Viewpoint from a filmmaker - Leon Cheo

We continue with a series of responses from local filmmakers on the current regulation and/or censorship system in Singapore. This is an ongoing project initiated by a group of students from LASALLE. Discussions and exchange of views are encouraged between members of the public and arts practitioners on the regulatory issue of films in Singapore. View our previous interviews here.

We find out what local filmmaker, Leon Cheo has to say:

1. During the process of making a film, have you ever felt restricted by any regulatory boundaries set by MDA? If yes, in what ways?
Yes I have. Sometimes I would question whether something will be allowed or disallowed.

2. If for artistic purposes, would you make a film which you know might attract censors or cuts but still continue to do it anyway? Why?
Yes, provided the story is as truthful as possible - that there is a need to tell the story.

3. In the Arts Community Position Paper, it is suggested that regulation should be implemented in place of censorship, as the former involves objective classification that is not politically-motivated. What is your view?
I absolutely agree with objective regulation and classification.

4. Two of MDA’s guiding principles behind its regulatory work are to uphold community values and to safeguard national and public interest. What is your view?
I think the principles are just a way to appease the general public who still rely on the government to take care of them.

5. Have you participated in any discussion programmes or feedback consultations with regards to content regulation initiated by MDA? Would you participate in future? Why?
I haven't participated in any, but I would like to. I am keen in such consultations and would like to contribute to progressive change.

6. What do you have to say about the censoring/banning of content in films screened in local theatres which are still obtainable on the Internet?
I think this is a wrong mentality for consumers, and people in the film industry to have. The point is to get rid of censorship and banning of films, not to find discounts and allowances for censorship.

Want to add your 2 cents worth? Join us in an open discussion on facebook

Viewpoint from a filmmaker - Kelvin Sng

We continue with a series of responses from local filmmakers on the current regulation and/or censorship system in Singapore. This is an ongoing project initiated by a group of students from LASALLE. Discussions and exchange of views are encouraged between members of the public and arts practitioners on the regulatory issue of films in Singapore. View our previous interviews here.

We find out what local filmmaker, Kelvin Sng has to say:

1. During the process of making a film, have you ever felt restricted by any regulatory boundaries set by MDA? If yes, in what ways?
Not really. I usually just go ahead and not let these regulations restrict my creativity.

2. If for artistic purposes, would you make a film which you know might attract censors or cuts but still continue to do it anyway? Why?
Yes I will still do it, reason being if we can't even be honest with the film we are making, how can we expect the audience to be moved by it?

3. In the Arts Community Position Paper, it is suggested that regulation should be implemented in place of censorship, as the former involves objective classification that is not politically-motivated. What is your view?
Totally for it. It is time for us to grow up and stop being treated like Singapore is made up of 16-year-olds and below!

4. Two of MDA’s guiding principles behind its regulatory work are to uphold community values and to safeguard national and public interest. What is your view?

What's new? Been hearing things like "national and public interest" from government-connected bodies for the longest time.

5. Have you participated in any discussion programmes or feedback consultations with regards to content regulation initiated by MDA? Would you participate in future? Why?

Not yet. I will in future. For the love of our industry and the passion for filmmaking.

6. What do you have to say about the censoring/banning of content in films screened in local theatres which are still obtainable on the Internet?

Perfect example of the power of internet, which is something hard to control. Never underestimate the world wide web as a powerful distribution channel, whether you ban a film or not, you can somehow still search or even able to 'buy' it by downloading via the internet.

Want to add your 2 cents worth? Join us in an open discussion on facebook

Viewpoint from a filmmaker - Martyn See

We continue with a series of responses from local filmmakers on the current regulation and/or censorship system in Singapore. This is an ongoing project initiated by a group of students from LASALLE. Discussions and exchange of views are encouraged between members of the public and arts practitioners on the regulatory issue of films in Singapore. View our previous interviews here.

We find out what local filmmaker, Martyn See has to say:

1. During the process of making a film, have you ever felt restricted by any regulatory boundaries set by MDA? If yes, in what ways?
Yes, Section 33 of the Films Act prohibits political films. Section 14 requires all films to be submitted for censorship.

2. If for artistic purposes, would you make a film which you know might attract censors or cuts but still continue to do it anyway? Why?
Yes, it is not the job of artists/filmmakers to self censor.

3. In the Arts Community Position Paper, it is suggested that regulation should be implemented in place of censorship, as the former involves objective classification that is not politically-motivated. What is your view?
Agree. No work should be censored, or cut, or altered. But we can regulate the kind of audience, by way of age group, to access these works.

4. Two of MDA’s guiding principles behind its regulatory work are to uphold community values and to safeguard national and public interest. What is your view?
These are vague terms. The individual's right of expression should come first.

5. Have you participated in any discussion programmes or feedback consultations with regards to content regulation initiated by MDA? Would you participate in future? Why?
No, I have never been invited or requested or summoned by MDA for anything.

6. What do you have to say about the censoring/banning of content in films screened in local theatres which are still obtainable on the Internet?
Makes censorship of films ridiculous.

Want to add your 2 cents worth? Join us in an open discussion on facebook

Viewpoint from a filmmaker - Sanif Olek

We continue with a series of responses from local filmmakers on the current regulation and/or censorship system in Singapore. This is an ongoing project initiated by a group of students from LASALLE. Discussions and exchange of views are encouraged between members of the public and arts practitioners on the regulatory issue of films in Singapore. View our previous interviews here.

We find out what local filmmaker, Sanif Olek has to say:

1. During the process of making a film, have you ever felt restricted by any regulatory boundaries set by MDA? If yes, in what ways?
Telling stories is an intuitive, instinctive process. I let my stories flow. My work in television trains me a lot about restrictions. Nevertheless, I don't see restrictions as limitations. There are other ways of telling your stories and communicating your ideas effectively. But if one needs to shoot a scene of someone "licking" ice-cream, I'm afraid there are no other ways of presenting someone "licking" the ice-cream, are there?

2. If for artistic purposes, would you make a film which you know might attract censors or cuts but still continue to do it anyway? Why?
I want to tell my stories effectively and avoid sensationalism for the sake of being sensational. I shoot something because there is something that I want to communicate. You can't fool the audience if your film is not sincere. I don't shoot a film on purpose to attract negativity. I think the panel in the censors are getting smarter. There are 6877000000 people in the world who wants to see your film, with or without censors.

3. In the Arts Community Position Paper, it is suggested that regulation should be implemented in place of censorship, as the former involves objective classification that is not politically-motivated. What is your view?
Can you rephrase your question, please? This question is too cheem for my heartland intellect lah.

4. Two of MDA’s guiding principles behind its regulatory work are to uphold community values and to safeguard national and public interest. What is your view?
State whatever they like. Yes we can find all of these in their mission statement.
However, I do agree that Singapore is multiracial and race and religion are very delicate issues. Some adult individuals are mentally-deranged when it comes to these things and still need the government to look after them. *not insulting the intellectually-handicapped here - please stick to context*

5. Have you participated in any discussion programmes or feedback consultations with regards to content regulation initiated by MDA? Would you participate in future? Why?
Was invited but most of the time didn't go because 1. invited at the last minute or 2. couldn't be bothered as most of the time these panels treat these discussions like primary school social class (?) sessions. I got bills to pay (don't we all..?), and that's very important for struggling artistes like myself. Yes would love to come.

6. What do you have to say about the censoring/banning of content in films screened in local theatres which are still obtainable on the Internet?
There's so much the MDA or any censorship bodies can do but ultimately I think PARENTS are still responsible to what their kids watch on the internet. Technology is so advance these days for the parent to utilise to regulate what they want their children to watch.

Here is a short video that documents some of the public's opinions

Want to add your 2 cents worth? Join us in an open discussion on facebook

Viewpoint from a filmmaker -Ting Szu Kiong

We continue with a series of responses from local filmmakers on the current regulation and/or censorship system in Singapore. This is an ongoing project initiated by a group of students from LASALLE. Discussions and exchange of views are encouraged between members of the public and arts practitioners on the regulatory issue of films in Singapore. View our previous interviews here.

We find out what local filmmaker, Szu Kiong has to say:

1. During the process of making a film, have you ever felt restricted by any regulatory boundaries set by MDA? If yes, in what ways?

For my case, I have not felt restricted because I have never produced violent, sexually explicit, and racially, religiously or politically sensitive films although my films can be quite artistic. My films are "healthy".

I like to add that in my personal experience, MDA / SFC is not entirely close-minded. My first short film, MY KEYS, portrays the Goddess of Mercy, which is a religious figure, in a mischevious way. My second short film, MICHELLE, shows a melancholic woman walking in streets and enviously gazing at loving couples. At the end, we learn that she's a transvestite yearning to be a normal woman. Before I made my fourth short film, THE FOREST SPIRITS, people threw wet blanket at me saying that SFC would only support films with local flavors and never support the wuxia genre. These films are all supported by SFC.


2. If for artistic purposes, would you make a film which you know might attract censors or cuts but still continue to do it anyway? Why?

If it is a short film which involves low budget and I feel strongly for, I would probably make it anyway. There are many film festivals around the world which might be more tolerant. If it is a feature film which is likely to be banned, I rather not because I am not a rich filmmaker. I would likely choose to make feature films that can reach out to all ages.

3. In the Arts Community Position Paper, it is suggested that regulation should be implemented in place of censorship, as the former involves objective classification that is not politically-motivated. What is your view?

It sounds good because regultions should be clearer.

4. Two of MDA’s guiding principles behind its regulatory work are to uphold community values and to safeguard national and public interest. What is your view?

I guess such guidelines are common in many countries. Most people should agree that filmmakers should not make films that are biased against a minority group, or any religion. Of course exercising the guidelines can be controversial and even colored with prejudices. However, it is a double edged sword because how the government acts and the mentality of the majority are related to each other. Often, the conservative group wins because of the government's support. So, the government has to change its perception and take steps to educate people and clear prejudices.

5. Have you participated in any discussion programmes or feedback consultations with regards to content regulation initiated by MDA? Would you participate in future? Why?

Nope. But I don't mind participating.

6. What do you have to say about the censoring/banning of content in films screened in local theatres which are still obtainable on the Internet?

This is like a case of a parent forbidding children to do this and that at home, but the parent can't stop them from doing those things out of home. People in the arts community would question the rationale of banned contents while they can all be accessed on the Internet. I think this kind of train of thought is dangerous because it means that since porn can be obtainable on the Internet, why ban porn in theatres? So, I advice people should not reason like that.

Want to add your 2 cents worth? Join us in an open discussion on facebook

Viewpoint from a filmmaker - Jeremy Sing

A 2010 Arts Community Position Paper on Censorship and Regulation has recently been developed by Arts Engage, a network of arts practitioners from various disciplines. The paper proposes and recommends for the current system to be replaced by one where there is a clear separation of regulation and censorship.

A group of students from LASALLE take to the streets and the internet to interview members of the public and local filmmakers on their views and opinion concerning the current film classifications system in Singapore.

Here is a response from SINdie's very own blogger/filmmaker, Jeremy:

During the process of making a film, have you ever felt restricted by any regulatory boundaries set by MDA? If yes, in what ways?
Not really. If commercial objectives were secondary in making a film, I will go completely with my guts because films cross geographical boundaries and every film will find its audience somewhere. So if it is a good piece of work that's kept my artistic integrity intact, I will not be too concerned that the authorities might ban it.

If for artistic purposes, would you make a film which you know might attract censors or cuts but still continue to do it anyway? Why?
Yes, I would. How can replace the word 'fuck' when you need the character to say it? If it is in Hokkien, it proves my point even more. There are just no substitutes for certain elements in film.

In the Arts Community Position Paper, it is suggested that regulation should be implemented in place of censorship, as the former involves objective classification that is not politically-motivated. What is your view?
The whole basis of the Position Paper is to lobby for the us to be treated more like adults. Adults are ready to judge for themselves what is right and wrong and what are the boundaries of being creative and being distasteful. This line is very fine. But when we are given the space to decide where the line is, it leads us to start thinking critically about what is acceptable and what is not. If we decide something is not, there is whole-hearted acceptance. We are not blindly placing 'conventional' judgements on thing.

Two of MDA’s guiding principles behind its regulatory work are to uphold community values and to safeguard national and public interest. What is your view?
On community values, it sounds sensible on the onset but what we forget is that the censors, like to err on the side of being conservative or 'the best way not to get into trouble'. They are after holding in highly-watched positions, doing sensitive jobs. On national and public interest, I find it hard to define what it is and politics can often get into play (and I guess this is universal, not just in Singapore).

Have you participated in any discussion programmes or feedback consultations with regards to content regulation initiated by MDA? Would you participate in future? Why?
No. This is mainly due to my busy schedule. But when I have more time in the future I would like to. I believe, in my position, running SINdie, a widely-read film blog, we have some social responsibility to my readers.

What do you have to say about the censoring/banning of content in films screened in local theatres which are still obtainable on the Internet?
Perhaps the censors see public screening of 'objectionable' films is public endorsement of them. So banning them is more a gesture and it does not ultimately block off all possible viewing opportunities of the film. But I wonder they do not explore restricted screening arrangements? Perhaps they may start to now given the recent changes announced.

Want to add your 2 cents worth? Join them in an open discussion on facebook