Isn’t the P. Ramlee’s Films Show the Reality of Malay Economy in 1950-60’s?

Assalamualaikum w.b.t. and a very good day.

I bet all of you are not bore watching the P. Ramlee’s films again and again. I don’t know why his films are not bored although I have watch his films since 20 years ago. Maybe the malay film are suitable to be launced in black and white colour. During I study Arabic Language at my university a few years ago, my lecturer told me that some P. Ramlee’s films ideas origin from the old arabic literature such Ahmad al-Bab. May be it was his recipe to keep his films not bore although after 50 years has launched.  Besides that, his films is tell the malay bad attitude that we should keep away.

Almost the P. Ramlee’s films was launched in 1950-60’s although his first film entitle ‘Chinta’ was launched in 1948. To be brutally honest what I want to highlight here is are his film shows the reality of malay economy in 1950’s? If you conscious, some P. Ramlee’s films show that the malay status is rich such as the films entitle Anak-ku Sazali (1956), Madu Tiga (1964), Tiga Abdul (1964), Keluarga 69 (1967), and others. We can see in these films the malays have huge mansions and luxury cars even have properties at abroad such in Tiga Abdul film. Isn’t it?

3 Abdul Filmed in the Mansion

Are these films tell the truth of the reality of the malay on that time? Absolutely not.

Actually, the equity of malay was only 1.5% while the chinese was 22.8% which led the outburst of 13 May tragedy in year 1969. But while P. Ramlee wants to show to the public in his films that the malays are rich in 1960s although it is not show the reality?

Is P. Ramlee wants to show that the malays are ‘Tuan Tanah’ of Tanah Melayu because Tanah Melayu just get independence from British in 1957?

Is P. Ramlee hopes that one day the malays can hold the economy their homeland because their equity only 1.5%?

Is P. Ramlee not want to show that the malays are poor and only live in slums?

Thank you.

http://wankamarul701.blogspot.com