pengabdi setan, pengabdi meme

makin ke sini, joko anwar bisa dibilang makin jujur mengeluarkan perspektif personal-politis pada karya-karyanya, yang mencerminkan kematangannya sebagai seorang sutradara. ia punya minat khusus menggali motivasi-motivasi manusia yang berkaitan dengan reproduksi, seperti di film adaptasi novel sekar ayu asmara, pintu terlarang, yang melibatkan janin dan karya seni, dan terakhir di film pengabdi setan ini. yang paling jelas adalah perspektifnya soal simbol-simbol kemapanan peninggalan orde baru yaitu agama dan keluarga inti. inilah yang paling menarik dari pengabdi setan 2017: agama dan keluarga sudah tidak jadi obat pengusir kejahatan seperti film yang lama. adegan munculnya setan berwujud ibu saat rini (tara basro) sholat jadi adegan favorit saya, lucu sekaligus seram. solusi persatuan keluarga yang ‘direvisi’ juga jadi semacam humor pahit yang menyatakan bahwa rasa kekeluargaan khas Indonesia itu tidak akan bisa melawan struktur kejahatan yang sudah terbangun sekian generasi dan menyebar. 

sepertinya joko anwar bukan penganut perspektif bahwa horor seringkali jadi simbol represi terhadap perempuan. atau jika ia sadar dengan itu, elemen ini sepertinya tidak terangkat dengan baik. ini yang disayangkan. karena tokoh ibu tidak jadi sentral cerita. motivasi ibu hamil karena ditekan mertua tidak mendapat justifikasi. ibu hanya terkulai sakit lalu mati dan wujudnya diambil alih setan, lalu kemudian diambil alih oleh meme-meme “ibu sudah bisa” di internet. 

secara alur banyak yang cukup menimbulkan pertanyaan. seperti kenapa bondi tiba-tiba tidak kesurupan lagi. kenapa, kalaupun bondi dimasuki roh nenek, nenek tega mau bunuh ian, padahal waktu hidup nenek terlihat menikmati sekali main sama ian. lalu bapak ustadz, kenapa dia yang sedang berduka dan urung menolong keluarga setan itu di hari berikutnya kemudian beramah-tamah tanpa beban dengan bapak seolah ia sudah move on dari berdukanya. kenyataan bahwa mereka mungkin anak-anak setan dari bapak yang berbeda juga seolah dibiarkan begitu saja, masak nggak syok sih tau mereka kemungkinan anak setan? banyak karakter penting yang tidak terlalu diberi perhatian dalam perkembangannya sepanjang cerita. mungkin energi tim habis di setting dan viral marketing?

dari segi set, film ini berhasil menimbulkan ketakutan yang sangat dekat dengan kehidupan sehari-hari. cermin di kamar ibu adalah cermin di kamar tidur saya. lemari itu adalah lemari di kamar tamu. rasanya saya pernah menginjakkan kaki di kamar mandi sumur semacam itu. semua tekstur rumah berhasil menimbulkan rasa ngeri yang indah, tanpa jadi benar-benar menghantui. yang sebenarnya cukup untuk saya yang cemen nonton horror ini. saya suka bagaimana saya kini mendengar sam saimun “di wajahmu kulihat bulan” tidak sama lagi, dan tatapan asmara abigail tidak mudah lepas dari ingatan. semua unsur yang sifatnya aksesoris seimbang ditampilkan di film ini. tara basro adalah figur perempuan yang harus lebih sering ditampilkan di layar Indonesia. badannya nggak kerempeng, kulit nggak putih, yah cukup ada beberapa poin yang di luar standar cantik industri hiburan di Indonesia, walaupun saya tadinya mengharap dia bisa lebih dieksplor lagi aktingnya. 

bagi penggemar film horror indonesia, film ini mungkin terlalu rapi dan polished, dan kurang bisa memberi terobosan baru dalam teknik pembuatan film horror. tapi buat saya, upaya joko anwar untuk secara jelas memasukkan perspektif personal-politisnya patut diapresiasi, sehingga saya menunggu film seperti apa lagi yang akan ia buat berikutnya.

The Red Turtle: Animasi Ghibli Rasa Eropa

 

trt

Apa yang bakal anda lakukan kalau anda terdampar di sebuah pulau sendirian? Walaupun pulau itu berisi semua yang dibutuhkan untuk bertahan hidup, tapi kesepian adalah sesuatu yang lebih pedih dari luka apapun di dunia ini.

Penyu yang punya umur panjang secara harfiah dan metafor sudah makan garam alias pengalaman hidup di dunia ini. Menurut beberapa penelitian spesies penyu bahkan sudah ada dari jaman dinosaurus. Beberapa mitologi menyatakan bahwa penyu menggendong dunia di cangkangnya.

Dengan pengalaman hidup seperti itu penyu adalah lambang dari kebijaksanaan, dan ketika satu penyu merah menemukan seorang laki-laki yang terdampar dan nekat ingin terus pergi dari pulau.

Walaupun film setengah Ghibli ini terkesan jauh dengan nuansa film Ghibli biasanya, tapi menariknya The Red Turtle tetap setia dengan faham Ghibli yang mengedepankan tokoh perempuan dan membuat peran perempuan sangat dominan.

Penyu merah mengorbankan sedikit dari waktu hidupnya yang panjang untuk jadi seorang istri dan ibu. Ini melambangkan bahwa peran menjadi istri dan ibu dari seorang perempuan, walaupun penting tapi bukanlah segalanya. Perempuan juga mahluk yang punya tujuan punya hidup sendiri sebagai fokusnya.

The Red Turtle atau La Tortue Rouge buatan  Michaël Dudok de Wit yang diproduksi barengan antara Wild Bunch dan Studio Ghibli adalah satu cerita animasi tanpa dialog yang membuat kepala penontonnya menyusun narasi sendiri dari adegan-adegan film itu. Karena itu pula film ini bisa begitu luas diinterpretasikan.

Walaupun penonton dibebaskan menyusun narasi di kepala, The Red Turtle seperti tetap membangun benteng yang membuat kita seutuhnya tidak pernah bebas dari norma dan logika. Sepanjang film anda akan dimanjakan oleh gambar indah tapi dikurung oleh musik latar nelangsa.

Mata karakter Studio Ghibli yang biasanya belo karena dibuat dalam semesta Eropa dibuat mengecil. Ini juga seperti melambangkan semakin kita dibebaskan berpikir, terkadang kita akan makin menyempitkan pikiran kita.

Film ini seperti film drama cinta lainnya punya premis cinta berawal dari kebencian dan berakhir ketika semuanya memang harus berakhir. Tapi walau cerita berakhir, buat penyu yang umurnya panjang, cerita ini adalah hanya sebuah penggalan kecil hidupnya, dan penyu merah kembali melanjutkan hidupnya, berenang dengan selaw melintasi samudera.

Tuesdays With Morrie Revisited: “A romantic traditionalist, a shallow self-absorbed baby boomer and life’s shittiest craps”

Processed with VSCO with e7 preset

Mitch Albom’s Tuesdays With Morrie

Well, not really. I’m being hyperbolic.

I wrote in my Instagram’s post that “revisiting a book is always a good idea to know how much you’ve changed… or not, and whether a book is a great work that transcends time and changes… or not.”

And “Tuesdays With Morrie” is not. So not.

So not great, not even good, that it made me wonder, why did I even cry my heart out years ago? Like getting some kind of enlightment or epiphany. Mine even has these colourful post-its of quoted lines that I thought were brilliant and hit all the right spots. Ugh.

Now that it’s almost twenty years later, I get another enlightenment… this book is a crap.

I re-read ‘Tuesdays’ because I was planning to watch “Sabtu Bersama Bapak”, which I thought was probably ‘heavily inspired’ by this book. Well, it’s a yes and no. ‘Tuesdays’ was published in 1997 and I consider it as part of the Inspirational Lit wave that hit the popular culture in the mid-90s along with “Chicken Soup For The Soul” series and “The Oprah Winfrey Show”. In fact, Oprah did later produce the TV film adaptation of ‘Tuesdays’, and Albom’s other book, “For One More Day” which was directed by the same director of another Albom’s book-turned-into-movie, “The Five People You Meet In Heaven”

Though it seems like ‘Tuesdays’ tried to disintegrate itself from the self-help genre, for me it failed to do so. It criticised the self-help books that flooded America’s book market by saying:

“Of course, there were a million self-help books on these subjects, and plenty of cable TV shows, and $90-per-hour consultation sessions. America had become a Persian bazaar of self-help.” (p.65)

I suspect Albom was talking about the ‘Chicken Soup’ series. Self-help, inspirational, motivational, whatever their jargon is, they all have the same effect on me. Left me feeling uninspired and demotivated.

I don’t know whether it was Albom’s conscious decision not to include other topics in this book that were probably mentioned by Morrie during their Tuesday sessions or it just happened to be that it was all there is to it about Morrie. If it’s the first, then I feel sorry for Morrie for being presented in such a way. If it’s the latter, then it’s really…

Morrie Schwartz was a professor in Sociology at Brandeis University, and Albom was one of his students. Studying Sociology apparently didn’t make either Morrie or Albom have a thorough and profound view of the world, at least not in this book. They just exchanged their white privilege’s ignorance covered in the so-called meaningful aphorisms.

The problems probably lie within Morrie and Albom’s backgrounds, and they seemed to heavily influence the way Morrie and Albom think. Of course it wouldn’t be fair to stereotype both Morrie and Albom, but they seem to be the almost perfect archetypes of their generations. Morrie was born in 1916, which made him part of the so-called G.I Generation or Greatest Generation. But let’s just call them the World War II Generation, the other less familiar term. Greatest sounds… well, too much. His father, Charlie Schwartz, was a Russian immigrant who left Russia to escape the Russian Army. Little Morrie lived in poverty. His father was constantly out of job, and because of the Depression, Morrie’s father found even less work in his fur business.

The experience of seeing people work in his father’s fur factory (his father was a labourer) made him make a vow that “he would never do any work that exploited someone else, and he would never allow himself to make money off the sweat of others” (p.78). This seems to be one of the World War II Generation’s values, “We before Me”. A value that in the years to come seemed to have no place in their über-capitalistic land of dreams.

The more I read about it (this generation division) the more I see ‘Tuesdays’, well Morrie’s aphorisms in this case, as a criticism towards the Boomers and their materialistic lifestyle and values. But unfortunately Morrie failed to see through these and recognising that the biggest contribution to their consumerism and hedonism are not only that they were being spoiled by their parents, but also thanks to their own economic and social systems, capitalism.

Though the 60s and 70s saw the rise of the counterculture of the 1960s, the civil rights movement, and the “second-wave” feminist cause (which later was also criticised for whitewashing), in which all the Boomers were the key players, but in the next coming years the Boomers evolved into a self-absorbed “Me Generation”. Everything is about “me, me, me”. Their ultimate goal is happiness. My happiness. Happiness, which was once just one of the emotions in the human emotion spectrum, has now become the holy and the only purpose of life. The purpose of life that, if you’re smart (and greedy) enough, can turn you into a multibillionaire by milking every drop of it.

Before going any further, perhaps this article by Simon Sinek in Salon can give a glimpse of World War II Generation and the Baby Boomer’s relationship:

“The Greatest Generation, raised during the Great Depression and wartime rationing, wanted to ensure that their children did not suffer or miss out on their youth as they did. This is good. This is what all parents want — for their children to avoid their hardships and prosper. And so that’s how the Boomers were raised — to believe that they shouldn’t have to go without. Which, as a philosophy, is perfectly fine and reasonable. But given the size of the generation and the abundance of resources that surrounded them, the philosophy got a little distorted. When you consider the rising wealth and affluence of their childhood, combined (for good reasons) with a cynicism toward government in the 1970s, followed by the boom years of the 1980s and 1990s, it’s easy to see how the Boomers earned their reputation as the Me Generation. Me before We.”

Now, Morrie criticised what this generation had become, which Albom represented being “.. so wrapped up with egotistical things, career, family, having enough money, meeting the mortgage, getting a new car, fixing the radiator when it breaks – we’re involved in trillions of little acts just to keep going…” (p. 64-65). Hence the “Love wins. Love always wins” (p. 40) type of aphorisms.

The problem is, it doesn’t.

If love always wins, we don’t have wars anymore. No discrimination, no violence, no blood, just none of those things. None. But it doesn’t.

Morrie probably wanted to relive the ‘We before Me’ values. A balance of hard work, a sense of being a part of a society and also love. The one thing that probably his generation was really deprived of, having lived in a constant struggle, but also the one thing that Boomers throw into the sea of divorces. So that’s what he emphasised most. Love.

Unfortunately, he passed on these ideas to the already self-absorbed and self-obsessed generation. As Brakow theorised, “One reason the Boomers were so spoiled, Brokaw theorizes, was their parents’ understandable desire to compensate for their own deprivation.” So they seemed to skip the ‘We’ part and went straight ahead to the ‘Love’ part. ‘Me + Love’ = self-love = positive psychology. A new breed of ignorance.

Now to my understanding, based on these backgrounds, Morrie was not likely to be an ignorant person. But somehow, he was too in a way. This ignorance came in the form of Morrie’s wise advice when asked by Albom “how can you be prepared to die?” His answer was,

“Do what the Buddhists do. Every day, have a little bird on your shoulder that asks, ‘Is today the day? Am I ready? Am I doing all I need to do? Am I being the person I want to be?” (p.81)

Huh? What the… ?!

The 90s (the period where the sessions took place) saw the booming of American Buddhism. Stephen Prothero, a professor of Religion, in his article “Buddhist Boomer” wrote,

American converts are taking a 2,500-year-old faith and making it over in their own image — self-absorbed.”

He then went on saying,

Boomer Buddhism, by contrast, is all too often shallow and small. It soothes rather than upsets, smoothing out the palpable friction between Buddhist practice and the banalities of contemporary American life, cajoling even the Dalai Lama to direct his great mind to small American preoccupations like “The Art of Happiness.”

This is actually ironic and pitiful since Morrie is a professor in sociology, the study of social behavior or society, including its origins, development, organisation, networks, and institutions. Yet he fell for this banality. So, I’m not sure whether this is Morrie’s or Albom’s conscious choice.

These picture-perfect ideals in delulu land also makes them lose the ability to see the bigger picture. Tom Brakow, who coined the term “Greatest Generation” recalled that at their time, “Whatever else was happening in our family or neighborhood, there was something greater connecting all of us, in large ways and small.”

I also need to remind myself that Morrie came from a generation that used to classify the African-Americans as second-class citizens. Brakow wrote “The majority of black Americans were still living in the states of the former Confederacy, and they remained second-class citizens, or worse, in practice and law. Negro men were drafted and placed in segregated military units even as America prepared to fight a fascist regime that had as a core belief the inherent superiority of the Aryan people.”

Again, I’m not sure whether this was purely Albom’s or partly Morrie’s, because one story in this book is racially biased and the choice of words feels like coming from white privilege’s arrogance.

“One time, a group of black students took over Ford Hall on the Brandeis campus, draping it in a banner that read MALCOLM X UNIVERSITY. For Hall had chemistry labs, and some administration officials worried that these radicals were making bombs in the basement. Morrie knew better. He saw right to the core of the problem, which was human being wanting to feel that they mattered.” (p.112)

If this book is out today in times of the #BlackLivesMatter movement, I’m almost sure that this would be criticised as racist. I suspect that that’s mostly Albom’s, since he also constantly talked about OJ Simpson’s case again in the background.

“I heard the door to Morrie’s study close. I stared at the TV set. Everyone in the world is watching this thing, I told myself. Then, from the other room, I heard the ruffling of Morrie’s being lifted from his chair and I smiled. As “the Trial of the Century” reached its dramatic conclusion, my old professor was sitting on the toilet.” (p. 158)

Mmm… no, we were not and no, it was not, you egocentric sheltered American Boomer. The world does not, nor will it ever be revolved just around your great nation!

Now, how did all of these very white American-centric problems, and very first world problems too, resonate with readers like me who came from the so-called third-world countries? I suspect that it has to do with the US cultural imperialism propaganda. It’s almost definite that when it comes to popular culture, people who live through the 80s and 90s in their adolescent years (the Gen X-ers), especially the urban middle-class kids and teenagers, can only remember mostly America’s popular culture products, and a little bit of British’s and Australia’s. Other than that, they are very minimal or almost non-existent.

The secret of the success of North American cultural penetration of the Third World is its capacity to fashion fantasies to escape from misery, that the very system of economic and military domination generates. The essential ingredients of the new cultural imperialism is the fusion of commercialism-sexuality-conservatism each presented as idealized expressions of private needs, of individual self-realization. To some Third World people immersed in everyday dead end jobs, struggles for everyday survival, in the midst of squalor and degradation, the fantasies of North American media, like the evangelist, portray “something better”, a hope in a future better life — or at least the vicarious pleasure of watching others enjoying it.”

So it’s no surprise if the propaganda seemed to find its effective weapon in Inspirational Lit, which wave reached its height between 1993-1998, because the genre promises a better and happier life. Your personal and individual better and happier life, because it aimed to ‘dismantle’ the sense of ‘We’-ness. The same value that was not only highly valued by the World War II Generation, but also the same core value of socialism, the economic and social systems that American capitalism has fought to dismiss for decades.

One of the great deceptions of our times is the notion of ‘internationalization’ of ideas, markets and movements. It has become fashionable to evoke terms like “globalization” or “internationalization” to justify attacks on any or all forms of solidarity, community, and/or social values. Under the guise of “internationalism”, Europe and the U.S. have become dominant exporters of cultural forms most conducive to depoliticizing and trivializing everyday existence. The images of individual mobility, the “self-make person”, the emphasis on “self-centered existence” (mass produced and distributed by the U.S. mass media industry) now have become major instruments in dominating the Third World.”

Not until the spectacular failure of capitalism, more Americans are embracing the idea of socialism.

It’s almost twenty years later. I have disassociated myself with the privileged middle-class.

Because I am not.

Nor I am white.

Nor I am part of the first-world.

Nor I have benefited from the system.

So this book has become meaningless for me. A waste of an ideally revolutionary youth.

*Original post was published here*

This is Where I Leave You: bapak yang tidak berpesan

Semalam nggak sengaja nyangkut di salah satu channel tv yang memutar film ini. Mumpung lagi dalam tema “mengenang bapak”, saya pikir film ini penting untuk dibahas juga. Shawn Levy si sutradara punya filmografi yang banyak bahas seputar hubungan anak dan bapak seperti Real Steel dan Night at the Museum. Film ini juga diangkat dari sebuah buku karya Jonathan Tropper, yang bantu bikin naskahnya.

 

maxresdefault

Setelah Mort, si bapak, meninggal, istrinya (diperankan Jane Fonda) minta keempat anaknya (Jason Bateman, Tina Fey, Adam Driver, dan Corey Stoll) kumpul di rumah di kampung halaman mereka buat ‘tahlilan’ selama 7 hari mengenang bapaknya. Doi bilang itu wasiat dari sang ayah. Dengan berat hati, keempat anak dengan masalah dan ketidakbahagiaannya masing-masing harus reuni di rumah tempat mereka tumbuh besar, ketemu mantan yang cacat otak, mantan yang kawin sama kakak sendiri, cinta yang gak kesampean, sambil menyembunyikan masalahnya masing-masing.

Sebagai sebuah film keluarga, film ini berhasil menghadirkan situasi dan karakter yang terasa nyata. Tiap karakter cukup menarik, dapat porsi cukup untuk didalemin. Semua karakter charming, punya kurang dan lebih. Di sini juga ada tokoh yang mengejar kesempurnaan karena berkaca dari bapaknya. Tapi pada akhirnya karir dan pernikahannya gagal. Kita bisa bersimpati sama kesedihannya dan melihat gimana dia berusaha membereskan dirinya sendiri dari pecahan-pecahan yang tersisa. Ada juga kakak cowok tertua yang selalu ribut sama adik cowok termuda karena mereka emang bertolak belakang, yang pertama penerus bisnis keluarga, yang muda sibuk pacaran sama psikolognya yang jauh lebih tua, nggak bisa pegang duit, dan nggak bisa dipegang komitmennya.

Karakter perempuan juga bukan sekedar perhiasan. Wendy (Tina Fey) punya rasa bersalah yang besar karena ninggalin mantan pacarnya abis dia kecelakaan yang ngerusak otaknya, sehingga si mantannya ini masih harus tinggal di kota itu bareng ibunya. Dia juga nggak pernah bisa ngelupain cintanya sama si Horry ini. Sementara anaknya Wendy dua, satu lagi belajar boker, satu masih bayi, dan suaminya gak pernah hadir karena sibuk kerja. Ada banyak adegan manis antara dia dan sodara-sodaranya yang lain. Salah satunya saat Philip (adek bontot, Adam Driver) bilang bahwa suara di kepalanya itu bukan suara ayah dan ibu mereka, tapi suara si Wendy karena dia yang membesarkan si Philip. Hillary (si ibu, Jane Fonda) adalah pensiunan hippie yang terlalu terbuka tiap ngomongin topik seks. Kita nggak kaget saat direveal bahwa si ibu memutuskan untuk jadi lesbian dengan tetangganya sendiri. Dan ternyata ide ngumpulin anak-anak nggak datang dari mendiang bapak, tapi dari ibunya. (Itu namanya ngasih bobot buat karakter!)

Sebagai film yang dilabeli drama-komedi, film ini berhasil menyelipkan komedi tanpa kehilangan mood dramanya. Karakter tiap orang adalah bagian dari komedinya. Kalaupun ada yang slapstick, adegan-adegan itu muncul di saat-saat yang tak terduga, seperti saat Hillary mencoba melepas sendiri alat bantu nafas suaminya, atau saat Judd (Jason Bateman) mergokin istrinya selingkuh. Humornya pait, humornya janggal, tapi di situlah lucunya.

Nggak ada dakwah bapak ala Mario Teguh di sini. Si bapak hampir gak punya suara, tapi anak-anak dan istrinya ngasih suara buat mendiang bapak lewat kenangan-kenangan dan pengalaman hidup mereka masing-masing. “This is where I leave you,” adalah pesan tak terucap yang punya makna masing-masing di tiap karakternya: divorced, unhappily married, childless, broke, but grateful.

 

*Gambar diambil dari sini

Kenangan Berbalut Kehangatan di Ssangmundong: Reply 1988 (응답하라 1988) (2015)

reply family

Warga Ssangmundong

 

Hangat. Teramat sangat hangat.

 

Bagaikan menyaksikan kembali “A.C.I” dicampur “Rumah Masa Depan” dicampur “Jendela Rumah Kita”. Menikmati kenangan yang dibalut kehangatan, kira-kira begitu rasanya.

The Reply series have been around for almost 4 years now. Dan selama itu itu pula, walaupun sampai jatuh cinta sama duo dodol Yoo Yeon Seok-Son Ho Joon (pemain “Reply 1994”) di variety Friends/Youth Over Flowers, keberadaannya gak bikin saya menyegerakan menonton seri ini. Sampai beberapa waktu lalu mendadak iseng. Ho oh, hanya karena iseng dan mulai kekurangan asupan drako seiring dengan nyaris berakhirnya “Bubblegum”.

Namun ternyata oh ternyata, tak disangka tak dinyana saya dibuat begitu jatuh cinta dengan seri ini.

Kenangan mungkin merupakan kunci formula seri Reply. Kalau ditanya ke saya, kenangan yang mana? Kan saya bukan orang Korea. Iya betul banget. Tapi melihat ke belakang, era itu (ini khusus bicara “Reply 1988” ya (selanjutnya ditulis R88), karena saya belum nonton 2 seri pendahulunya) nyaris dikuasai oleh hanya satu gelombang budaya populer, yaitu budaya populer Amerika. Ini gak terlepas dari agenda imperialisme Amerika yang mungkin dengan bodohnya gak kita sadari waktu itu (lha iyak, wong saya masih piyik). “Catatan Si Boy” adalah salah satu produk film masa itu yang habis-habisan menghadirkan referensi budaya populer dan gaya hidup keamerika-amerikaan. Di salah satu serinya, CSB bahkan sampai mengambil setting di LA, sarang anak-anak tajir pejabat Orba masa itu. Korea Selatan, seperti halnya Indonesia, masa itu juga dilanda demam budaya populer Amerika. Political fact, Korea Selatan merupakan salah satu pendukung terbesar Amerika Serikat sampai saat ini.

Okay, I think that’s enough. Nanti malah kepanjangan ngelantur jadi telaah sejarah deh.

Kembali ke Reply, seperti 2 seri pendahulunya, R88 juga menceritakan kisah kasih sekumpulan anak muda yang pada tahun 1988 itu tinggal bertetangga di Ssangmundong, sebuah area di pinggiran Seoul. Akamsi lah judulnya. Seri Reply (katanya) selalu punya benang merah menebak siapa calon suami si tokoh utama perempuannya. Tapi untungnya ini tidak lantas membuat R88 berkutat ngurek-ngurek si Deok Seon (yang diperankan dengan sangat unyu bin gengges oleh Hyeri, yang lebih dulu dikenal sebagai personil Girl’s Day) bakal kawin sama siapa doang. Bahkan porsi tebak-tebak buah manggis calon suami dan drama dunia pergebetan Deok Seon mungkin gak sampai 40% dari keseluruhan cerita R88.

 

reply1988 - 2

Akamsi Ssangmundong

 

Seperti halnya “Rumah Masa Depan”, dan tentunya drama yang jadi inspirasinya “Three Families Under One Roof” (“Hanjiboong Segajok”) (maaf, buat yang ini saya gak punya pengetahuan apapun kecuali referensi dari forum Soompi http://forums.soompi.com/en/topic/346174-drama-2015-answer-me-1988-%EC%9D%91%EB%8B%B5%ED%95%98%EB%9D%BC-1988/?page=2), R88 komplit menghadirkan hubungan di antara mak-bapak-anak, kakak-adik, tetangga, teman, de el el de el el. Hubungan manusia sehari-hari, pre-gadget era. Masa ketika dimana saat kita mau main, tinggal keluar rumah, berdiri di depan pagar tetangga, terus teriak-teriak panggil namanya tanpa perlu janjian playdate. Atau di kalau di kasusnya akamsi Ssangmundong ini, main gerebek kamarnya Taek (si super manis Park Bo Gum). Kakak adik gantian nongkrongin telfon rumah dengan saling ancam, “Jangan lama-lama lu, gua lagi nungguin telfon!” Tetangga dari saling kirim makanan, pinjam bahan masakan, sampai pinjam uang buat tambal sulam kondisi finansial yang kembang kempis. Manis, tapi gak kemanisan. Menyentuh, tapi gak cengeng. Pas. Seperti menikmati pisang goreng dan teh manis hangat di teras rumah sore hari.

R88 juga sepertinya tidak merasa perlu untuk menghadirkan ide-ide besar, justru kekuatannya terletak pada kesederhanaan. Anak bete karena ortu (seperti) pilih kasih, abege curi-curi nonton bokep, pensiun dini, sampai menopause segala dibahas di R88. Penggarapan detail semua aspek yang nyaris tanpa cela menempatkan R88, bersama dengan Heard It Through The Grapevine, sebagai salah satu drama Korea terbaik di daftar drako kesukaan saya.

Oke lanjut. Bicara tentang “membangkitkan kenangan” tentu gak aci (cuma anak lama yang ngerti istilah ini) kalau kita gak membicarakan tentang budaya populer yang tadi sempat disinggung secuil sebelumnya. Jika film “Architecture 101” menghidupkan kembali tren 90an di kebudayaan populer Korea Selatan, R88 sepertinya justru terinspirasi atau mungkin memanfaatkan gelombang tren 80an yang tahun lalu melanda dunia K-Pop (check out SHINee’s “Married To The Music”, my personal favourite album of 2015 and Wonder Girls’ “I Feel You”, with  MV which looks like a today’s copy of Robert Palmer’s “Addicted To Love”). Soundtrack R88 bahkan merajai tangga-tangga lagu Korea Selatan selama beberapa minggu

 

SHINee – Love Sick

Wonder Girls – I Feel You

 

Generasi X dan secuil generasi Y mungkin masih inget celana baggy, kemeja gombrong, nintendo, keriting papan, poni trap (poni traaaaap!!!), LA Gear & Nike Air Jordan? Semua hadir di R88. Salah satu episodenya bahkan memperlihatkan bagaimana Deok Seon membentuk poni trap-nya. That one really hits home, LOL. Gimana Deok Seon ngakalin celananya yang lurus jadi baggy juga manis sekali. Karena keluarganya bukan keluarga berada dan selalu kekurangan secara finansial, Deok Seon (kayaknya) gak punya banyak baju, sepatu pun harus nunggu giliran ada uang untuk diganti. Untuk mengakali supaya tetap trendy (bahaha, aku gak percaya pake kata ini lagi), Deok Seon melipat sisi luar celana jeansnya lalu melipat bagian bawah ke atas.Voilà! Jadi deh celana baggy. Sangat inspirasional!

Mirip-mirip malam keluarga kita dulu menonton “Gita Remaja” atau “Berpacu Dalam Melodi”, setiap tahun semua keluarga di Ssangmundong ini gak absen nongkrongin kompetisi MBC College Musicians Festival, yang tahun 1988 itu dimenangkan oleh Infinite Track (무한궤도) dari Seoul National, Yonsei dan Sogang University

Infinite Track (무한궤도) – To You (그대에게)

Infinite Track waktu itu sepertinya membawa angin segar ke dunia musik Korea Selatan dengan aliran rock proggresive-nya, sedikit berbeda dari tren umum yang masih didominasi pop melankolis. Cukup menarik membaca bahwa ini pun dipengaruhi faktor politik masa itu. Rasa synth kuat dalam musik Infinite Track (yang merupakan cikal bakal N.E.X.T) ini juga kita temukan di band-band jazz fusion Indonesia circa 80an, seperti EmeraldKarimata dan Krakatau (mohon dikoreksi kalau salah, maklum ingatan semi-berkarat).

Emerald Band – Ronggeng

 

Referensi barat di film ini mungkin lebih akrab buat penonton Indonesia, seperti grup NKOTB, film “Dirty Dancing”, lagu tema “MacGyver” dan “Knight Rider” serta tidak ketinggalan lagu “Nothing’s Gonna Change My Love For You”-nya George Benson/Glenn Medeiros.

        “Nothing’s Gonna Change My Love For You”. Lagu wajib darmawisata

 

R88 juga tidak melewatkan peristiwa-peristiwa penting bersejarah dalam kehidupan sosial ekonomi politik Korea Selatan pada masa itu, seperti Olimpiade Seoul dan restrukturisasi Bank Hanil, walaupun beberapa detail sepertinya rada keteteran. Misalnya pada kasus Bo Ra (Ryu Hye Young), kakak Deok Seon yang adalah aktivis mahasiswa. Dari blog Following Kpop;

“But the show creators turned her into an important activist who goes out of her way to participate in the occupation of the Minjeong Party headquarters in Episode 5. According to an Ize article, this event was expected to be violent and the participants went in knowing that they would all be arrested. It would have been very unlikely for a female college sophomore to have gone in and come out in one piece. In addition, the event was organized by a group to which Bo-ra’s school Seoul National University did not belong at the time due to an ideological rift. She must have felt very strongly about the event to have joined it on her own and wouldn’t have come back home to hide under a blanket.”

Dengan topik yang beragam dan materi yang kuat, R88 tidak takut akan durasi tiap episodenya yang tergolong panjang. Jika hampir semua drama Korea berdurasi kurang lebih 1 jam per episode, R88 berdurasi rata-rata 1,5 jam per episodenya, bahkan hampir mencapai 2 jam di episode-episode terakhir. Durasi yang panjang ternyata toh tetap membuat penonton manteng di depan TV. Ini dibuktikan dengan pencapaian rating yang memecahkan rekor rating tertinggi sepanjang masa untuk TV kabel, yaitu 18,8% untuk episode finalnya. Rating rata-rata TV kabel biasanya tidak mencapai 2 digit, tidak seperti TV umum. 

Walaupun R88 ini kocaknya ampun-ampunan, rasanya belum pernah selama ngikutin drama Korea di tiap episode pasti saya punya sesi mewek.  Seduapuluh-puluhnya!

Tulisan ini pertama kali diterbitkan di sini.