Critical Asian Cinemas. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2020. 254 pp. (Maps, B&W photos.) US$119.00, cloth. ISBN 978-94-6372-193-6.
Gerald Sim’s recent publication is a welcome addition to a growing field of scholarship on film studies in Southeast Asia. The book focuses on the southern archipelago region of Southeast Asia, addressing industries and productions in the culturally affiliated nations of Malaysia, Indonesia, and Singapore. For Sim, this subset of nations offers a new context through which to examine postcolonial film aesthetics. Indeed, as specified in the title, the book begins with a strong focus on outlining the attitudes and constructions of the colonial eras within these three countries. Such a focus can initially seem divorced from the topic of discussion, yet Sim successfully demonstrates how outlining this history and perspective is crucial to launching an analysis of films and film movements since the mid-twentieth century.
Sim also seeks to outline the significance of Southeast Asian cinema on the global scene, arguing that the complex circumstances of postcoloniality in the region add much to the field. Indeed, Sim sees the book as part of an important movement that questions standard constructions and understandings of postcolonial studies, and in doing so, begins to break down this umbrella term. While the book examines films shaped by the colonial encounter, Sim argues that this is a very different encounter and legacy from previous examinations of postcolonial film studies.
In particular, Sim posits the significance of the national as a position of interrogation in these three industries. While the author concedes the outdated nature of this term in the wider field, he also highlights how the position of these industries vis-à-vis the state demonstrates the continuing relevance of such a framework. Indeed, the framework does seem to offer an alternative angle, one which again highlights the previous neglect of Southeast Asia in both postcolonial film studies and film studies in general.
Beginning with a study of the prosperous city state of Singapore, the first chapter is largely concerned with the “space” in the book’s title—not surprising given the small nation state’s emphasis upon the built environment. The chapter addresses the establishment of location in Singaporean cinema, examining the spatial discourse represented in key films. In particular, this includes the impact, both real and imagined, of Singapore’s (post)colonial relationship with Britain. Such colonial cartography infuses productions going back to the 1950s and 1960s, including the cross-cultural productions from P. Ramlee and others during Singapore’s “Golden Era.”
Chapter 2 then works hard to meld the spatial history of Singaporean film, indicating how various periods of development may seem disconnected but are in fact strongly linked through this emphasis and theme. In particular, this chapter disputes the tendency to only read contemporary Singaporean film through the authoritarian nation state, arguing that postcolonial spatiality provides the common thread to bridge eras that may otherwise seem politically very different.
Chapter 3 moves definitively to Malaysia and auteur Yasmin Ahmad. This chapter focuses on the use of sound (rather than speech) in communication, illustrated through close analysis of Ahmad’s productions. The examination draws upon wider film theory and sound analysis, becoming a very promising example of melding local aesthetics with wider theoretical models. Sim argues that this “local aesthetic” represents a movement away from pure linguistic meaning and allows audiences to take pleasure in the multilingual surroundings of this complex postcolonial nation. Sim convincingly argues for a “seductively immersive” experience that transcends the usual hybridity in filmic representations of postcolonial nations.
Chapter 4 addresses Indonesian cinema, teasing out the dominant postcolonial myths that imbue films seeking to “work through” the effects of trauma and violence experienced in life under the Indonesian New Order. While opening with a necessary examination of the documentary The Act of Killing (2012) and its problematic reenactments of violence and empathy, the chapter then moves on to address films of the reformasi and the way in which these films also address repressed memories and trauma. Of particular interest is the Indonesian incarnation of the road movie, recognized in the feminist-inflected production Marlina the Murderer in Four Acts (2017). In contrast to The Act of Killing, Sim notes how the women seek no empathy and express no regrets when violently killing their attackers. Overall, Sim suggests, there is a difference between male and female characters when addressing such trauma, an observation that calls for greater understanding of the role of women in these films.
Despite its relevant framework and original observations, the book does elicit some critique. At times Sim makes sweeping assumptions about audience response, issuing statements about outsiders and locals with little evidence to support such binary perspectives. Indeed, one suspects that in the globalized and cosmopolitan landscape of Southeast Asia today, the divisions Sim insists on making between (most often Western and local) audiences are less pronounced than he surmises. Given the turn towards audience studies in the recent generation of film scholars, we can be hopeful that such observations will soon be affirmed and/or challenged by forthcoming Southeast Asian researchers.
Likewise, while the choice of these three nations is well justified through their cultural proximity, including “Southeast Asian Cinema” prominently in the book’s title does seem somewhat disingenuous. Indeed, the main contradiction in the entire book seems to be the title—an umbrella term that is surprising given the author’s desire to question and decentralize such overarching constructions. Film scholars may take issue with the omission of Thailand and Vietnam, nations with thriving successful industries. Similarly, while the volume is convincing in its motivation to read films through postcolonial frameworks, the Indian and Chinese cinematic impact on the region does feel somewhat neglected in favour of Euro-American powers.
Despite these potential shortcomings, the book offers a significant contribution to the growing field of Southeast Asian film studies. In distinguishing the unique postcolonial poetics within the differing industries, filmmakers, and topics of these three countries, Sim has succeeded in a task that eludes many, and identified a specific angle through which to begin expanding the umbrella of postcolonial film studies. In the end, Postcolonial Hangups in Southeast Asian Cinema manages to tie its many threads together and elevate what was previously a relatively obscure district to the forefront of critical reflection in postcolonial studies.
Mary Jane Ainslie
University of Nottingham Ningbo China, Ningbo