Akbar Yumni adalah seorang kritikus di Jurnal Footage dan kurator filem, juga peneliti lepas untuk Dewan Kesenian Jakarta. \u00a0Sedangkan Michael Baute adalah seorang penulis, pengajar, dan sering mengadakan seminar mengenai filem dan seni di berbagai universitas.<\/p>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/arkipel.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/panel-2-2.jpg?resize=1140%2C760\")
Kiri ke Kanan: Akbar Yumni, Afrian Purnama, Michael Baute<\/p><\/div>\n
Garis besar panel \u201cKritisisme Filem dan Lembaga Perfileman<\/em>\u201d ini adalah bagaimana posisi kritik filem terhadap institusi filem yang memiliki estetika bahkan elemen sensornya sendiri. Juga kebutuhan untuk meluaskan lingkungan kritik, dan hubungan antara lembaga formal dan informal dalam kritik filem.<\/p>\n Pembicara pertama adalah Akbar Yumni. Akbar menyatakan bahwa kritik sendiri termasuk dalam ekosistem perfileman. Kritikus\u00a0 adalah penanda penting dalam medan sosial seni, termasuk filem dan seni rupa. Estetika karya seni tersebut akan ditopang oleh teori. Maka kritik menjadi penting sebagai aspek yang menopang apa itu seni, membantu membedakannya dari karya-karya yang lain.<\/p>\n Akbar juga percaya bahwa kritik mampu merumuskan identitas nasional. Salah satu contoh yang ia berikan adalah Perancis. Pada tahun 1960an, kritik Perancis berkembang berbarengan dengan kultur perfileman negara tersebut dan melahirkan suatu estetika yang berkembang menjadi identitas nasionalnya. Sedangkan di Indonesia sekarang, kritik yang seharusnya menjadi bagian dari ekosistem produksi filem, justru terpisahkan seolah menjadi media yang berbeda.<\/p>\n Hafiz, salah satu partisipan forum dalam sesi diskusi<\/p><\/div>\n Dengan bangkitnya blog dan situs publikasi lainnya, banyak yang mengaku dirinya sebagai kritik meskipun dengan latar pendidikan di luar perfileman. \u00a0Ulasan filem yang muncul kemudian bukan dari kacamata akademis, tetapi kacamata publik. Akbar menjelaskan pengertian ini dengan membandingkan pembuatan filem dulu dan sekarang.<\/p>\n Dulu, karena mengunakan analog, kesalahan harus minim karena keterbatasan medium. Karena itu, pembuat filem harus disiplin. Beda dengan zaman digital sekarang, di mana pembuatan filem menjadi lebih cair dan seolah tidak memerlukan disiplin seperti dulu. Ini semua mempengaruhi pengertian sinema yang terus berubah.<\/p>\n Setelah Akbar berbicara, Michael diberikan kesempatan oleh sang moderator. Pada topik ini, Michael lebih berfokus kepada pengertian dan lingkungan kritisisme di Eropa dan Jerman. Dia mendukung pernyataan Akbar sebelumnya bahwa dunia kritik di Perancis sudah sangat berkembang. Berkat ini, Michael lebih mudah mengakses berbagai karya tulis kritikus Perancis yang kemudian mendorong ketertarikannya terhadap dunia filem.<\/p>\n Sebelum melanjutkan pembicaraannya, Michael menjelaskan terlebih dahulu perbedaan antara kritik filem dan ulasan. Ulasan biasanya lebih ditemukan di koran atau majalah, dan menyasar interaksi dengan penonton untuk memberitahukan kilasan mengenai plot cerita tersebut. Sedangkan kritik filem lebih mengarah ke aspek sastra dan teori dalam filem. Kritik adalah tentang apa yang dialami penonton saat menonton sebuah filem.<\/p>\n Yang justru kerap menjadi kendala, menurut Michael, adalah bagaimana menginstitusikan orang-orang yang mengerjakan kritik filem ini. Pembuatan institusi menjadi penting dalam rangka membuat sistem yang lebih awet dan berkelanjutan.<\/p>\n Perbandingan dunia kritik filem antara Indonesia dan Jerman lebih terlihat lagi ketika moderator meminta Akbar dan Michael untuk menjelaskan keterhubungan lembaga negara dan kritik itu sendiri. Akbar menjelaskan bagaimana lembaga negara masih belum berani untuk berinvestasi pada wilayah kritik yang mana bersifat eksperimentatif. Sedangkan di Jerman, dengan pemerintahan sipilnya terutama di Jerman Barat, pembangunan institusi perfileman dapat terjadi dengan dukungan pemerintah. Dengan dukungan tersebut, infrastruktur budaya perfilemannya pun terbangun dengan kuat.***[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_tab][vc_tab title=”English” tab_id=”1503218961-2-58″][vc_column_text title=”Catatan Tentang Forum Festival Panel II” css=”.vc_custom_1533896061008{margin-bottom: 0px !important;}”]\n A Panel of Forum Festival was held this Wednesday (8\/8) at the GoetheHaus. Attended by 27 participants, the topic of discussion was about \u201cFilm Criticism and Film Institution\u201d. There were two speakers, the one from Indonesia was Akbar Yumni, and the other from Germany was Michael Baute. The moderator this time was Afrian Purnama.<\/p>\n Akbar Yumni is a film critic in Jurnal Footage, curator and also an independent researcher for the Jakarta Arts Council. Meanwhile, Michael Baute is a writer, educator, and has held many seminars regarding film and art in various universities.<\/p>\n Left to Right: Akbar Yumni, Afrian Purnama, Michael Baute<\/p><\/div>\n As the title suggests, \u201cFilm Criticism and Film Institution\u201d in this panel focuses on the position of film criticism toward the film institution that has their aesthetics and censorship, and the need to expand the environment surrounding criticism and the relationship between a formal and informal institution in the film criticism.<\/p>\n The first speaker was Akbar Yumni. Akbar stated that critics should become a part of the film production ecosystem. The critics are an essential signifier in the social field of film and art. The theory will support the aesthetic of the artworks. Thus criticism is necessary because it will sustain the understanding of what art is, and help to distinguish it from other works.<\/p>\n Akbar also believes that critics can help to formulate a national identity. In the case of France, for instance. In the 1960’s, France film criticism was growing along with their film culture, and it gave birth to a certain aesthetic that grew as their national identity in term of cinematic aesthetic. Whereas now in Indonesia, critics that should become a part of the film production ecosystem has been separated from it and seems to be a different media.<\/p>\n Ugeng T. Moetidjo, in Q&A session.<\/p><\/div>\n With the rise of blog writing and other online publications, many can claim themselves as film critics even if their educational background is not related to film. Later on, the film review that appears doesn\u2019t come from the academic standpoint, but rather through the public perspective. Akbar further explained this phenomenon by comparing filmmaking then and now.<\/p>\n In the past, filmmakers used the analogue medium to create their films, and the limitation of the medium made them worked carefully to minimise mistakes. Meanwhile, now, since almost everything is digital, the filmmaking process has shifted to be more flexible and as if not as precise as before. This situation has influenced the definition of cinema which also keeps changing.<\/p>\n After Akbar, the moderator gave Michael his chance to talk. Growing up in the 1980\u2019s, Michael was more focused on the understanding and environment of film criticism in Europe and Germany. He supported Akbar\u2019s statement from before that the French film criticism has been well developed. It has made his access to various works of French film criticism was easy, and later it encouraged his interest toward the film.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Before continuing, Michael first explained the difference between critic and review. A review usually is found in magazines or newspaper and aiming at the interaction with the audience by conveying a glimpse of the film\u2019s plot. Meanwhile, a film critic is more to a literary genre of the film and based on theory. It is mostly about what the audience experienced when they watch a film.<\/p>\n What might be a question to address, according to Michael, is how to organise these people who work on film criticism. The formation of the institution has become an essential matter to create a durable and sustainable system.<\/p>\n The difference between Indonesian and Germany film critic scene was more apparent when the moderator asked Akbar and Michael to explain the relationship between state institution and film criticism. Akbar explained how in Indonesia, the state institution is not brave enough to invest in something very abstract and experimental such as film criticism. Meanwhile in Germany, especially in West Germany, the development of film institution has been supported by the government.\u00a0 The infrastructure and the cinema culture, in this case, can grow with strength.<\/p>\n ***[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_tab][\/vc_tabs][\/vc_column][\/vc_row]\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A Panel of Forum Festival was held this Wednesday (8\/8) at the GoetheHaus. Attended by 27 participants, the topic of discussion was about \u201cFilm Criticism and Film Institution\u201d. There were two speakers, the one from Indonesia was Akbar Yumni, and the other from Germany was Michael Baute. The moderator this time was Afrian Purnama.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":145,"featured_media":8674,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"Notes on Forum Festival Panel II","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[479,1,307],"tags":[480,298,481,505],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"yoast_head":"\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/arkipel.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/panel-2-4-466x700.jpg?resize=466%2C700\")
Criticism and Institution: An Unstable Relationship<\/h2>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/arkipel.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/08\/panel-2-5-466x700.jpg?resize=466%2C700\")