Review: Sang Pencerah

SPOILER WARNING!!

I already said it before, but I need to repeat it again: many Indonesian movies are embarrassments. Many said "Sang Pencerah" (The Enlightener) is an exception. Hey, religion is also my point of interest, so I watch this movie with quite high hope.

Oh yeah, before I watched this movie, I watched the superbly written Red Letter Media's Titanic Review. Coincidentally, some of their criticisms for Titanic are also valid here. More on that later!

First the synopsis. This is the movie about the founding of Muhammadiyah, the 2nd largest Islamic organization in Indonesia. It is a modernist movement, which was founded by Ahmad Dahlan, in late 19th century Indonesia, which at that time was under Dutch colonialism. Dahlan is the main character of this movie. He was repeatedly opposed by the existing Islamic elites, who control the largest mosque in that area, who prefer the status quo to changes thought by Dahlan. The movie essentially follow this formula:

Enlightenment -> Preaching & application -> Violent response of pro status quo Islamic leaders -> Contemplation, accompanied with violin plays -> Enlightenment again!

Rinse and repeat.

The movie tries really hard to portrait the stubbornness, the refusal of the elites to change. It tries so hard that it forget that change is not good per se. For example, Dahlan tries to modernize Islamic education system by copying Western school, complete with chairs and tables. The elites branded Dahlan as "infidel," since he used "Infidel's chairs and tables" instead of simply sitting and studying on floor, like on mosque. But Dahlan never pointed out the reason WHY they have to switch to chairs and tables. Hey, I am no Muslim, but I can pointed out that studying on floor is far cheaper, spacious, and flexible. But no, the movie only want to say "Dahlan is so progressive and smart while the elites are stupid!"

Oh yeah, speaking about the elites, the movie also without any subtlety said that "Indonesians have to unite to fight against the Dutch who sucked our land!" But on the other hand, it almost totally AVOIDS one of the main historical reason of  the founding of Muhammadiyah: to fight back Christian missionaries. Heck, in one scene, it was shown that the Dutch officials and children thought that Islam was a backward and primitive religion, BUT they quickly CHANGED their mind only after a single demonstration of Dahlan's knowledge, wittiness, and teaching capability! Oh yeah, this was done AFTER Dahlan insulted a Dutch official as "fatso". Somehow that official didn't really take that insult personally and let Dahlan become a teacher at his school! Compare that with the fact that the Islamic elites in this movie ALWAYS oppose Dahlan, and even using VIOLENCE against his followers! Now, whose reign do you prefer? The once-ignorant Dutch who CAN CHANGE their mind after a single demonstration? Or the stubborn and violent local elites? I like this one, for once this movie didn't play it safe, but ... doesn't that means that the movie weakened its own "patriotic" message? And speaking about violence by the locals ...

There is one scene that made me shakes my head in disbelieve. It is the scene after the elites warned Dahlan for the first time to close his mosque. Dahlan KNOW that the elites already send an angry mob to his mosque. When the mob tore down the mosque, he went to, then hugged his father, and playing violin in contemplation. At the same time, his wife & disciples crying, watching the mob in horror, powerless to defend the mosque.

WHAT??

He left his wife and disciples to face the angry mob by themselves?? WHAT THE HELL, HERO? Then, in the next day, NOBODY pointed out this. Nobody.

So, with all those weaknesses, is this a bad movie? Not exactly. Let me refer to Red Letter Media's Titanic review: "It was shot superbly. Small details are not overlooked, every scene is gorgeous. Every music enhanced every scene. Technically, it is an excellent movie. Too bad the plot sucks." Same here. Almost every single scene magnify the beauty of Javanese village and houses. "Sang Pencerah"'s weaknesses are all plot related. 

Another point brought by Red Letter Media about Titanic: Cameron play it safe in terms of plot. It never try to dig deeper into the character, it never try to pose a moral dilemma to them. It always pointed out that the main character is the perfectly-good human while the antagonist(s) are total monsters. "Sang Pencerah" is better here, since in the end the highest elite actually repents. But it also play it safe, it refuse to confront an "ugly truth," for example, a simple fact that Muhammadiyah is also about confrontation against Christian missions. It also preached endlessly that "the Islamic way preached by Dahlan is better than local cultures," and since most Indonesians are Muslims, I don't see anything other than "I want to play it safe!" from this fact. Just like The Lady, it tries so hard to put its protagonist on pedestal, it only slipped during the mob-attack scene. Most of the time, it choose NOT to mention that Dahlan's foot is always on the ground, never hovering.

Final verdict: 55 out of 100. Watch it if you are interested in history of Indonesia, but with a grain of salt. BTW, I also love the fact how this movie put the colonial masters in more positive light than the local elites! But I suspect only few recognize this ...