Pengepungan di Bukit Duri

Thrilling seat-edger, but drags nowhere.

As a long-time admirer of Joko Anwar's work, I watched a critic's review ahead of this release, which described him as one of Indonesia's most distinctive and promising directors, though it also suggested that his growth as a filmmaker may be distancing him from the essence that once defined his style. Having seen most of his entire filmography, I consider Pintu Terlarang and Pengabdi Setan 2 to be his most compelling, narratively coherent, and innovative works within their competitors. I've observed his tendency to deliberately distort the plot, seemingly to provoke discussion, which can be effective if it leads to meaningful resolution. Pengepungan di Bukit Duri marks his third consecutive work where I've questioned his overall quality and growth as a well-known Indonesian director, yet the consistently high expectations surrounding his work compel me to reconsider whether my critical stance might stem from a biased perspective rather than a true decline in his creative output.

Pengepungan di Bukit Duri. Discrimination. Violence. The only elements which dominate the film to such an extent that little else emerges from the narrative. While the main message has been conveyed early on, the plot's development feels constricted, resulting in a two-hour runtime that often drags in its attempt to deliver a point of social critique. From my perspective, Joko Anwar consistently excels in crafting compelling premises and captivating the first act, which successfully keeps the audience with intrigue. However, his recent works, including this one, tend to lose strength in the second act and stall entirely by the third. It increasingly feels like his plots start with great premise, only to lose momentum midway, leaving some spectators confused and unsatisfied. By the time I reached the third act, I found myself mentally overwhelmed by a relentless stream of conflict, both from the storyline and audiovisual design, without any pause of resolution. This continuous barrage creates a draining viewing experience. The film's sensitive content teeters between feeling authentic and artificial. Its buildup and visualization of certain acts lacks uniqueness to his other work, making it feel unnecessary and repetitive.

Some characters create gaps between the smoothness of the overall delivery, specifically Diana, which raises a great question about her mysteriousness and clarity of the character. For some followers of Joko Anwar's work, you must know what this mystery is related to.

That said, in terms of technical execution, Joko and his team remain exceptional. The production design, cinematography, and overall visual coherence are executed with a level of craftsmanship that commands respect. Even when the narrative falters, the visual presentation remains captivating which reinforces a good impression of a thoughtfully-made project. The audio design, which features a throbbing bass segment, dynamic action effects, and meticulous stereo mixing, enhances the immersive quality of the film and adds emotional depth, serving as a reminder of Joko's continued strength in sensory storytelling.

As a thriller, this movie is amazing. It really made me tense in some scenes to the point I didn't even want to look at the screen. The actors are also amazing. Sometimes some build up tension is ruined by the actors but most of the actors here actually helped with making the scenes even more intense. They executed the scenes well. The music for this song is awesome. Most of them are very catchy. Despite not being horror, I find this story to be very scary in a psychological way. Ghosts and other spirits might be scary, but nothing is scarier than mankind. Everything that happened in this movie could happen in real life, and I find that makes the story much more scarier.

The intro to the movie is amazing. It made me intrigued, it looked promising. But then a huge time jump happened (17 years) and the story starts falling apart from there. At first, it was about racism. Then as the story progresses, it starts to focus less and less on the racism; instead, it starts focusing on gore, brutality and the violence. I can tell they were trying to tell a message, but it falls short as the ending was shown abruptly. Many questions were unanswered and yet the story already ended. Maybe they were trying to show the dangers of racism, but I would've preferred if the ending had a complete conclusion to the story instead of just ending it when there's so many unexplained things.

(spoiler warning from here!!)

I really don't like how the two girls (the only girls in the story) immediately fell in love with the mc at first sight. Don't get me started on this pick-me teacher. If they made her a strong type of woman that's independent and can fight on her own, that would've made the story more interesting. But instead, she's obviously just a female love candidate for Edwin and she does nothing to help him. She studies psychology and it was never utilized. It's such a missed opportunity. If she could've done something useful rather than just waiting and depending on Edwin, it would've made the story and their dynamic much more interesting.

The other one is the girl Edwin met at the bar. She was an obvious love candidate for Edwin too. Cheering him up, and then getting upset when she saw him bringing another woman in the bar, only to disappear forever from the story after that. I wish the story gave an explanation to what happened to her, otherwise this scene just feels unnecessary and adds nothing to whole plot. If you're going to introduce a character that's going to disappear after two scenes, might as well not add them. (Do they know about The Bechdel Test...)

I do like the shaky camera effect when Jeffrey was bullying the random student. It makes it seem like we're watching a live video of a bullying. Though some of the camera angles are a bit awkward. During the time when Edwin was talking to his sister, it was supposed to be emotional. But the awkward cuts and pause from the sister talking to just a shot of Edwin with tears in his eyes just felt very stiff. Some of the scene change was also very sudden and didn't flow smoothly with the previous scene.

The way they were stalling the door scene for so long actually makes me so sick of it. At this point, I'm begging them to just kick down the door. I know they're terrified, but they couldn't utilize all of that time behind the door to actually searching the room for exits? Instead of just going back and forth arguing with Jeffrey, and being like "I should open the door," "No, you shouldn't!" again and again. I wish the tension could've been spread into other locations as well instead of spending what felt to be like 45 minutes behind the door.

Some of the sfx were a bit much. It sounded too gore-y in a way I can't explain well with words. The vfx for the blood splatters as well. It was too exaggerated. The way the blood splatters like hand sanitizer spray when they were being slashed with a long knife... It was unnatural and not very realistic.

I wish there was subtitles for this movie. Some of the words they were saying weren't that clear, I just had to assume what is happening. I don't know if every movie theater is the same, but mine didn't have any subtitles.

Finally, the questions that were left unanswered in the end of the movie. First, how did a child get into an abandoned place and saved the student that was being bullied at the start? I understand they were trying to portray how, despite their differences, they helped each other. But it just felt so sudden and it doesn't make any sense why a child would wander into an abandoned place all alone and coincidentally know which door to unlock to save the student. Next, what happened to the bar? What happened to some of the other characters in this movie? Like the principal for example. He never appeared again after expelling Jeffrey. What happened to Christo and the teacher when they escaped? They disappeared after that. Especially the most important question, who is Edwin's nephew? Maybe it was answered in the end but it wasn't that clear (since, again, my movie theater did not have any subtitles) so I'm assuming it's Jeffrey? I'm still confused.

Overall, the movie is really great as a thriller. The actors are also great. But I wished they could've told the story better, and especially for the ending. I wish it had a complete conclusion instead of leaving the viewers hanging.

A visceral and unflinching descent into the darkest corners of racial hatred and societal neglect, Joko Anwar's The Siege at Thorn High is a powerful, albeit uneven, action-thriller. Known for his mastery of the horror genre, Anwar steps into a different arena, using a gritty, high-octane premise to deliver a searing critique of deep-seated prejudices in Indonesian society. The result is a film that is both relentlessly brutal and deeply thought-provoking, though its narrative ambition sometimes outpaces its execution.

The film opens with a harrowing prologue set during the 1998 racial riots in Jakarta, where a young Edwin (Morgan Oey) witnesses the brutal assault on his sister. The trauma of this event echoes through the film, driving Edwin on a mission in 2027 to find his nephew, the child born from that horrific incident. His search leads him to Thorn High, a school for juvenile delinquents that more closely resembles a prison. Here, Edwin finds himself a minority, a Chinese-Indonesian teacher in a hostile environment ruled by the volatile and deeply prejudiced student leader, Jefri (Omara Esteghlal). The tension builds with the simmering resentment between Edwin and Jefri, culminating when a new wave of riots erupts, trapping them and a handful of students inside the school.

The true strength of The Siege at Thorn High lies in its fearless exploration of its themes. It's a raw and confrontational look at systemic prejudice and the cyclical nature of violence. The film doesn't shy away from the brutality, and Anwar's direction, reminiscent of The Raid's visceral action choreography, makes the violence feel impactful and earned. The school, with its claustrophobic halls and barricaded classrooms, becomes a crucible where years of racial animosity and personal trauma collide. The performances, particularly Esteghlal's turn as the detestable but complex Jefri, are a highlight. He embodies the rage and ignorance that are a product of his surroundings, making him a compelling, if deeply unlikable, antagonist.

However, the film is not without its flaws. The pacing in the second act can be sluggish, with repetitive verbal confrontations between Edwin and Jefri that stall the momentum of the siege. While the plot point of Edwin's missing nephew is the emotional core of the film, its execution can feel like an afterthought, and the revelation is a twist that some viewers may find perplexing. The film's message, while vital and powerful, is at times presented with a bluntness that leaves little room for subtlety. The social commentary is so transparent that it can feel like a lecture rather than an organic part of the narrative.

Despite these shortcomings, The Siege at Thorn High is a film that demands to be seen. It's not a fun or easy watch; it's a grueling emotional and physical gauntlet. Yet, it serves as a powerful and necessary social critique, a warning that history will repeat itself if unhealed national trauma is left to fester. Anwar has created a film that is both a propulsive action-thriller and a grim reflection on the corrosive power of hatred. It's a bold and important work from one of Indonesia's most exciting filmmakers, and its final moments, as brutal as they are, offer a haunting sense of tragic completion.

I honestly don't understand the negative reviews here. This film delivers strong acting, excellent cinematography, and a very convincing portrayal of chaos and fear. The performances feel raw and human, and the visuals really pull you into the atmosphere of that dark moment in history.

Some people criticize it for "not reflecting Indonesia today," but that completely misses the point. This is a fictional film inspired by historical events - it's not a documentary, nor is it meant to represent current Indonesia. Its purpose is to tell a story, to evoke emotions, and to remind us of the human cost behind tragedy.

As a piece of cinema, it succeeds: the acting is solid, the direction is thoughtful, and the tension feels real. Instead of comparing it with today's reality, we should appreciate it for what it is - a well-crafted film that dares to revisit painful history through the lens of fiction.

I believe it deserves much more credit than it's getting here.

About a teacher named Edwin who searches for his sister's child, who was raped. It's set in a dystopian era with riots everywhere. Inspired by the racist riots against the Chinese in 1998.

The visuals are quite impressive, with Jokan's graphic, gory scenes. From beginning to end, we see slashings, stabbings, and burnings-all of them fantastically brutal. Personally, I was watching it with a shiver of joy and wincing.

Personally, i expected plenty of action. However, the transitions between the stories felt slow, and many of my expectations felt unfulfilled. Even so, Jokan managed to deliver another jaw-dropping ending.

In the end, this film successfully depicts and critiques all forms of racial issues that have occurred in Indonesia and also portrays the deplorable morality of schoolchildren. Whether it's violence or offensive language (ajg, bgst, ngentot)-it's all truly present here.

Anyway, keep this up, Bang Jokan!