audience readings

Question 1

PREFFERED READINGS: perpetrators as ordinary people

Answer 1

e.g. fishing, playing golf, shopping in malls

• highlights the danger of being swept up in violent ideologies
• challenges viewer to reconsider their own assumptions about the world
• perpetrators sense of pride in their actions/lack of remorse - done through interviews and re-enactments

Question 2

PREFFERED READINGS: dreamlike sequences

Answer 2

e.g. dancing girls + surreal imagery

• underscores psychological escapism that has resulted from perpetrators involvement in atrocities
• Herman’s cross-dressing / Anwar’s cowboy attire - distancing themselves from violent past

Question 3

PREFFERED: change

Answer 3

• film demonstrates people are capable of change
• Anwar faces his past ad there is genuine remorse by the end

Question 4

NEGOTIATED: critics vs criticism

Answer 4

e.g. scene where they ‘burn’ the village

• highly rated by critics
• praised for its ability to shock, reveal evil and possibly show remorse
• however, in allowing Anwar and his friends to show history of events, does it provide an unnecessary fake version of the past?
• would a faithful re-enactment been more beneficial/impactful

Question 5

OPPOSITIONAL: delight in re-telling’s

Answer 5

• NICK FRASER: argues killers ‘delight’ in re-telling their stories
• satisfaction in what they have done
• YAPTO + ADI in particular take no remorse
• could make them into modern day heroes
• FRASER: if Nazi’s had made the same film, would it get the same response?

Question 6

OPPOSITIONAL: no victim perspective

Answer 6

only takes viewpoint of killers, who have final say on how they will be remembered through re-enactments

Question 7

OPPOSITIONAL: history

Answer 7

• teaches nothing about history of conflict
• no explanation of political events of 1965 that led to genocide of communists