It's hard to "review" a movie like "The Look of Silence". You don't really watch it and evaluate it like you do anything else. You bear witness.I have never been able to write anything about its prequel, "The Act of Killing". I broke my rule of reviewing every movie I watch on here because I just wasn't up to the task. Watching that movie, and "The Look of Silence" to a slightly lesser extent, was like being dosed with heroin and hit with a sledgehammer. The usual "disturbing" movie, documentary or otherwise, has an impact that can be shaken off eventually. With "The Act of Killing", I never really felt it, but I knew it was there. It took something from me. The impact bled through into my day to day life. It wasn't just like a bad dream. It was real.Here is "The Look of Silence". It gives a different side of the story that "Act of Killing" presented, through the son of survivors of the Indonesian genocide. He learns about the fate of his older brother, killed two years before his birth. Then he confronts some of the killers and their families, though these meetings don't go as you might expect, especially for the son, Adi.This movie really should be watched alongside "The Act of Killing". Whereas "The Look of Silence" is no less horrible in its descriptions of actual murder, I have a feeling that it is the goodness of Adi and his family you will remember.

Directed by Joshua Oppenheimer, this Indonesian film is seen as almost a sequel, more a companion piece, to his previous Oscar winning documentary The Act of Killing, and it was one I had to see when it came to awards season. Basically a middle-aged man, whose brother was murdered during Indonesian killings of 1965–66, a purge of "communists", confronts the men who did the killings. For safety and concern for the man, he and man of the film's production crew are not fully identified, they are only credited as "anonymous". The film includes the man watching (what appears to be) extra footage from The Act of Killing, and video of the men who killed his brother. The man later visits some of the killers and their collaborators, including his uncle, who is pretending to have an eye exam, none of the killers appear to show any remorse, the daughter of one of them looks shaken hearing the details of the killings for the first time. Where the director's previous delivered many shocking moments and haunting footage of the real-life genocide, this follow-up film leaves most of the imagery to your imagination, there were certainly some terrible scenes of the killers admitting their crimes and almost smiling about it, and other horrible discussions, but not a lot is seen, you could argue this is a good thing and makes it less hard to watch and less shocking, but it is still an interesting documentary film. It was nominated the Oscar for Best Documentary. Very good!

'THE LOOK OF SILENCE': Four and a Half Stars (Out of Five)A companion piece to director Joshua Oppenheimer's 2013 critically acclaimed documentary flick 'THE ACT OF KILLING'. The film centers around one man, who's brother was killed; during the Indonesian killings of 1965 to 1966. Oppenheimer once again directed the movie; which was nominated for an Academy Award, for Best Documentary Feature. I found it to be almost as good, as Oppenheimer's previous feature (which I ranked as one of the best of 2013). Oppenheimer follows an Indonesian man around, that survived the 1965 genocide; by the name of Adi Rukun. Adi's brother, Ramli, was brutally killed; during the 'communist' purge (as a young boy). Adi now wants to confront Ramli's suspected killers (with Oppenheimer's help). He bravely interviews these men, under the pretense of an eye examiner, and seeks uncomfortable answers; as the viewer awkwardly watches. The movie is extremely disturbing, and hard to watch; like it's predecessor. It's also very moving, at times, but never truly satisfying; as Adi can never truly get the honest answers he's looking for (and the suspected culprits show no remorse, of any kind). It's yet another masterpiece, from Oppenheimer; but some will feel like it's just an extension of the other film. That didn't bother me though.watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: https://youtu.be/A1MyBFioKXM

The Look of Silence is Joshua Oppenheimer's follow-up to his fascinating documentary The Act of Killing, which dealt with the legacy of massacres of so-called Communists by paramilitary groups and their followers in Indonesia in 1965. This time Oppenheimer focuses in on an optometrist, Adi Rukun, who goes around interviewing various men and their family members involved in the 1965 massacres, some of whom were directly involved in the murder of his older brother. As in the Act of Killing, the murderers are well-known pillars of their community, proudly boasting about their role in the massacres. Oppenheimer utilizes footage from the Act of Killing which Rukun looks at on a TV screen. In one sequence, the main killer of the man's brother, along with an accomplice friend, are interviewed at the very spot where the brother was murdered. They joke about how they killed the brother which involved cutting off his genitals and slitting his throat.Rukun interviews another killer who soon objects to his "political questions." He cuts the interview off as it's clear he doesn't like dealing with the moral questions that are being raised. The killer is vague about how the victims were identified as Communists. At one point he mentions that they failed to attend the local mosque for prayer services. He also mentions that there were rumors of some people having extramarital affairs which would have implicated them as "bad people." It soon becomes obvious that virtually anyone could have been accused of being a Communist back then. The victims might have been a collection of all types of people from varying socio-economic classes: union activists, non-religious people, those accused by neighbors trying to settle a score, and thousands who were completely apolitical and had no affiliation with Communism.The demented nature of the killers became clear when more than person being interviewed admitted that they drank their victim's blood. They did so, according to these men, because if they didn't, they would have gone "crazy." Family members of the perpetrators often claimed no knowledge that their kin were involved in the massacres. Some of these people stated that the past needed to be left alone and a few even implied that those who persisted in looking at the past could be subject to retaliation in the present day.Eventually Rukun pays a call on his uncle who worked as a prison guard in 1965. The uncle had no guilt feelings as to his role in the massacres and claimed that since he didn't kill anyone directly, he bore no responsibility for the killings. When Rukun informs his mother of this, she's incredulous that her brother may have been involved in the death of her son.In addition to the various killers interviewed, we also meet Rukun's centenarian father who is blind and almost deaf as well as his mother who harbors a great deal of bitterness over her neighbors who have escaped the bar of justice.Between The Act of Killing and The Look of Silence, the former has more of an overall impact. James Lattimer writing in Slant gets to the root of the problem with Oppenheimer's current approach: "With the previous film and most of this one already having repeatedly plumbed the depths of depravity with which such killings were carried out, it's hard to understand why the protagonist needs to be placed in such a manifestly wrenching position, aside from a salacious desire to have his reaction on camera."Despite reservations as to the way the material is presented, The Look of Silence remains a fascinating glimpse into the mindset of people who have committed horrendous crimes and escaped the bar of justice.