ADA APA DENGAN CINTA 2: A “HELLO, HOW HAVE YOU BEEN” FROM AN OLD FRIEND

 Ada Apa dengan Cinta 2 Trailer

It is very rare for a movie to be able to capture the imagination of a generation. And when a bunch of filmmakers succeed in doing so, the movie itself transforms into something that is more than a 90-minute escapism. It becomes a culture. I do not need to go to great lengths to prove that “Ada Apa Dengan Cinta” (“What’s Up With Love”/“AADC”) is one such movie (in Indonesia at least). Almost everyone from my generation in Indonesia that I know of are familiar with the names “Rangga” (played by Nicholas Saputra in his screen debut) and “Cinta” (played by the perfect—and none of you can convince me otherwise—Dian Sastrowardoyo), even if they have not actually seen the film. A lot of people can recite the lines to the point where they become parodies (with the most popular ones being: “Salah gue? Salah…..(if you can fill in the blanks then I have proved my pseudo-theory)). A lot of people can immediately recognize the music whenever it is on. Some people may even remember phrases from the Rangga’s poems. The point is, when a movie (or any event, really) is blessed with being at the right place, and at right time, the target audience will eat it up, its stars will be typecasted, the storyline will be copied, and the lines and quotes will be etched in that generation’s mind for a long time as if they have been taught in school textbooks (which got me thinking, maybe the best way to get kids to voluntarily memorize some boring textbooks is by capturing their imagination, but I digress).

I am one of those people that were in awe of the film when it first reached Indonesia’s theaters in 2002. Back then, I was in high school and I did not understand what teenagers my age were talking about, what music they were listening to and where they hang out.  Basically I was like the Amish of my school. Imagine how I felt when I saw AADC on the big screen with hundreds of anak-anak gaul Jakarta (that’s Jakarta’s hip teenagers for you) who I assume have all experienced what Cinta experienced (the puppy love, the heartbreaks, the cliques, the hangouts, the concerts and the need to be accepted by their peers). It was like getting a crash course on “how Jakarta’s young people supposed to behave”. During the first minutes of the movie, I was dumbfounded at the dialogue between Cinta and her clique. I was shrinking in my seat when I saw how Cinta and her clique treated the school nerd, Mamet. I was terrified when—I imagine—that the teenagers watching the movie were nodding in agreement to all of the above. I remember thinking, “So those are what’s acceptable. That’s the way I should’ve talked to my peers.” It made me question whether I was ever human.

But then, as the plot progressed, the viewers were introduced to another character, Rangga, which was a loner and a cynic with a penchant for poems. He did not have any clique. He spent his time reading at the back of the school, and scoffed at the concept of “peer pressure” which teenagers subject themselves to. But even so, Cinta was almost immediately drawn to Rangga, like a cat to catnip, from the moment they met. And I just realized from a recent re-viewing of this film that Cinta was the one who orchestrated her subsequent meetings, dates and midnight strolls with him. Like a scientist who stumbled upon something mysterious, she wanted to know more. And surely, as with any boy and girl characters in any teen movie, they fell in love, albeit not without some memorable bickering in between. These bickering, is pivotal for me, as these are what made me like the movie. One of the standout arguments between Rangga and Cinta, for me, happened during the basketball scene, where Rangga approached Cinta to apologize about what he said during their first outing as frenemies in a traditional bookstore. I like their confrontation in this scene because each of them had valid points, and it made each Rangga and Cinta (and me), got that needed slap in the face. The heated exchange went something like this: Rangga called Cinta aside to talk privately during her friend’s basketball match. He apologized to her about his behavior the day before. She dismissively told him that she didn’t think about it anymore. However, seeing that the girl kept looking at the other direction while speaking, made Rangga called her out: “Why do you keep glancing to your friends the whole time you are talking to me? I bet they don’t like seeing me here, do they? You too are embarrased to be seen talking to me, aren’t you?”

When Cinta defensively responded that his thoughts are mean, Rangga went on, “I just wanted to read the minds of people like you and your friends.” Hearing this, Cinta’s anger intensified, “So now you can read our minds now can you? And that makes you have the right to judge us? Whose fault is it if you always feel uncomfortable in social settings? Is it my fault? My friends’ fault? You want to know what I think? I think you are out of your mind.”    

Bear in mind that the above is a loose paraphrasing of the original dialogue. That being said, at that time I could really imagine myself saying the things Rangga said. He faked self pity in front of Cinta so people like her and her group could not hurt him, because he got there first. She got great comebacks though, since it is true that Cinta and her “people” are not responsible for Rangga’s cynical view of the world.     

Back to the movie, I honestly think AADC is wonderful. Unlike, say, Hollywood teen movies, it transcends its genre. It is not drown is teen movie cliches. Even if there are cliches, they don’t feel like it when I watched it. The movie didn’t end in a party or a prom (although to be fair, it ended with a chase through the airport), the girl didn’t fall for the guy because he’s a jock or a rebel that needs fixing, neither of them have terminal illness, there is not bets (as in “he/she dating her/him is actually a bet made with his/her friends), no opposing families and they bonded over poetry and books, not due to their time spent during a detention or community service mandated by the school principal.

The music and the songs that fill the movie is exceptionally good too, to the point I can dare say that the film is, in part, a musical, even if none of the characters burst  into songs at any point in the movie. It is because the songs, rather than disrupting the scenes, are actually intensifying them. This, to me, can be clearly seen in the much cried over “farewell at the airport” scene when both characters professed their love to one another. The haunting and classical sounding “Suara Hati Seorang Kekasih” (“A Lover’s Desire—okay I just made it sounded like an X rated adult movie, but trust me, this song is good) were playing in the background and climaxed (sorry, couldn’t resist) just in time for Cinta and Rangga to  embrace each other for one last time.

That scene marked the last time Indonesian vievers saw Rangga, Cinta and her friends. However, acclaimed producer Mira Lesmana and Director Riri Riza pulled a “Before Sunset”/”Before Midnight” move, and made the sequel to AADC in 2016, fourteen years after the first movie broke into Indonesian big screens. It involves all the main characters of the first movie, namely Rangga, Cinta and her group of friends, living the life as thirtysomethings with all the perks and challenges it offers. The movie opens with Cinta and clique, still as tight as they were back then (now, do not misconstrue that), celebrating several milestones. There is an engagement, a pregnancy, and a recently clean and sober former addict (it goes to show that, life after a successful teen movie is indeed usually rough). To celebrate this milestone, the girls decide to go to Yogyakarta, a city in Central Java that is steeped in tradition, myth and culture, old-timey regalness, magnificent mountains, awe-inducing temples, honest to goodness food, laid back aura and friendly people (I cannot praise Yogyakarta enough. Anyone should visit this city at least once).     

In an act of serendipity, Rangga who since the end of the first movie, has been living in New York, decides to also come to Jogja (short for Yogyakarta) to finish some family matters. Long story short, they finally meet in Jogja and has the much needed talk to, not only catch up with what the other one has been doing for the last fourteen years, but also to get some explanation, some venting up, some acknowledgement and apologies, truce, and finally, closure, so they can move forward in life, be it together or otherwise.

I must admit, I quite like the idea of making the second movie sort of like a road movie. I like that the two former lovebirds are confined by (compelled by) time and space to quickly resolve their issues with one another. I imagine that, because they are not an item anymore and so many years have passed, they can really say hurtful things to one another and get on each other’s nerves like nobody’s business, when they feel like it, like people in long term relationships often do. This does not happen here though. There are some heated exchange of words (mostly courtesy of Cinta) of what happened in the past, but I feel like it is played for giggles and laughs (mind you, I think this is intentional) rather than realism.

This says about the tone of the movie. Maybe, in order to keep this film strictly on the sweet and romantic side, the filmmakers have decided to keep the “fights” in the romantic comedy territory. This made the sequel lost a bit of an edge when compared to the first one. After all, a little “You are so selfish” or “You lied” or “Why now?” are hardly comparable to a spot on piece of character dissection hurled by the two of them in the basketball scene in the first movie. But, this decision has made the movie into a simple and entertaining crowd pleaser while it last, even if it is not a mature or a substantive one.

A lot of props must be given to the main actors who imbue their respective characters with distinctive and consistent personality. Cinta, as played by Dian Sastrowardoyo, is still the “leader” of her group, even if she is constantly in need of validation from other people and almost always in fear of what her group might think of her decisions. Rangga somehow seems comfortable in his loneliness, but begins to question some of his choices in life, some family related, some love related and is picking up the courage to make peace with these choices. The other characters are not equally fleshed out, but given the limited screen time and how thin they are written, Cinta’s friends remain amusing as a group and provide the needed comic relief, which mostly comes from the character Milly as played by the effortlessly comedic, Sissy Priscillia, who almost steal the movie.

However, to me, the standout actor in the movie is still Dian Sastrowardoyo. Sure Nicholas Saputra displays some emotional range, however, in this film, Ms. Sastrowardoyo displays something that I have never seen from her before (no, not what you’re thinking), that is her comedic range. As I have written above, some of the exchanges between Cinta and Rangga seem to be intentionally made for laughs, and if the viewers do laugh like they did when I watched the movie, it is due to her line readings and facial expressions. One need to look no further than when Rangga drives Cinta around Jogja. She tries to keep her cool but occasionally a gleeful smile would escape from her lips. It is a hoot to watch. It is as if Ms. Sastrowardoyo can command the viewers to react the way she wants them to react, simply by making subtle (and not so subtle) change in her expression and voice. This part of her reminds me of Jennifer Lawrence. I do not know if she even knows that she is capable of doing comedy.

Now about the music, AADC 2 is still scored by the talented couple that scored the first movie,

Melly Goeslaw & Anto Hoed. While the orchestraic music and songs sound grand and big to my inexperienced ears, none of them have stuck yet to the brain. They correspond well to the scenes on screen, but I did not end up humming the songs on the way out of the theatre. But then again, maybe the objective of this movie is not to compete with the first one, which has attained somewhat of a cult status among people of my generation, but simply to make up for lost time and bring us up to speed with what has happened during the 14 years, just like a reunion. And like any reunion, it might not be as exciting as we had hoped, but we sure are glad we came to the party. 

    Dimas Riyo Kusumo

Jakarta, 1 May 2016

Batman v Superman: The Dawn of Justice

Batman v Superman Trailer

Pertama dari look film-nya dulu. Berbeda dengan film-film Marvel yang penuh warna dan membingkai adegan aksinya dengan jelas (walaupun sering kali sulit diikuti lantaran terlalu banyak kejadian dalam satu frame (I'm looking at you, Avengers), BvS hampir sepanjang durasi film (kurang lebih dua setengah jam) diselimuti kelam, mendung dan malam, seolah-olah langit cerah, berpelangi atau bahkan cerah berawan cuma terjadi di belahan bumi lain. Tone warna film ini yang nyaris monokromatik menyiratkan bahwa film ini akan menjadi sebuah tontonan yang serius, bahkan berisi--paling tidak dalam ukuran film superhero. Bisa jadi BvS ingin mengikuti  jejak seri Batman besutan sutradara Christopher Nolan yang sukses membawa genre ini ke tempat terhormat di dunia perfilman. After all, film kedua dari seri Batman besutan Nolan yang berjudul The Dark Knight (2008) berhasil mengantarkan mendiang Heath Ledger memenangkan piala Oscar tahun 2009. Sebuah prestasi yang jarang (atau bahkan tidak pernah?) dicapai oleh film-film dalam genre ini. Luar biasanya lagi, piala Oscar tersebut dimenangkan setelah meninggalnya Ledger. Kemenangan ini pun tidak dirasa mengagetkan. Hampir semua kritikus dan penonton sudah hakulyakin piala berlapis emas itu akan jatuh ke tangan mendiang aktor tersebut, sama dengan yakinnya kritikus dan penonton atas kemenangan Leonardo DiCaprio tahun ini untuk film The Revenant. Salah satu kunci keberhasilan Ledger dalam memerankan Joker, selain insting keaktorannya yang hebat (dia tidak pernah terlihat berlebihan, walaupun berperan sebagai kriminal sakit jiwa), adalah naskah filmnya yang apik. Hal ini tidak saya temui di BvS. Menurut pandangan saya, BvS ini termasuk ke golongan film dengan ''style over substance' atau bahasa gaulnya: 'kebanyakan gaya'. Menurut saya, di permukaan, BvS terasa begitu mirip dengan The Dark Knight dari mulai tone warna, cara tokoh-tokohnya berinteraksi (sepertinya harus selalu dengan air muka serius, tegang atau dingin), dialognya, sampai musiknya. Namun bedanya, nyaris semua komponen tersebut kurang memperkuat plot-nya. Padahal BvS punya pertanyaan yang menarik: Apa Anda yakin perbuatan Anda, yang menurut Anda bertujuan baik, tidak menimbulkan bencana yang lebih besar bagi (lebih banyak) orang lain? Seandainya Anda punya kekuatan seperti Superman atau endless resources as owned by Batman (atau katakanlah senjata nuklir) dan berjanji hanya menggunakannya untuk kepentingan "orang banyak", "orang banyak" yang mana yang Anda bicarakan?

Pertanyaan tersebut tidak hanya dapat ditujukan kepada putra Jor El, namun juga Batman dan Lex Luthor (atau para penguasa dunia, grup teroris sampai ormas anarkis di dunia nyata). Namun sayangnya tidak dijawab sama sekali di film ini, karena sutradaranya lebih mementingkan the sole hook of the movie, yaitu Batman dan Superman berantem, guling-gulingan, tinju-tinjuan, at the expense of the civillians they were suppossed to be protecting. Tidak digambarkan adanya penyesalan diantara kedua superhero ini atas kerusakan dan bahkan kematian yang mereka buat. Wouldn't it be nice (character wise) to have Superman, the boyscout of all superheroes, uncertain about his intentions, the effects of his actions and his existence as an immigrant on earth? Batman pun demikian. Walaupun di atas kertas, menurut saya, Ben Affleck cocok memerankan Bruce Wayne dan Batman, dia tidak memberikan nilai apapun untuk tokoh ini selain selalu terlihat tidak senang, murung dan marah. Penyebabnya, menurut saya adalah, di film ini, si Manusia Kelelawar tidak diberikan "hati". Superman masih punya Lois Lane dan Ibunya, Martha Kent yang membuat dia paling tidak terlihat punya rasa cinta. Bruce Wayne/Batman, walaupun memang sudah yatim piatu, tidak diberikan tokoh lain yang dapat menunjukkan bahwa ia punya sisi (dan ekspresi) selain terlihat banyak pikiran. Bahkan pelayan setianya, Alfred digambarkan tidak seperti father figure bagi Bruce Wayne (sesuatu yang menurut saya menyisipkan kelembutan pada film Batman versi Christopher Nolan, thanks to the moving performance by Michael Caine) tapi hanya seperti a wiser sidekick/technician to Batman. Di dalam film sempat terlihat kostum bekas Robin (sidekick-nya Batman) yang ditaruh di tabung kaca, dengan kondisi dicoret tulisan "the joke's on you, Batman." Bukankah menarik jika BvS juga menggambarkan bagaimana Robin "menghilang" (meninggal?) dan efeknya terhadap Bruce Wayne ketimbang menunjukkan beberapa adegan Bruce Wayne meratapi mendiang orangtuanya, yang saya pikir sudah bukan hal baru bagi yang mengikuti film/komiknya?

Satu satunya peran yang menurut saya menonjol (and not entirely for the right reasons) di BvS adalah tokoh Lex Luthor yang diperankan oleh Jesse Eisenberg. Jangan salah, menurut saya, aktor ini merupakan pelakon yang salah untuk berperan sebagai Lex Luthor. Walaupun Eisenberg merupakan aktor dengan comedic timing yang spot on (lihat Zombieland), aktor yang intens (lihat The Social Network) dan sanggup membuat film komersil biasa, lebih bernyawa (lihat Now You See Me), dia bukan aktor yang memiliki range yang luas. Gerak tubuh dan cara dia men-deliver dialog sebagai Lex Luthor mirip dengan sewaktu aktor ini memerankan Mark Zuckerberg di Social Network. Pelanggaran terberat dari Eisenberg sebagai tokoh antagonis adalah, dia sama sekali tidak terlihat berwibawa, ataupun menakutkan. Setiap kali tokoh ini berbicara, ia terlihat gugup dan gemeteran. Sulit dipercaya bahwa larger than life figures like Superman & Batman fell into his traps. Itu sebabnya mengapa saat Manusia Baja dan Pendekar Kegelapan itu akhirnya adu jotos di pertengahan film akibat politik adu domba Luthor, saya tidak merasakan apa-apa. Seru? Nggak, karena saya merasa nothing is at stake, or I just couldn't buy the supervillain's plans. Eisenberg jadi menonjol karena salah tempat. Dia aktor character-driven yang dibawa ke film explosion-driven. Hasilnya nggak nyambung. But chances are, he is the only actor in the movie that viewers will talk about. Aside from Wonder Woman yang muncul di penghujung film, sayang screen time nya nggak begitu banyak. 

Secara umum, film BvS ini adalah tipe film yang dijadikan movie event untuk nobar dengan teman-teman kantor/sekolah/kuliah. Keluar dari bioskop, kita akan lanjut makan dan ngopi, ngobrolin film ini sedikit, lalu lanjut ke topik lain yang lebih menarik. Film ini sendiri perlahan-lahan tenggelam dari ingatan saat matahari terbit keesokan harinya.  Ini berbeda dengan The Dark Knight, yang, paling tidak, kesan positifnya (terutama performa Heath Ledger) nempel di kepala penggemar film yang menontonnya di bioskop. Atau mungkin, film superhero seperti ini sebenarnya bukan untuk saya (saya memang bukan pembaca komik. Doyannya nonton film). Tapi kalau begitu, kok dulu bisa menikmati The Dark Knight, Batman Returns, Iron Man, dan Spider-Man (versi Sam Raimi) padahal filmnya sama-sama dua jam lebih? Am I getting to old for these superhero movies?  Oh well. 



Dimas Rio  

Incompetent Reviewer Reviews 'It Follows' (2014)

It Follows (2014) Official Trailer
 

Nightmares often feel like B grade horror movies. They are illogical, unexplainable, almost entirely plot-less, with barely a hint of character development. The difference is that bad horror movies can easily be dismissed by getting our rear ends out of the theater (or by a flick of a remote). But we cannot shake the lingering impact of a nightmare by simply waking up. Those can only resulted from a terrifying, sweat-inducing nightmare. Or a very good horror movie.

2014, in my humble opinion, has been an interesting year for horror movies, especially the indie ones. The stylish and intense ‘The Babadook’ by Jennifer Kent garnered positive buzz and lived up to that buzz, to certain extent (I personally thought the climax was poorly handled especially compared to the arresting and masterful first hour). Then there were the lesser seen but equally disturbing ‘The Canal’ (an Irish equivalent of ‘The Ring’), ‘Honeymoon’ (in which newlyweds’ happiest time was cut short by the slowly changing behavior of the other half. Just wait until you see a f*cked up scene where the husband pulled out something from his wife’s…from his wife’s—um, or you know what, just cover your eyes and scream expletives for five straight minutes like I did when you watch this) and the hilarious send up to every vampire movie ever made from New Zealand, ’What We Do in the Shadows’. Now, ‘It Follows’, a simple, straightforward horror movie from David Robert Mitchell deserves to be placed near the top of those interesting indie horror movies in 2014, if only because it is the only movie that actually resembles an actual nightmare to the point where I feel like puking from 90 minutes of constant nervousness. And I watch horror movies regularly. The last movie that managed to reduce me into shriveling, pants-wetting, inconsolable mess of a toddler was the Japanese version of ‘The Ring’, and the most recent one, ‘Noroi (The Curse)‘(2005)’, also from Japan (Yes, when J-horror works, it works like nobody’s business. it is as if the devils have taken up residency in the heads of Japanese horror filmmakers and produced celluloid footage from hell. And I mean this to be the highest compliment).[1]  

 

The reason why ‘It Follows’ works on a primal level is due to its simplicity. It could have easily been a story told around a campfire, during sleepovers or during an especially creepy overnight drive across the woods— if you’re feeling like being a d*ck to your friends. It is a story of Jay (played by the permanently vulnerable looking Maika Monroe) a teenage girl who, after a first night of passion with her boyfriend got transmitted with, not so much a disease but more of a curse. The curse being that from now on, Jay will be constantly pursued by ‘it’. This ‘it’ in question can take a form of anybody, from her loved ones like her parents and friends to an old lady in campus, a naked woman in an abandoned building, an impossibly tall man in the house, and so on. While this ‘it’ may seems like any other people on the street, Jay (and we) can distinguish ‘it’ almost immediately the moment ‘it’ appears on screen—even in wide shots—since this ‘it’ usually walks alone, slowly and deliberately (with vacant stare to boot since this is a horror movie) straight towards Jay—and us—without anyone seemingly able to see it. We were informed by the douche ex-boyfriend and the nihilistic prologue that once ‘it’ reaches its target, ‘it’ will kill the said target in a gruesome manner. For temporary solace from the ever-persistent ‘it’, one must barricade him/herself in a closed room or building (a word of caution however, ‘it’ can throw rocks at the window and make its dreaded entrance from there). Or, one can transfer the curse by having sexual relations with another person. But here’s the catch, if that transferee is eventually killed by ‘it’, ‘it’ will move up the chain and pursue you (or in this case, Jay), again, all the way until it reaches patient zero.

Having read the plot and watched the movie, I am quite certain that other horror hounds will find this movie unique, intriguing, haunting, even depressing since the conclusion to Jay’s fate seems inevitable. Like, how can you get away from something that will eventually find out where you are? How will you be able to sleep knowing that at any minute ‘it’ can break through an open window and get you? How can you explain to anybody of this thing that keeps following you when nobody but yourself can see it? Simply put, it’s like mortgage or tax debts only with creepy faces slapped on it.  

However, herein lies my problem with this movie, especially the final hour. It does not end the way that I (and I assume also many viewers) expected. Usually in horror movies—or most movies for that matter—endings that defy expectations are mostly welcome, but not if the circumstances surrounding the main character seems to lead the character—and us—towards a clear conclusion. During a particularly confusing climax, the movie bent its rules (or added a new rule) that seriously diminished the tension that came before. And what a tense first hour it was. The director, David Robert Mitchell has successfully (at least for most of the running time) held me hostage. I couldn’t leave. I didn’t want to. Not until I know what will become of Jay and her group of offbeat friends, who eventually banded together to outrun the nameless entity. Will Jay ‘transfer’ the curse to Paul, whom she cares, or to any other boy in the risk that if that person dies, Jay will have to once again flee for her life? Or who knows, maybe Jay will try to reason with the nagging supernatural entity and they’ll both be BFF and paint each other’s fingernails in the end. 

The stretched out tension, boo moments-free, and low body count nature of this film reminds me of Ti West’s ‘The House of the Devil’ (2009), a horror movie of the recent past disguised as an 80s horror film, and the classic ‘Halloween’ (1978). Even the look and sounds of this movie seems to be deliberately engineered to resemble ‘Halloween’, right down to its unstoppable pursuer. This is not a bad thing, as ‘It Follows’ operates with a distinctive set of rules and has a slightly different tricks up it sleeve. If not for that questionable climax, this movie would have been a perfect pressure cooker of fear. But then again, we never do get a satisfying ending to a nightmare since it is always cut short by our gasps or screams when we wake. What linger first are our heartbeats, the creepy bits and pieces, and the feeling that says, had we stayed longer in that dream, that someone—that something is going to get us. Who knows whether we’d still be able to wake up screaming after that.
 

Dio

Jakarta, 2 June 2015

---

[1] Special mention has to be made of an Australian horror film called ‘The Reef’ (2010) about passengers of a capsized yacht at the Great Barrier Reef who are being hunted by a Great White Shark. If this scenario alone does not make you want to ditch that scuba diving plan and vow your allegiance to land-based vacations, I don’t know what will. 

MENCOBA ME-REVIEW HOW TO TRAIN YOUR DRAGON 2

 How To Train Your Dragon 2 Oficial Trailer

Nggak ada yang ngalahin rasanya waktu kita men-discover sesuatu yang baru. Be it a new place to travel to, new skills to master, new things to do, or just simply new song that we hear on the radio. That is what I felt when I watched How to Train Your Dragon 2, the follow-up to the 2010 DreamWorks’ animated hit of the same name. A sense of discovery. Or make it a re-discovery.

Bagi yang nggak inget soal film pertamanya, or simply just missed out on one of the most surprisingly inventive animated offerings from DreamWorks (the others being the first Shrek (2001) and the Croods (2012)), How to Train Your Dragon berkisah tentang seorang bocah bernama Hiccup (disulih suarakan dengan dengan cara delivery yang lempeng, cuek dan kocak oleh Jay Baruchel—iya, cowok kurus yang bikin Seth Rogen dan Jonah Hill berantem kayak pasutri di This is the End (2013), anak kepala suku di pulau bernama Berk yang—beda dengan orang Viking kebanyakan yang demen adu otot dan ngusir hama (“ngusir” as in swaying their swords and axes feverishly dan “hama” as in dragons—they burn the crops and steal the cattle, you see)—Hiccup lebih suka menyendiri, “nukang” dan menemukan alat-alat canggih buat ngebuktiin diri ke bokapnya, kepala suku di Berk bersuara bak Leonidas dari film 300. Singkatnya, Hiccup ini kayak Thomas Alfa Edison, if Mr. Edison were a teen, a Viking, has a dry wit, and ride dragons. Pada suatu malam, Hiccup yang sedang menguji coba salah satu alat penangkap naga rancangannya, tak dinyana sukses melumpuhkan seekor naga berjenis Night Fury yang konon katanya tidak mungkin ditangkap manusia karena kecepatan terbangnya yang ngebut bak rajawali Brama Kumbara on steroids. Kecepatan terbang sang naga ini lah yang akhirnya terganggu akibat tembakan alat Hiccup yang jitu. Hiccup, yang tidak sampai hati menghabisi nyawa sang naga memutuskan untuk memeliharanya dan memberikan nama Toothless (tidak bergigi)—terinspirasi dari barisan gigi sang naga yang bisa gampang keluar-masuk. Singkat cerita, di akhir film pertama, Hiccup menyelamatkan kampungnya dari petaka, dengan bantuan naga-naga yang dilatihnya, dengan satu battle wound, kehilangan satu kaki. To me, for the supposedly kiddie movie to have its protagonist lose limbs/body part at the end was a daring move. Konsepnya sendiri cakep: Ini tentang dua sahabat yang saling melengkapi secara harfiah: Hiccup tidak bisa selamat di situasi genting tanpa kemampuan terbang naganya, tapi Toothless sang naga pun juga tidak bisa terbang sempurna tanpa penunggangnya, yaitu Hiccup dikarenakan ekornya yang luka permanen.

When the movie was first released, it was nominated for two Oscars (for Best Animated Feature, albeit was beaten by the “ya-iyalah-pasti-menang” Toy Story 3 (2010), and for Best Music Score, but was beaten by The Social Network (2010). Saya harus bilang bahwa seharusnya film ini menang untuk music score terbaik. Kalau ada yang sudah sempat dengar score albumnya, musik yang digarap komposer John Powell untuk film ini luar biasa kerennya. Score berjudul “Test Drive” yang mengiringi Hiccup dan Toothless saat pertama kali terbang bersama menggunakan ekor buatan has a grand, soaring and victorious sound dan score “Romantic Flight” yang mengiringi Hiccup dan Astrid melayang di atas awan is warm, sweet and, well, romantic). Singkat kata, jilid pertama How to Train Your Dragon memukau saya yang mulai jemu dengan film animasi yang menomor wahidkan cute factor, sulih suara selebriti, humor slapstik tanpa substansi (lirik sekuel-sekuelnya Madagascar, sampe Rio). I was thoroughly impressed with the first movie. Needless to say that I cheered when I first saw the glorious teaser of the sequel in the theatre. Now that the sequel is out, how does it compare?         

Film kedua ini dimulai lima tahun dari akhir film pertama. Hiccup, kini lima tahun lebih tua, berpacaran dengan Astrid (disulihsuarakan dengan kombinasi feisty and sweet yang pas oleh America Ferrera), hendak diangkat menjadi kepala suku oleh Stoick, sang bokap (sulih suara oleh Gerard Butler). Tapi Hiccup yang merasa nggak punya leadership skills semumpuni bokapnya, selalu berusaha menghindar dan memilih untuk terbang menjelajah bersama naganya, Toothless, demi membuat what must be a prehistoric version of google maps. Salah satu daerah baru yang ditemukannya adalah sebuah pulau porak poranda berlapis es yang dihuni oleh gerombolan penangkap naga beringas (surprisingly, Princess Elsa and Princess Anna are nowhere to be found) yang dipimpin oleh pemuda bernama Eret. Eret & the geng ini ternyata terafiliasi dengan seorang dragon master bernama Drago Bludvist (disulih suarakan oleh Djimon Hounsou, yang dijamin sukses bikin anak-anak yang nonton film ini trauma) yang tujuan hidupnya adalah menguasai semua naga yang ada di dunia supaya bisa dengan mudah menjajah orang-orang yang nggak sepaham sama dia. Alegori terhadap penguasa yang membangun kekuatan militer untuk menekan rakyat dan bangsa lain bisa dilihat dari sini. Pun dengan keyakinan Hiccup untuk menjalankan politik luar negeri berbasis diplomasi dan keyakinan sang bokap bahwa nggak ada gunanya bernegosiasi dengan teroris macam Drago Bludvist (“people who kill people without reason cannot be reasoned with,” gitu katanya).

Singkat kata, ada banyak adegan perang. Banyak adegan naga terbang. Banyak aerial shots pemandangan alam. Pokoknya semua boilerplate film kolosal yang udah dipatenkan lebih dulu oleh Lord of the Rings. Tapi semua adegan tadi bisa kerasa punya weight, gravity and emotion due to the care applied to character development. Ini adalah aset terbesar How to Train Your Dragon 2. Penonton dibikin care terhadap tokoh-tokoh utama di film ini, terutama sekali Hiccup dan Toothless. Ini dicapai melalui ekspresi mata tiap tokoh yang hidup dan berbicara, humor slapstik tapi subtil (most of the physical comedy occurs in the background while other important scene/dialogue is happening), dan sulih suara yang total dari semua voice actors-nya. Jay Baruchel menginjeksikan dimensi lain ke dalam Hiccup—tidak lagi hanya jadi vessel untuk dialog dan reaksi awkward, tapi juga hesitance and ultimately, heroism. Gerard Butler menunjukkan bahwa pelakon film tidak hanya harus punya screen presence tapi juga voice presence. Karakter Stoick punya nyawa dan kehadiran karena dia. Cate Blanchett brings a strong and yet ethereal quality dalam karakter Valka, ibu Hiccup yang tiba-tiba muncul setelah dua puluh tahun disangka wafat. However, the star of the show is still Toothless, seekor naga yang entah gimana oleh para animator DreamWorks dibikin kurang ajar menggemaskannya. Kuat-kuatin batin aja saat anak/keponakan anda jerit-jerit minta dibeliin naga buat jadi binatang piaraan.

Sedikit nitpicking, kalaupun ada yang kurang nendang di film ini adalah music score-nya. Music score “Test Drive” yang megah yang ada di film pertama sayup-sayup terdengar di film kedua ini tapi di overlap dengan vokal dan dibikin mirip lagu pop (at least that is what it sounds like in my inexperienced ear) ngebuat adegan terbang Hiccup dan Toothless nggak semegah dahulu (then again, kata The Groove, dahulu semua indah.. so..). Tender moments in the first movie, seperti waktu Hiccup terbang bersama Astrid atau saat Hiccup dan Toothless melalukan “bonding time” juga nggak banyak di film ini. Terlepas dari satu adegan Stoick (Gerard Butler) mengingatkan istrinya akan lagu pernikahan mereka yang joyful dan infectious, kayaknya How To Train Your Dragon 2 memang sengaja dibuat lebih gelap (bersiaplah untuk menyaksikan sebuah (atau beberapa buah) plot development(s) yang membuat film ini secara instan memiliki sense of maturity and realness) dan lebih mengedepankan action bagi penontonnya. And its not a bad thing. In fact, taken as a whole, How to Train Your Dragon 2 is frikkin’ awesome. Setuju sama salah satu kritikus film yang gue baca di metacritic.com, kalo sekuel pertamanya aja masih sebagus ini, here’s to How to Train Your Dragon 3 to 20!