. Can this be justified with regard to visual logic? This is where a director’s expertise is tested. The same rigid regulations are applied in Iran, an Islamic country in which scenes where persons not of muhrim** association and scenes exposing aurat*** are prohibited in films. Yet renowned Iranian directors, namely Abbas Kiarostami, Samira Makhmalbaf, are genially and innovatively able to build film language which accords to Islamic sharia—to speak of it that way—or to the conventions of Iranian society at large without being trapped in dogmatic religious formality. It’s not surprising that Iranian films are regularly screened in prestigious international film festivals.

^{Bintang Kejora}

At one point during my interview with Chaerul Umam, he lightly mentioned how he directed—at certain point in his career as a director—jahiliyah**** films; the term he used to differentiate the films with the religious ones he made. He was in fact joking, but he should not term them jahiliyah, nevertheless. Again, Chaerul Umam has categorized things and taking it lightly, seeing matters in black and white, whilst from my observation, his earlier films were succinct and carried clear vision. None of his films are unappreciated. This is proven from the numerous awards he received; a remarkable achievement, clearly. Here we can see Chaerul Umam’s ambivalence which, to my opinion, has damaged Asrul Sani’s grand ideas of how films solve people’s problems by putting forward Islam as a rahmatan lil’alamin***** religion, but not as an escapade, nor bringing it to commodification for the sake of capital escalation. Didn’t he matter-factly say to me that films are not merely commodities traded to gain profit; that films have to contain information, education, and, moreover, enlightening inspiration?

Chaerul Umam, His Views on the 60^th Anniversary of Indonesian Film Industry and Film Community

Looking back to year 1950, the year 2010 may be considered as the 60^th anniversary of our film industry. Exactly on March 30^th, 2010, our national film industry is 60 years old. For film practitioners, March 30^th is a monumental date in Indonesian film history. On the said date, the first shooting of Darah dan Doa (The Longmarch) began. It tells the story of a soldier in the westbound Siliwangi division marching to Central Java who falls in love with a Dutch detainee. The film was directed by Usmar Ismail and made completely by native Indonesians, including its production house PERFINI (Indonesian Film Company). March 30^th is then named as National Film Day by the Presidential Decree No. 25 in the year 1999 issued by President B. J. Habibie after a long-pended acknowledgement from Indonesian government. This 60^th anniversary momentum also received Chaerul Umam’s attention and comment. He forthrightly remarked that Indonesian films are lagging behind, especially with regard to production. He added how Indonesia is, at this point, supposedly able to produce semi-colossal films, historical films, and other spectacular films. He probably means that, in its 60^th year, Indonesian film industry should have been able to produce colossal films as grand as Hollywood. To him, recent Indonesian films are engaged mainly in common themes of horror, sex, and violence.

To Chaerul Umam’s opinion, there are various factors contribute to this lag, among them are cultural colonization, political factor, economic factor, and the film education in Indonesia incommensurate to the industry’s age span. To picture, there is only one film school/institution in a country as vast as Indonesia, i.e. IKJ (Jakarta Art Institute). The situation is also worsened by the ever-recurring monotonous themes, indicating low innovation level in the industry. He also remarked on the technological problems which by turn affect operational cost, film production that mismatches its thematic problem, things that keep treading the water. He didn’t seem to acknowledge an increase in the industry within the last decade, in which operational cost is, as a matter of fact, not as worrying as he might think since we have video technology which enables practically anyone to make films. The increasing usage of handheld video by many people from all walks of social class gives more meaning to the foundation of our film industry. Undoubtedly, an increase in film production level, plus appreciation from wider audience, is gained with great contribution from indie filmmakers who are also collectively known as film community.

^{Kejarlah Daku Kau Kutangkap}

Ironically, Chaerul Umam did not see this as a heartwarming development in the landscape of our film industry. People who work in independent field or communities of all kind of course took part in formulating our national cultural strategies amidst globalization, especially information globalization. This is precisely what has been only partially valued by people of established position in the industry, including Chaerul Umam who cynically perceives raison d’etre of film community as merely channels for hobbyists. In his opinion with regard to the film industry growth, what we need to pay attention to is the massively viewable films that generate income, whereas the time for independent films is yet to come. Independent films do not quite sell (they’re not made for cinema screenings), although he admitted that the films produced by independent filmmakers are inherently good but they require a special screening venue. Chaerul Umam’s ambivalence can be strongly sensed where he particularly mentioned that films should be informative, educational, and enlighteningly inspirational. Regrettably, the largest part of Indonesian film industry does not seem to look up to this acme Chaerul Umam has dreamed of, including—ironically—himself, for recently making his last film which commodified religion. Lucky for indie filmmakers and communities for being able to bring about works that are socially, politically, culturally, and aesthetically responsible. I should think Chaerul Umam is not the only one to partially value the presence of film communities, but also the whole lot of practitioners in the film industry who do not wish their positions to be disturbed. Indie filmmakers and communities have certainly laid out their bargaining power in representing Indonesia in the global stage and also in helping to define our national film industry. Yet this role remains unnoticed by certain parties in the bigger industry who do not wish for their established positions be replaced. Film festival organization is now not only the sole monopoly of Indonesian Film Festival (FFI). Today we can see variety in film festival organizations just as resembled by Konfiden Short Film Festival, Jiffest (Jakarta International Film Festival), Banyumas Film Network, and also others who have largely contributed to the contemporary Indonesian cultural narrative.

Now, Chaerul Umam defined how Islamic films have to conform to sharia which puts him cornered in sharia devaluation and formalization. His narrative and cinematic approach disorients by assuming that ‘Islamic’ means to rigidly follow sharia conventions. His biased interpretation is similar to the ever-increasing tendencies of religious institutionalization in this country. Instead of giving didactic comprehension to public, he failed to transmit the religious messages fluently by putting forward the concept of rahmatan lil’alamin Islam. It’s worth noting if indeed Chaerul Umam has deliver the socio-ethical messages endowed by Asrul Sani who has nurtured him into greatness, or has he forgotten Asrul Sani’s idea of religion as enlightenment?

^{Sumber Foto: Google}

^{* Istiqamah means to stand firm, to keep on the right path.}

^{** Muhrim is the degree of consanguinity between a man and a woman that renders marriage impossible but gives them the right of association. E.g.: the relationship between a brother and a sister, or a son and his mother.}

^{*** Aurat refers to parts of body that must be covered for the sake of basic decency. For men, aurat extends from the navel to the knees. As for women, aurat refers to whole body except for the face, hands, and feet.}

^{**** Jahiliyah literally means ‘ignorance’. The word originally referred to the decadent and perverse lifestyle of pagan Arabs before Islamic mission began.}

^{***** Rahmatan lil’alamin means ‘blessing for the whole world’. The phrase refers to Islam as a universal teaching that brings beneficial for the world and all mankind.}

3.26 Copyright (C) 2008 Compojoom.com / Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."