“KATANYA” FILM INI BISA BIKIN TRAUMA… | REVIEW & PENJELASAN “PENGEPUNGAN DI BUKIT DURI” (2025)

Summary

This transcript offers a critical review of Indonesian filmmaker Joko Anwar's work, particularly focusing on the film *Pengepungan di Bukit Duri*. The speaker discusses how audiences often praise films for superficial aspects like brutality and action, rather than appreciating the deeper narrative. They argue that many viewers fail to grasp the complexity of films, calling out the difference between action-packed thrillers and more cerebral works. Ultimately, the speaker rates *Pengepungan di Bukit Duri* as 'mediocre,' asserting that *Siksa Kubur* remains Anwar's best film due to its surrealism and narrative freedom.

Takeaways

• 😀 The speaker critiques how some viewers overemphasize the brutality and action in films, focusing more on surface-level elements rather than deeper themes.
• 😀 The speaker mentions that while Joko Anwar's films, like 'Siksa Kubur,' are appreciated for their surreal and thought-provoking nature, 'Pengepungan di Bukit Duri' feels incomplete and lacks the same depth.
• 😀 There's a growing trend in Indonesia where people aggressively defend films they like, often dismissing others' opinions by labeling them as ignorant.
• 😀 Despite receiving praise from some critics, the speaker disagrees with the opinion that 'Pengepungan di Bukit Duri' is the best Indonesian film, asserting it is a mediocre effort.
• 😀 The speaker acknowledges that everyone is entitled to their opinion, respecting the experience of more knowledgeable critics like Bang Feri, but still disagrees with their view of the film.
• 😀 The key criticism of 'Pengepungan di Bukit Duri' is that its strength lies in action and violence, which the speaker feels should not be the primary appeal of the film.
• 😀 The speaker refers to the film’s action scenes, arguing that other filmmakers like Kimo Stambul and Timo Cahyanto do a more intense job with violence, suggesting those are better choices for fans of gore.
• 😀 The film's rating by the speaker is 7.5/10, categorized as 'mediocre,' meaning it doesn't live up to the high expectations set by Joko Anwar’s previous works.
• 😀 'Siksa Kubur' is highlighted as the peak of Joko Anwar's filmmaking, praised for its surrealism and intellectual depth, unlike 'Pengepungan di Bukit Duri' which felt like a half-finished project.
• 😀 The speaker is critical of people who misunderstand films, thinking they are superior without comprehending the full narrative or thematic complexity, thus reducing the discussion to simplistic praise of brutality and action.

Q & A

What is the speaker's general view on the film *Pengepungan di Bukit Duri*?

The speaker gives the film a score of 7.5/10, calling it 'mediocre.' They believe that while the film has some strengths, it falls short compared to Joko Anwar's earlier work, particularly *Siksa Kubur*.

How does the speaker feel about people praising films based solely on surface elements like action or brutality?

The speaker is critical of people who praise films like *Pengepungan di Bukit Duri* for superficial reasons, such as its brutality or action. They argue that the film’s strength lies beyond these elements and that viewers who focus only on these aspects miss the film's deeper qualities.

What does the speaker think about the film's action scenes?

While the film includes action scenes, the speaker clarifies that the strength of *Pengepungan di Bukit Duri* does not come from its action or brutality. They point out that other filmmakers, like Kimo Stambul or Timo Cahyanto, produce films with more intense action and violence.

How does the speaker view the opinions of other critics, particularly Bang Feri?

The speaker respects Bang Feri’s opinion, acknowledging his experience and expertise in film. However, they express disagreement with Bang Feri’s assessment that *Pengepungan di Bukit Duri* is the best Indonesian film, as the speaker does not share that viewpoint.

What distinction does the speaker make between *Siksa Kubur* and *Pengepungan di Bukit Duri*?

The speaker believes *Siksa Kubur* is Joko Anwar’s best work because it feels more surreal and allows for greater interpretation. In contrast, *Pengepungan di Bukit Duri* feels more 'half-hearted' and lacks the same level of artistic freedom.

How does the speaker describe the audience’s understanding of *Pengepungan di Bukit Duri*?

The speaker suggests that many viewers do not fully understand the film's deeper themes. They mention that some people focus on the film’s brutality and action but fail to grasp its true meaning or narrative complexity.

What is the speaker’s view on the portrayal of violence in Indonesian films?

The speaker notes that while Indonesian filmmakers like Kimo Stambul and Timo Cahyanto create films with more graphic violence and action, *Pengepungan di Bukit Duri* should not be judged solely by its violent scenes, as it offers a deeper narrative experience.

What is the significance of surrealism in *Siksa Kubur* according to the speaker?

The speaker emphasizes that *Siksa Kubur* is more surreal and abstract, which allows for more freedom in interpretation. This quality makes it stand out as Joko Anwar's best work in their opinion.

Why does the speaker believe that *Pengepungan di Bukit Duri* didn’t reach its full potential?

The speaker feels that *Pengepungan di Bukit Duri* was 'half-hearted' and did not deliver the same depth or surrealism as *Siksa Kubur*. They believe that it could have been a stronger film if it had explored its themes and artistic choices more fully.

How does the speaker perceive the culture of film criticism in Indonesia?

The speaker reflects on the tendency of some Indonesians to blindly praise films without fully understanding them. They describe a culture where people may be quick to label a film as great, even if they are only responding to certain elements like violence or action, without considering the broader artistic aspects.