A Masterpiece!

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Nominated for an Oscar for Best Documentary in 2015This is a sequel/companion documentary to THE ACT OF KILLING (2012) about the genocide in Indonesia, this time seen from the POV of the family whose one of its members been murdered.Everything about this is strange. From the calmness of the people talking about the killings, to the calmness of the members of the victim's family. It's like everything is either trivial or told from a distance.Plus, there is the strange situation of people talking about forgetting and forgiveness, while obviously remembering everything and basically threatening the brother. Again, very strange feeling throughout the entire movie.Like the previous film, there is a strange feeling of trivializing genocide and brutally murdering of people. I thought the first movie was better constructed. This film feels like bits and pieces of interviews without a real coherent structure.

With just two films to his name, both about the Indonesian mass-murders of the mid-1960's Oppenheimer has become the most important documentarian of his generation. His second film, "The Look of Silence", coupled with his "The Act of Killing" has created a sea- change in the Indonesian truth, justice and reconciliation movement. Forcing new laws to be written and putting the government in a defensive position against the nation's media.But Oppenheimer is more than an activist. He's an artist. His films are contemplative, playful and quietly confrontational. His visual attack is succinct, his marriage of form and theme is flawless and his moral intent is thunderous.Where "Act of Killing" was concerned with a larger study of post-massacre Indonesia, "Look of Silence" chooses a more intimate landscape. Geographically, emotionally and cinematically it is regional. Concerned with a single killing, the men who did it – directly and indirectly - the family it affected and the small village that has lived with questions about other killings like it for fifty years. Where "Act of Killing" lived in absurdist grand cinema, "Look of Silence" exists in tight close-ups of the perpetrators, survivors and truth-seekers. More than anything, more than words, their faces tell the story. So much happens behind the eyes, around the corners of the mouth, in unspoken glances. The horror, doubt, guilt and seemingly impossible reconciliation stirs below the surface. For all the cinematic flex of "Act of Killing", this contained take on the same material, seems more haunted and human.The star of the film, Adi the eyewear peddler, pursues this mission with intelligence and courage. We meet his family. His happy playful daughter, his thoughtful son, his cautious loving wife, his ageless mother (probably the most engaging character captured on film this year), his wisp of an ancient father, and his memory of a murdered brother, looming over everything. From them he finds the courage to question murderer after murderer face-to-face. The combination of his profession as an optometrist with his quest to seek truth would seem heavy-handed if it were fiction, but nothing here is inauthentic. In showing all of Adi's family, from the fresh and young, to the spent and dying, we see the full arc of life.Lastly, the film makes a glancing but firm indictment against the American anti-Communist fervor that fed into - and the American corporations that profited from - these killings. It gives strong evidence that the Cold War, the war of ideology and the murder of millions, allowed for, and was even fought for, Western corporate dominance in places like this. And here the grinding up of human beings for profit in this situation is undeniable. Oppenheimer wants to make sure no one involved gets off without having to face, if not their own role in the massacre of millions, then at the very least, their culture's.And so it goes, the people (wives, mothers, daughters, sons, fathers, husbands), the silence, the haunted jungle hum that fills most of the auditory space in the film, the great and overwhelming significance of it all… everything pools together to show us something words alone can't manage. Something about how a horror can be so great that its impact can loom over generations. About living with debilitating fear of those who have claimed power over you through violence. About the most nightmarish tendencies in humanity, and our courageous capacity to overcome the worst of ourselves. About just how difficult it is to look into the eyes of a killer and say, "I know what you did." And more profoundly, more frighteningly… "I know you."

"The Look of Silence" is a companion piece to Joshua Oppenheimer's previous film "The Act of Killing". Both films deal with the mass murder of communists in Indonesia between 1965 and 1966 - a serious crime resulting in the deaths of over a million innocent people by the hands of hired militia sanctioned by the government, but has gone unnoticed in the public eye for so long because the perpetrators are still at large, hailed as national heroes for stopping a revolution and in positions of power in government for over fifty years, living peacefully among the families of those they murdered."Act of Killing" is more audacious in style, following three killers as they recreate their murders for film in any genre they want (gangster flick, musical, etc.) - all the while they're boastful of their accomplishments, without any remorse or regret for their actions.'This film follows Adi Rukun, an optometrist who's brother was murdered in the genocide. We see him confronting death squad leaders and those who knew his brother, looking for some sort of understanding and possibly reconciliation for his murder. There are also domestic scenes with his mother and father, as well as with his wife and family. Life plays out happily before our eyes, but beneath it there are still painful reminders of the past when Adi talks about his brother with his mother, or when he tells his wife what he's been up to, talking with these killers they know. She says she would have stopped him if she knew, that his life could be in danger if he keeps digging up the past instead of forgetting. This gives the interviews a very real sense of tension, and you wonder if such a film could be made if it weren't for the involvement of outsiders who could be there with Adi.Still, Adi puts up a strong front, asking why they did what they did. The answer's usually the same, they deny individual responsibility, or say that it was necessary. Sometimes their answers are disturbing, saying that they drank the blood of their victims to stay sane. Family members of the now-deceased murderer of his brother deny knowing anything about their father's work. In a very affecting scene, Adi's uncle, a prison guard in the army says he was unaware what happened to the detained after they were shipped off onto trucks each day. He's trying to keep up a strong resolve, but you can see the pain in his face when he talks about the past.This film director chooses not to intrude on the telling of the stories with narration, but instead lets the interviewees tell their version of events, leaving pregnant pauses between answers to linger on their faces, which often tell more than spoken words ever could.It's a very quite, slow film, but I found it hypnotic and a damning portrait of a country's silence after horrendous acts were committed. Adi gives a voice to the families of many victims, and both films should be watched by everyone to get a better understanding of the depths humanity can sink to, and how a nation struggles to cope with long dormant pain after government sanctioned genocide.

Focussing on a single family who during what is now known as a genocide in the late 1960s, who lost their eldest son. Adi, who wasn't born at that time, has a deep and personal commitment to not just finding answers that his whole family was asking, but to setting his country on a path of truth and reconciliation. Amazingly, the perpetrators of the genocide were still in positions of power. The interview showed Adi time and again facing perpetrators of the genocide – those indirectly involved with his brother's killing – and later with those who were directly involved. Throughout the documentary, Adi showed his calm nature, even when tested and even when displaying his resilience and determination to hear the truth. While steps were taken to protect Adi, thinly veiled threats to his safety where made – leaving the viewer in no doubt that he had literally put his life on the line.Adi in person, at the Q&A session after the showing at Telluride, his answers (translated by director Joshua), his persona and his body language conveyed a disarming softness, a humbleness and an absolute commitment to the truth and reconciliation of his country.I was honored to shake Adi's hand, to exchange a few words of greeting.There is no doubt in my mind that I was in the presence of someone very special, someone who through his own deep and personal commitment was in the process of making the world a better place.