PUTRAJAYA, Nov 23 — The Film Censorship Board (LPF) has yet to decide on the status of a local Chinese film accused of glorifying communism, despite having already been viewed by senior Home Ministry officials, Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said today.
The home minister said he and his senior officers have already seen the film with members of the LPF, but remain undecided on whether or not to approve the movie that was initially scheduled to be released on August 22, 2013.
“So far there is no final decision, but based on studies (by the LPF) they found there are hidden elements that may not be suitable for screening,” he said at a news conference after officiating at the LPF’s 60th anniversary Carnival here.
The New Village, a Mandarin film directed by local award-winning director Wong Kew-Lit, was suspended on July 28 last year despite having been initially approved for public screening following a second review of the film’s plot by the LPF.
LPF chairman Raja Azhar Raja Abdul Manap had said then that the film was initially approved for local screening as it passed their guidelines on “public peace, safety, religion and race relations”, but the board had to “double check” the film’s message.
The suspension came on the heels of public furore over the eventual screening of controversial film Tanda Putera, which detractors claimed had negatively portrayed the Chinese community with its interpretation of the deadly May 13, 1969 racial riots.
Astro Shaw and Yellow Pictures, the joint producers of The New Village, had described it as a “Chinese period feature film” depicting a “forbidden love story”, which was set during the resettlement of the Chinese communities into new villages by the British.
The relocation by the colonial British government then had been aimed at preventing the Chinese villagers from aiding the Malayan Communist Party, either willingly or unwillingly.
The furore over a 2.20-minute trailer of the film moved other filmmakers to express disappointment with the irrationality that met attempts to retell the nation’s history in ways that differ from what far-right elements consider “official”.
