The IPMANISATION of Dato' Meor's character played brilliantly by Beto Kushairi is complete. Pablo Picasso said, good artists copy, great artists steal. T.S. Elliot also said, immature poets immitate, mature poets steal.
Perhaps the IPMANISATION practice could be given more depth in term of writing. What we have now is just a 'facade' of it is Malay, Silat and the period it is taking place.
I cannot remember who said it but, if after a film length (in this case two), your character is the same in the beginning and in the end, then it is not a good character writing.
I am not a scholar on Dato' Meor's autobiography, but I think that is the unwritten rule on character writing necessary to bring the audience for a ride of character building and growth.
Even to the length of doing a film about the PMX, it is still very much a fiction. For example, the scene where Anwar Ibrahim confronted himself in the jail cell did not happen in real life. But our society are experts in taking things literally, literally.
But thats for another write-up.
One huge missed opportunity is on the very first scene in the first Gayong film when Dato' Meor's master (Panglima Merah played by Ebby Saiful) was beaten. The whole film could've been an intro to who Dato' Meor is before he got into Silat. And the character growth and phases he faces (learning from a mentor archetype, Panglima Merah)
A complete character arc. Hero's Journey 101.
Some famous characters in film history (that I grew up with) gone through the same phase. A couple of significant example - Bruce Lee and Rocky. These characters too, have mentors.
Here's something that I've been wanting to write since I've watch the first Gayong film, but decided to wait until I complete with Gayong 2 (which I did, thanks Netflix)
Like I've said earlier, if your character is the same from act 1 to act 3, it is not a good character for literature. First reason, because its boring. Imagine Frodo from LOTR is the same happy Hobbit at the end of LOTR 3.
Bruce Lee, Rocky and Frodo characters serves the archetype character. Dato' Meor's character in Gayong and Gayong 2 is a stereotype. The IPMANISATION is the main cause. The second cause is the non-existant character arc. The third reason is too political to be said here yet for those who are observant enough on what is didactic and not so subtly preached all along the film would be able to catch it easily.
Even the death of Rambo's character in First Blood was fortunately cancelled so they could use that archetype and turn it to a stereotype to serve Hollywood and also the US Military complex agendas.
Yes. Do not underestimate the scale (not only the physical size) of cinema! Think before you project! (and let the correct ppl do it!)
Oh another aspect is the camerawork. Bruce Lee is not a big person is real life. But it is the camera treatment in his films made him look larger than life (and made him an immortal). Beto's appearance and posture made him look same size as other characters, if not smaller. No problem adding some creativity to the moves! Bruce Lee do not fight with the same moves (and wataaa sound) in real life as in movies! Its fiction people!
Anyways.
Last but not least is the usage of the 'MacGuffin' writing device (even when it comes to Dato' Meor!). Spoiler warning: In the act three of Gayong 2, Dato' Meor and his squad does a raid on the drug cartel. And on the next day, he joyfully goes to work without even minutely thinking what consequences would that raid brings - most probably to his family.
And yes, as any good 'MacGuffin' does, the drug gang revenged on Dato' Meor family and that drove the story forward with him rampaging the area (for the second time, Terminator-style) and saving his wife (of course)
(Yes, theres a scene showing Dato' Meor sensing the danger when he was at work. But a little 'tilikan' wouldnt hurt right, mr. writer. Or even better, some 'pagar' efforts?)
There is another box office topping 'MacGuffin' that was showing during the Hari Raya holidays this year. A mat rempit who won the illegal street race showdown with a gangsta drug lord, happily spend the next day dating with his girlfriend, without even minutely thinking of retaliation from the other side. That is of course, to drive the story forward lah otherwise the protagonist mat rempit archyetype wont get his malaikat (angel) label.
This leads me to the 1988 writing of Prof. Dr. Syed Hussein Alatas for Dewan Masyarakat entitled 'Bebalisme I'. It is where he says,
'Seorang bebalis tiada daya menduga kejadian terlebih dahulu. Mereka selalunya beraksi hanya setelah sesuatu kejadian berlaku. Dengan perkataan lain berpayung hanya setelah ditimpa hujan.'
Basically saying a bebalis is someone who has no ability to gauge (or evaluate or reckon) or forsees what is coming. They usually act only when the thing has befelled onto them.
Unfortunately, this type of character has been normalised for our screen, for the sake of propaganda (nothing wrong with propaganda and cinema, just do it properly lah) and ticket collection. There goes the function of ethos in cinemas. Kudos!
