I am not surprised that the film had to have 10 minutes cut, thus changing its content and meaning, before it could be screened as R21 in Singapore, limiting the audience who can catch it. I'm not an advocate of censorship, being an aspiring editor myself, but I see the need for it to be rated with scenes of full frontal nudity, drugs smuggling and self mutilation.
I watched Cut, Royston's short, an interesting response to the banning and cutting of this film first. & I simply had to catch 15 for myself.
I was stunned by the depth of the film, its rawness at portraying how these unprofessional actors off the street, who are truly living life like this is something refreshing and unprecedented for Singapore.
I think the journey was interesting for Royston himself, like how the film got me to think about societal norms and the people who fall through them, neglected by society and the people who so claim to be civilised and forgiving towards those who make mistakes
This opening sequence was thought provoking and very symbolic, the young gangsters in the desert and metaphorically dying in this barren land, with little hope except each other's company and promise of brotherhood.
I loved the idea of the arrow as something that they fight for and representative of their hopes for the future.
The opening titles resound throughout the film in the same red and font type, creating uniformity across the film.
I find the combination of rap, music and gangster chants very refreshing and insightful. Yet Royston playfully mocks it by inserting their transition into a Japanese love song for the performance.
Throughout the whole film, the theme of loyalty and brotherhood is prevalent, there are many scenes of them spending time together, standing up for one another, taking revenge for others and being willing to stand by each other's side, dead or alive.
Pain is often portrayed as it is, with almost documentary like footage of them getting piercings/ giving each other piercings and the truth of it scares the audience, that such things are really happening, these youths are really harming themselves physically.
I particularly like the metaphorical meaning of the shot above, of the gangsters being entrapped by societal norms and jailed in others' negative perception of them. To balance that, I don't think what they do is right, but they need definitely more concern and care rather than judgmental attitudes and severe punishment without any counselling or guidance.
The newsflash above is particularly comical as it lists vulgarities as a form or record breaking, which is both mocking and disturbing.
I find this suicide scene particularly disturbing, the audience is not allowed to run away from it but we see her face in close-up and we are confronted with the truth of what stress is doing to the youths. & also, the vulnerability of the youths these days who are not able to be resilient to changes and challenges.
The contrast after seeing this horrible sight is mocking as the two guys then continue with their lives and even put on facial masks.
The portrayal of gang fights as arcade games might appear to trivalise the severity of the consequences, but it provides relief for the audience from the film's serious & provocative tone.
This comic-like feel is also brought out in the sequence where the film turns into animation and is like a suicide manual. It reminds us of the kind of sadism in Happy Tree Friends.
Much as we know it is unreal and sometimes unrealistic, it also presents another perspective: the stupidity of suicide and taking one's own life.
Vynn's quest to look for a suitable place to jump and the exaggerated nature in which he nits and picks every building until he found the Esplanade, which is the prime location, portrays the warped state of mind of youths when they make such decisions.
Also, the use of the long take of time reversal as he cries on the bus, passing the sights of Singapore prolongs his suffering in actual screen time and we are able to sympathise with him more.
The film also contains two significant scenes where the boys are being stared at by people who appear to be "better off" than them. Firstly, the "ang moh" boys who are not able to speak chinese even though they are Chinese, who provoked a cat for no reason and despise the two boys. Secondly, the English speaking working woman who deems herself to be higher up than them.
Although such staring incidents must be true to a large extent and there is some fault of the youths in choosing to look so unlike students, but these scenes portray the reality: the prejudice people have against them, because they are different and are unable to thrive under our education system.
Sex and female objectification is rampant in the film. The boys are shown to be watching porn in two scenes and they even brought a sex doll out on the streets.
There are many photographs of nude women in their room and though there are no overt sex scenes, these function as an integral part of their male dominated life.
The ending with what happened to the characters once again blurs the boundaries between reality and fiction and the audience is left hanging, wondering if the film was entirely true.
The articles shown from real newspaper articles also point to the truth that such is what is happening in our society as we speak. How much of the film is exaggeration? & what about the scenes that were shot documentary style? Were they not true?
I think Royston has done a great job in portraying the misunderstandings and pain these youths go through, with his creative use of rap, camera techniques like slow motion and these in-your-face violence and nudity. As such, 15 is a film much unlike other coming of age films, but without much clear narrative, it is a film that pretty much defies genre conventions.
References:
http://www.filmcritic.com/reviews/2003/15/
http://anutshellreview.blogspot.com/2005/08/screen-singapore-15.html
http://www.timeout.com/film/reviews/66605/15.html
No comments:
Post a Comment