skip to main content

KRONIK FILMEDIA’S RECEPTION TOWARDS FLORIAN GALLENBERGER’S COLONIA

*Muhammad Luthfan Hanifi  -  Literature Department, Faculty of Humanities, Diponegoro University, Indonesia
Redyanto Noor  -  Literature Department, Faculty of Humanities, Diponegoro University, Indonesia
Open Access Copyright (c) 2020 HUMANIKA under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0.

Citation Format:
Abstract
This paper analyzes the audience’s reception of Colonia, a 2016 film by Florian Gallenberger. As a popular work, Colonia is a docudrama film that presents historical events happened in Chile during the coup of General Augusto Pinochet in 1973. The problems analyzed in this article are the reception process of respondents and the quality of Colonia as popular films. The film is chosen for the study as it received five nominations from German Film Awards 2016 and won Bavarian Film Awards 2016 for Best Production category, but it only has a rating of 26% from 47 reviews by Rotten Tomatoes. The respondents involved in this study are members of Kronik Filmedia of Diponegoro University. Kronik Filmedia is the university film club that focuses on producing short films and appreciating films by conducting film discussions. The purpose of the study is to describe the reception processes of respondents who are affected by their horizon of expectations and to prove that not all of popular works are low literature. The theory used in this paper is the Aesthetic of Reception theory by Hans Robert Jauss. The main concept of this theory is horizon of expectations. Horizon of expectations is a reader’s preferences from the previous experiences or readings. For the methodology, this paper uses qualitative research and focus group discussion as the data collecting method. Focus group discussion is a gathering data method by means of interviewing respondents in a forum consisted of five to eight people. Focus group discussion is an effective method to observe a social phenomenon or a case study. The data obtained is then analyzed as texts to draw a conclusion. The research involves eight members of Kronik Filmedia as respondents. The results of the research show the reception of Kronik Filmedia as Colonia can satisfy and even surpass seven out of eight respondents’ horizon of expectations as the film goes to be more ‘interesting’ and ‘thrilling’. All respondents also view that Colonia is worth to be studied and discussed as those of high literature.

Note: This article has supplementary file(s).

Fulltext View|Download |  Transcripts
Focus Group Discussion Transcript
Subject docudrama; popular literature; reception; romance-thriller
Type Transcripts
  Download (21KB)    Indexing metadata
Keywords: Reception; Film; Docudrama; Audiences
Funding: Kronik Filmedia, Diponegoro University; Master Degree of Literature, Faculty of Humanities, Diponegoro University

Article Metrics:

Article Info
Section: research artikel
Language : EN
Statistics:
  1. Card, O. S. (1988). Characters and Viewpoint. Cincinnati: Writer’s Digest Books
  2. Civelek, E. S. (2012). Food in Film: A Study on Audience Reception (İhsan Doğramacı Bilkent University). Retrieved from http://www.thesis.bilkent.edu.tr/0006290.pdf
  3. Coppola, J. (2019). Cinema/Politics/Philosophy by Nico Baumbach. Film Quarterly, 72(4), 105–106. https://doi.org/10.1525/fq.2019.72.4.105
  4. Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications Ltd
  5. Fathurizki, A., & Malau, R. M. U. (2018). Pornografi Dalam Film: Analisis Resepsi Film “Men, Women & Children.” ProTVF, 2(44), 19–35. Retrieved from http://jurnal.unpad.ac.id/protvf/article/download/11347/9075
  6. Gallenberger, F. (2015). Colonia. Germany: Majestic Filmproduktion
  7. Grant, B. (2007). Film Genre: From Iconography to Ideology. London: Wallflower Press
  8. Grundström, H. (2018). What digital revolution? Cinema-going as practice. Participations: Journals of Audience & Reception Studies, 15(1), 5–22. Retrieved from https://www.participations.org/Volume 15/Issue 1/2.pdf
  9. Guerin, F. (2019). Aesthetic Spaces: The Place of Art in Film by Brigitte Peucker. Film Quarterly, 73(1), 107–109. https://doi.org/10.1525/fq.2019.73.1.107
  10. Hoffer, T. W., & Nelson, R. A. (1978). Docudrama on American Television. Journal of the University Film Association, 30(2), 21–27. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/20687422
  11. Jauss, H. R. (1982). Toward an Aesthetic of Reception (T. Bahti, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press
  12. Kunsey, I. (2019). Representations of Women in Popular Film : A Study of Gender Inequality in 2018. Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research in Communications, 10(2), 27–38. Retrieved from https://www.elon.edu/u/academics/communications/journal/wp-content/uploads/sites/153/2019/12/03-Kunsey.pdf
  13. Perdana, D. D. (2020). Reception Analysis of Related Audience by Watching “Sexy Killers” the Documentary Film. Proceedings of the 2nd International Media Conference 2019 (IMC 2019), 423(October 2019), 86–98. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200325.009
  14. Ramrao, T. N. (2016). Film and Literature: An Overview. Epitome Journals International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 2(9), 149–156. Retrieved from http://www.epitomejournals.com/VolumeArticles/FullTextPDF/175_Res earch_Paper.pdf
  15. Till, B., Niederkrotenthaler, T., Herberth, A., Voracek, M., Sonneck, G., & Vitouch, P. (2011). Coping and film reception. Journal of Media Psychology, 23(3), 149–160. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-1105/a000048
  16. Yushar, N. I. (2016). Resepsi Mahasiswa UIN Alauddin Makassar terhadap Film Dokumenter Sicko. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/30349497/ANALISIS_RESEPSI_TERHADAP_FILM_DOKUMENTER_SICKO

Last update:

No citation recorded.

Last update:

No citation recorded.