SHORTLY after Pakatan Harapan first came to power in 2018, the documentary “M for Malaysia” (2019) was submitted to the 2020 Academy Awards for “Best International Feature Film” by the National Film Development Corporation Malaysia.

The film is the joint effort of Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s granddaughter Ineza Roussille and Dian Lee, daughter of the tycoon Lee Kim Yew.

Heart-warming scenes in the film depict Mahathir as a kind old man who tries to set the country back on the right path. Controversies of Mahathir’s long tenure as the prime minister and his rivalry with Anwar aside, they are nothing compared to the corrupt Najib they were fighting against. So let bygones be bygones.

The film is in fact “M for Mahathir”. Downplaying the human rights violations during his previous autocratic rule, he is shown leading the opposition party to win the election with the support of civil society leaders.

The historical drama “Tanda Putera” (2013) narrates how Abdul Razak Hussein quelled the May 13, 1969 racial riots and restored the country in the aftermath of the crisis.

It portrays Tunku Abdul Rahman as an incompetent ruler to highlight Razak’s wise leadership.

This creative sleight of hand also hinted at then prime minister Najib Razak, whose capability must surely be a continuation of his father’s legacy.

The government had also encouraged film producers to make more patriotic projects like this.

“Tanda Putera”’s prejudicial portrayal of ethnic relations is also a subject for debate. However, the director Shuhaimi Baba has claimed that the film is true history done creatively.

Meanwhile, another film, “The New Village” (2013), suffered a different fate. Although no specific historical figures were featured, the love story was alleged to have glorified communism and depicted the May 13 incident inaccurately.

Clearly, racial and religious hegemony determine what makes a patriotic film.

“M for Malaysia” and “Tanda Putera” glorify political heroes who saved the country. They function like advertisements, lacking emotional and psychological depth.

The films do not show how these political heroes made use of racial tension in times of national emergency to further their political goals.

They have conveniently hijacked history and painted a pretty picture of their obsession with powerful leaders to propagate their racist politics.

In comparison, new Indonesian films, be it fiction or non-fiction, have surpassed ours in craft and ideas.

“Autobiography” is a remarkable Oedipal film. It tells the story of young Rakib who works as a housekeeper in an empty mansion belonging to Purna, a retired general whose family Rakib’s father and grandfather had once served.

After Purna returns to his rural hometown to run for mayorship, aided by Rakib, their relationship evolves from master-slave to father-son.

As Rakib’s own father is in jail, the old general fills the void of an absent father. And Purna regards the boy as his own son because he has none.

When Purna’s campaign posters are vandalised, Rakib is determined to find the culprit behind it and things begin to escalate violently, paving the way for tragedy.

At first, Rakib obeys Purna, a figure of wealth, power and fame. He imitates the father figure’s demeanour admirably. Purna hopes that Rakib will become his successor and nurture him in an affectionate yet autocratic manner.

After a series of unfortunate events intermingling with guilt and fear, Rakib decides to break away.

Desperately searching his own direction in life, the apprentice ends up following the footsteps of his mentor inevitably.

Military intervention in politics has its roots since Indonesia’s struggle for independence and plays a part in the 1965 mass killings. The old general is the embodiment of the Indonesian army and Suharto’s regime.

Purna still wanted to enter politics even when he is retired. This cruel, narcissistic and hypocritical man is the very character of a corrupt authoritarian power.

He had the local police officers eating out of his hand, indicating the continuing influence of old power. He also colluded with developers to snatch farmers’ lands, thus destroying their livelihood.

This recalls the Indonesian army’s role in the massacre of rural peasants.

The jury citation of the Jogja Film Festival justly says that the film “tackles a very complex subject that can be both specifically Indonesian and yet psychologically universal”.

It is fiction that tells the truth. This is not only an “autobiography” of the old man, but also the young one. The father points to the future of the son while the son is a reminder of his own past.

The relationship is an incisive political metaphor that reflects generational conflict. The generation that grows up under authoritarian rule often becomes the new oppressor in the course of rebellion.

Without a clear conscience to resist the temptation of power, the overthrow of authoritarianism will result in the reappearance of authoritarianism. – December 26, 2022.

* Veronica Lim Yi Hui is the Agora Society chairman. She holds a degree in biochemistry and is a PhD candidate in Philosophy. She has great interest in human creative endeavours like films and music. At the same time, she is concerned over the destructive impact of humans on the planet.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.