Banning ‘Primetime’ sabotages Malaysia’s creative economy

The removal of A24's psychological thriller Primetime from Malaysia's cinemas by the Film Censorship Board has sparked concerns over its impact on the country's creative economy. As a media studies scholar, Jamaluddin Aziz sees this as a clear case of policy misalignment that conflicts with the government's own economic directives.

With international assets like Primetime being abruptly removed from the local market without clear justification, the government must address how such opaque decisions pose structural risks to the industry. Instead of viewing these adjustments as routine protection measures, policymakers should evaluate the consequences of unpredictable censorship on the sector.

This move contradicts the developmental goals of the National Film Development Corporation Malaysia, which recently advocated for increased budget allocations to bolster the local film ecosystem and enhance the global competitiveness of Malaysian stories. The ban on Primetime signals to investors that Malaysia's theatrical space is volatile, creating an environment of fear that discourages local filmmakers from taking creative risks.

The removal of educational content like Primetime, which tackles complex issues such as vigilante media and child exploitation, is detrimental not only to intellectual development but also to government revenue. Banning a film does not stop its consumption in the digital age; it merely funnels audiences to illicit online sources and foreign streaming platforms, while simultaneously depriving local exhibitors of box-office revenue.

This effectively drains taxable entertainment expenditures out of the country, hampering the very ecosystem the communications ministry aims to fund. To cultivate critical thinking skills among citizens, the government cannot continue removing the educational materials necessary to teach these skills. The banning of Primetime represents a significant setback from the progressive shift toward a more transparent censorship framework, as highlighted by Finas CEO Azmir Saifuddin Mutalib.

Instead of stifling open discussion, the LPF should transition toward a transparent classification system that publishes detailed, analytical justifications for content restrictions. By explaining why a piece of content crosses cultural boundaries, the board can educate the public on media ethics and artistic boundaries, fostering a mature and responsible film culture.

Trusting Malaysians to engage in critical analysis of films is no different from trusting them to vote, pay taxes, and raise families – it deserves the same level of trust.