Eclipse (3rd of the Twilight Saga) by kriztine rosales-viray

July 16, 2010

 

Watching the twilight saga has been a scheduled date for me and my high school girlfriends.  It is the only time we get to be together and still share the kilig moments we have for edward and jacob, as if we are 15years or 16year-old teenyboppers on the loose. Last july 3, i watched eclipse with my husband and of course my girl pals at Sm North.  I was excited since it is the first movie from the twilight saga that my husband will see in the big screen.  My hubby was never a fan of such kind of movies.  He likes better political or philosophical films.  So it was really an effort for him to tag along with us. I promised him that he will like the movie.  But to my dismay, he slept on it.

I must say that among the 3 movies already shown of the saga, eclipse has the most talkies.  There were more parts that you will get bored and ask yourself if you can forward the scenes to the fast phased sequences so you save yourself from turning asleep.  The only scene i guess my husband loved was the fight scene of the wolves and the vampires (the bad ones). Maybe because he literally felt the trembling of the characters fighting since we watched it in dolby surround system.  Other than that, you will forget the other scenes of the movie. It focused on too many stories of the characters in the film that it failed to really emphasize on the importance of the forbidden but undying love of the major characters. I love edward and bella’s characters.  However, i think since the movie was actually derived from a book, the director and the screenwritier weren’t able to get out of the talkies sense of the film.  It became so bookish that those who have seen it and read the book at the same time felt that , “am i reading the book or am i watching the movie?”

Nevertheless, if you are a fan, you might just ignore it and get out of the cinema smiling, or grinning for at least, before the movie ended, edward was able to proposed to bella.  Plus the fact that for jacob-bella fanatics, bella and jacob kissed torridly for the first time!

I still have plans of watching breaking dawn with my girlfriends, for i would like to see in the big screen how bella will transform into a vampire. I just hope that the last of the saga would be the most memorable one…

 

 

 

Decin, Santa Teresa M. BBrC 3-3 Irr

November 15, 2009

The Letter I Would Love to Read to You In Person

By Alexis Tioseco

As this letter to his beloved in Slovenia displays, his relationship with local cinema is still very much like a long-distance love affair.

 

My Dear Nika,
I’ve been asked to write a column for this issue of Rogue, and the topic given to me was myself. I’ve always felt it awkward to write in public spaces about personal motivations behind the work I choose to do, so I have decided to use you as an excuse: there are things that you must know, that you may sense but not understand unless I tell you, and so I shall use this opportunity to put them on paper.

Besides, how could I say no to this offer when just the other day you recalled how an essay that was written by the solicitor of this column—in a previous incarnation of this magazine—played a central role in our being together? One must pay back one’s debts . . .

When we met in Rotterdam last January there was something about you that struck me immediately. It was not your beauty, or rather, not just your beauty, but your manner of speaking: which now sixteen months later still demands so much of me. There is a precious intensity in your gestures, the way in which your eyes dart and hands reach out to grab the right word, that illustrates how strong a desire you have to communicate, especially when the conversation turns toward the things that matter to you—the integrity of your work, the importance of nature, the concern for your brother. (I know what you’re thinking—shut up! I’m not a native speaker!—but this isn’t a question of familiarity with language.)

We both did not arrive at the festival in the best of conditions: you in ill health and from the disappointment of not closing the latest issue of Ekran before leaving Slovenia (compounded by you missing your flight and multiplied by a year’s fatigue of battling for editorial independence) and I from the solitude of learning to live alone, and of not yet having come to terms with the abrupt death of my father seven months before (something which, as you know, I am still attempting to do).

I wasn’t in a very good place the months before we met, reckless and hurried in my interactions with new acquaintances, but in Rotterdam it was hard not to fight for clarity and calm when the person before you, beleaguered and weary as they were, would still refuse to let their words slip carelessly . . .

I know sometimes you may think that it was the fact that we worked in the same field that attracted me to you, but I must tell you that this couldn’t be farther from the truth. Why? Because one of the greatest joys I believe one can feel is to share that which they find beautiful with someone who otherwise wouldn’t have noticed it, and to see it appreciated. This is the main reason why I love teaching and why I refuse to show Lord of the Rings to my students (no matter how fervently my co-teachers insist). It is also the evidence that cinema isn’t what brings us nearer to each other: because in this regard, we are on equal footing, and I must instead find other things in me to share with you. For anyone who knows me, they know how difficult that is . . .

Does a place mean more than a person? Does my work in the Philippines mean more than the possibility of a life with you, somewhere, anywhere else?

But Rogue wants to hear about cinema! Or at least about my work and what I have done in it. Why it means so much to me, and why I have done the things that I have. So it is about cinema that I must write! Some of this may seem like things you have heard, my dear Nika, but don’t worry, if I am successful it will all come together in the end, and you will see why it relates to you, to us, and to the future.

Allow me to begin with a story, one of which you may be quite familiar.

In 1997, my father decided that my brother Chris and I, together with my mother, should return to the Philippines (my father as you know had been going back and forth between Manila and Vancouver, never growing quite comfortable in Canada. Remind me to make you a copy of the essay “Where’s the patis?”).

We had moved to Canada in 1983, leaving the Philippines just a few months before the death of Ninoy Aquino and just a few months after my second birthday.

Like most teenagers, I was still growing comfortable in my own skin, or rather trying to, and the thought of moving to another country for my last two years of High School petrified me. I resisted: on one hand, I protested to my parents that I wanted nothing to do with a country that was so class conscious and so corrupt (though I didn’t mind going there for vacation . . . ), and on the other hand, inside, I just didn’t want to deal with attempting to infiltrate ill-fated High School social circles in a new country. I was also completely devastated about having to leave the first girl I ever slow danced with in my high school life—Melodie Pangan—who I’m sure never thought of me as anything more than a friend, but who I still called dramatically from the airport, in tears, telling her I loved her for the first time. But I digress . . . 

My father seduced my brother and I with the promise of round-the-clock air conditioning and a driver to take us wherever we wanted, which admittedly made the move easier to take (so much for my 16-year old defiance of class consciousness). Both of which, as it turned, were just selling points: things he was able, but unwilling, to provide.

As you know, we are five children in my family, but only Chris and I, together with my Mom, moved back. The primary excuse for it being just he and I was that we were the two youngest, and since Chris was just preparing to enter College and I was finishing my last two years of High School, we would both be able to adjust easier. But the other reason was also that we were men and, as men in the Philippines, he had wanted to groom us to take over the family business, to help maintain what he had established, or build on top of it. The primary reason, I believe, for him wanting my mother to come back was so that Chris and I would. We had grown quite close to my Mom over the years in Vancouver, as my Dad was often away, and he knew that her agreeing to go was the key to being able to bring us back. On the part of my Mom, she was settled in Vancouver, she wasn’t comfortable having helpers live in the house, and was used to cooking and cleaning herself and looking after us. She moved back for him, because he asked her to.

Two years passed, and my mother moved back to Vancouver. She had been battling bouts of depression caused by their fights, by her lack of control of the family, and it was decided that she would go to Vancouver for a while for therapy. I didn’t know at the time that it would be for good, it was supposed to be for two months. She returned for the first time in 2006 for my father’s funeral.

My brother Chris never quite settled in the Philippines. One theory we have was that he never got to imbibe the culture in a manner deeper than gimmicks in Makati—and as a majority of his good friends were foreigners and he had no Tagalog classes, he didn’t learn the language much. The other possibility is that he just wasn’t used to living under my father’s watchful eye. He graduated from University in June of 2001, and by August he moved back to Vancouver.

The first impulse of any good film critic, and to this I think you would agree, must be of love.

What was left of my Dad’s dream—of keeping the family together in the Philippines and of one of his sons taking a keen interest in the business? Me. And just me. With less people living in it, the house had more space, and I no longer shared my room with anyone, but I felt more and more suffocated. Upon graduating with my studies directed towards business management, I began working for my father. I lasted from June to November of 2004 before admitting that I couldn’t do it any longer. I would tell you I quit. My father told relatives at family gatherings he fired me. Either story will do now; it doesn’t really matter.

Sender: Dad
Date: 24-04-2006
Time: 05:19:51pm

“BF 2 GF’s rich dad: I wana mari ur dauter,
Dad: Do u work?
BF: Im a theology scholar.
Dad: Can u afford a weding?
BF: God wil provide.
Dad: Wat about a haus, raising a family & education of d kids?
BF: God wil provide.
Later…Mom: How’d it go dad?
Dad: D guy’s poor, & he thinks Im God!”

Sender: Dad
Date: 24-04-2006
Time: 05:22:32pm

“BF 2 GF’s rich dad: I wana mari ur dauter,
Dad: Do u work?
BF: Im a Unvrsty Profsor nd a film critic.
Dad: Can u afford a weding?
BF: God wil provide.
Dad: Wat about a haus, raising a family & education of d kids?
BF: God wil provide.
Later…Mom: How’d it go dad?
Dad: D guy’s poor, & he thinks Im God!”

I never wanted to be a film critic. To this day I abhor using the term for myself, but I’ve begun to do so regularly, just because it makes life easier.

Many filmmakers, especially filmmakers in the Philippines, have a problem with the word critic. We have little to no culture of healthy polemics in the country, as any attempt to consider fault is taken as a personal attack. Rare are those that are able to deal with it properly. One particular filmmaker took objection to the idea of a publication that I was to edit using the title “Criticine”: he had a problem with the word critic being included. A nasty term, I suppose he thought.

The first impulse of any good film critic, and to this I think you would agree, must be of love. To be moved enough to want to share their affection for a particular work or to relate their experience so that others may be curious. This is why criticism, teaching, and curating or programming, in an ideal sense, must all go hand in hand.

The first proper review of a Filipino film that I wrote was on Lav Diaz’s Batang West Side. I knew I liked movies, had even harbored thoughts of making them at one point, and I certainly took a measure of pride in being looked to by my peers as someone whose opinion was worth seeking. But despite this, and despite the surprising satisfaction of first seeing my name in print, I never had any interest in writing film criticism in any serious way.

It was not writing the review of Batang West Side (which I was quite proud of at the time, but look at with a bit of embarrassment for its simplicity today) that changed things for me, but rather what took place before and after writing it: the complete lack of engaging, intelligent writing on the film that engaged more than just the length. (Conrado de Quiros tried, and perhaps his championing was more important than the actual text.) Batang West Side, as you now, is 5-hours long, and if you read most of the articles that I mentioned (I dare not say discussed), this would likely be all that you knew. Even Jessica Zafra, after organizing a screening of the film through her engaging-if-but-short-lived FLIP Magazine (and having commissioned an article from Lav), proceeded to make crude jokes about the film in the letters section of the succeeding issue.

I was a junior in college when the film premiered, and in the five years I had lived in the Philippines, the closest I had come to connecting with culture via cinema were a few jokes in April, May, June, a film about three sisters starring the then quite popular Alma Concepcion and maybe SPO1 Don Juan: Da Dancing Policeman, starring the great Leo Martinez. Needless to say, Batang West Side was a departure, not only in length, but in aesthetic: its rhythm, the distance from the camera to its subject, the duration in which shots were held, the construction of the discourse (equally about past as about present), and most especially in its attitude towards its audience—its stubborn refusal to give in to our inherent need for a neat ending, instead forcing us to draw our own conclusions.

I wasn’t prepared for Batang West Side. I hadn’t heard of Lav Diaz and simply attended because it was during Cinemanila, and it’s not everyday someone makes a film of that length. I was curious. The film stuck with me. Especially so as one of the first films that made me think concretely about what it meant to be Filipino, about the pitfalls of migration. Perils that, I think for the first time now as I type this, my Dad probably understood better than anyone. It’s a shame he never got to see the film.

It was now a full year after Batang West Side premiered, a good few months after I wrote the article, and still little literature was available on the film. I contacted Lav and asked if I could interview him, to which he obliged graciously. The interview ran close to an hour, and I asked him all the questions I wished others had.

Happy with the results, which ran 12 pages long and was published on the website Indiefilipino.com (may she rest in peace, how I loved her so!), I used all the prepaid credit I had to text most everyone mildly interested in cinema in my modest phonebook to plug it. Hardly any of them responded, of course, but there were notes of appreciation on Indiefilipino’s forums, and it made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

There were people, it turned out, who were interested in reading serious writing on serious cinema—it just had to be written and published somewhere accessible.

The first impulse is always one of love.

The more films I saw, specifically local independent films, the more I wanted to see. The deeper I got, the more responsibility I felt, the stronger the need to do something, to share that which I found beautiful.

Writing in English, I never felt much of a need to write about foreign (non-Filipino) movies—though I’m often asked to, and mostly of Hollywood fare. While I love cinema in general, a passion that has grown exponentially over the years, I feel no need to put myself in service of that which doesn’t need it. The feeling has always been: why write about Juno when I’ve hardly read anything incisive put to print about the great animation of Roxlee? Why write about No Country For Old Men when there’s the brilliantly charming films of Antoinette Jadaone waiting to be discovered by readers? The same held true for a stint I had reviewing films every other week on The Breakfast Show on Studio 23. The informal terms of agreement: I could review anything I wanted, local or foreign, new or old, short or long, so long as they could get clips to show. It didn’t make waves by any means—it was but a single segment on a show for viewers with ADD—but I think it meant something to some people: Kris Villarino, the Cebu filmmaker who made the short Binaliw; the group of young upstarts from Davao starting a series of filmmaking workshops that has only grown over time; or the chaotic arrangement of an entire episode on independent filmmaking (before the term was abused) in Christmas 2005 that guested Raya Martin, Khavn De La Cruz, Mes De Guzman, Roxlee, Lav Diaz, Pam Miras, and a very shy John Torres speaking about his short films in public for the first time.

One thing has slowly progressed into another and, what began as a simple curiosity pursued with sincerity, has evolved into a commitment.

Philippine cinema has given much to me, and one must pay back one’s debts.

I never expected to have the opportunity to travel for/from film, especially not on the expenses of others—but, slowly, the opportunities presented themselves. Traveling is a privilege, and not one that I take lightly. In June 2004, as a fresh college graduate, I attended a conference in Singapore. A few months later, on the basis of my writing, I was selected to participate in the Asia-Europe Foundation’s Meeting of Young Film Critics from Europe and Asia. A few months later, I found myself in Berlin as part of the Berlinale Talent Press (though this was only partly subsidized, and it was a last minute loan from my brother in Canada that allowed me to go). A number of trips have ensued, to everywhere from Singapore (7x) to Hawaii, from New Dehli (2x) to Paris, Rotterdam, Oberhausen, and, of course, precious Slovenia, serving on juries and giving talks. All the time I’ve maintained the same stance: that it is important for people to write about their own cinemas and not let it be left to those outside to dictate what matters.

But these tickets, these travels, are expensive. Hotels are expensive. Time is expensive. The pollution caused by airplanes in the sky will cost us in the long run. When you put all these things together, it equals an investment: a serious investment made on and in an individual. Do I sound like I’m taking this too seriously? Allow me to phrase it another way: without the cultural investment made in me, for the work I have or can do with regard to Philippine cinema, I would have never met you. There is much to repay.

I don’t like writing about the Metro Manila Film Festival. I didn’t like it the first time I did it in 2003, nor did I the second or third time. I didn’t like it as well when, with the help of Erwin Romulo, we drafted a position paper seeking reforms in the festival and attempted to rally established filmmakers behind it (signatories included, among others, Eddie Garcia, Peque Gallaga, Jose Javie Reyes, Erik Matti). It’s not fun being told off like I was a two-bit journalist looking for a quote by filmmakers named Laurice. I didn’t like it, but I did it because part of me sincerely believed we could things. A belief that, for a few moments, was infectious, for even those that knew in the back of their mind that nothing would come of it still chose to take part. A friend whose couch I slept on for much of those weeks sent me a text sometime after, a message that now three years later is still saved on my phone:
There’s a line in AGUILA where a Moro secessionist is told his cause is lost. He replies to him that winning doesn’t matter, it’s doing what one feels one should do. That’s wisdom for you.

My dear Nika,
If there has been a single cause of strain that has stuck out in our relationship it is this: the idea of my attachment to the Philippines, the strong desire you see that I have to live and work here, and the way that, perhaps, you see this as a matter of misappropriate priorities. Does a place mean more than a person? Does my work in the Philippines mean more than the possibility of a life with you, somewhere, anywhere else? Must it be you that moves, makes the (I know you hate the word, but let us use it) sacrifice of moving? And what, if anything, does that say about us—that the scales of our love weigh more heavily on your chalice?

I know you’ve come to terms with the idea of moving here, hopefully next year, we discuss—but I still feel the need to talk a bit more about some of my reasons for wanting to stay, at the very least for the meantime. I’m not attempting to compare my affection for Manila with yours for Slovenia, but only to explain the thoughts that go through my head, the things I feel I must do, things that, perhaps, we can do together.

Yours,
Alexis

 

Title: Fame

Cast of Characters:

Naturi Naughton                   -           Denise Dupree

Collins Pennie                        -          Malik Washburn

Kay Panabaker                       -           Jenny Garrison

Asher Book                            -           Marco Ramone

Kherington Payne                 -           Alice Ellerton

Walter Perez                          -           Victor Taveras

Anna Maria Perez de Taglé -            Joy Moy

Paul Iacono                            -           Neil Baczynsky

Kristy Flores                           -           Rosie Martinez

Paul McGill                            -           Kevin Barrett

Debbie Allen                          -           Principal Angela Simms

Charles S. Dutton                  -           Mr. Alvin Dowd

Megan Mullally                     -           Ms. Fran Rowan

Kelsey Grammer                   -           Mr. Joel Cranston

Bebe Neuwirth                      -           Ms. Lynn Kraft

 

Director: Kevin Tancharoen

Writer: Allison Burnett

Synopsis:

                A story of talented individuals, who wanted to reach their dreams by entering New York’s High School of Performing Arts and their quest to overcome the trials to success. Through the help of their mentors they will be able to perform with great confidence and excellence.

Audience Suitability:

           General Patronage

Cinematic Focus:

            Obviously we can say that it is a character driven movie. It focuses on the characters’ talents on how to reach the fame they have been aiming for. 

 

Points of Observation:

            At first, it excites me. It is another musical movie that will be tasteful for everyone. But I guess, it is all about music. No conflict. No story at all. There are too much characters that it failed to connect those casts and be able to establish a good story. I guess that is one disadvantage of too much casts, there is no focus on the story. Maybe, lessen those and then add conflicts and twists.

 

Rating:

**

MOVIE REVIEW - HEINTJI SORIANO

ENDO

 

HEINTJI S. SORIANO, BBRC 3-3

 

Producer: Ned Trespeces and Michiko Yamamoto    

Cast of Characters:

Jason Abalos as Leo

Ina Feleo as Tanya

CJ Javarata as

Ricky Davao as

Alcris Galura as himself

 

Director: Jade Castro

Writer: Jade Castro, Michiko Yamamoto and Raymond Lee

 

Synopsis:

 

Leo’s life is a series of terminable contracts. He was unable to finish school and forced to be the family’s breadwinner. He takes on five months service-oriented jobs, one after another. This movie will show us if Leo’s love affair with the spirited dreamer Tanya finally give him a taste of security.

 

Audience Stability: R13

 

Points of Observation:

 

The story of was primarily focused on the life of the main character(I forgot) played by the newbie Jayson Abalos. The struggles and the journey that he went through from his family, to his love life and down to himself. Endo was easily one of the best films of last year. It told a love story set in the world of contractual labor, where people are trained to accept that everything is temporary. It’s a heartbreaking little tale that says so much with so little. It’s the antithesis of the modern Filipino romantic film, which has degenerated into absurd stories about absurd people falling in love in absurd ways, all in service of promoting the latest flavor-of-the-month love team. Endo attempts to stick to what’s real, and the honesty is refreshing.

            As far as I researched, the writer began to relate this to his own experience working without permanent status at ABS-CBN. These elements eventually came together as the spark of an idea. There wasn’t any solid story yet, but Jade knew that the experience was something to be shared. These observations told a much richer story about the state of the nation, of the worldview that everything is temporary. It began as a character study of contractual workers, but as it was pitched to Cinemalaya, it became a love story.

Jade wanted the film to stick to the truth as much as it could, since he sees the film as a loving tribute to the young contractual workers of today. His goal was just accurately depict the situation without being patronizing or condescending. “I don’t believe that movies change things,” he says. Critics of Endo has bashed the film for not being political enough, saying that the film should have just said everything outwardly. But Jade sees it another way. “It all starts with a genuine observation, with describing the problem.” People don’t like being preached to, and they are smart enough to come to their own conclusions. Jade trusts his audience to start reflecting on their own, without the film having to yell rhetoric in their ears. It’s a refreshing sentiment; people often underestimate the power of realism over social realism.

One thing I don’t like a bout this film is the unrelated live scenes which made the movie ‘OA’. And that the leading lady in the film was not good in acting. I don’t like her. But the whole package was interesting but with shallow story but is still a love story. It is primarily a love story; a well crafted one at that. It is the kind of independent film that one can really get behind and fall in love with.

RATING: ***

 

 

HIMALA

 

HEINTJI SORIANO

 

Movie production output (Producer): Charo Santos Concio

 

Cast of characters:

 

Nora Aunor                 as                     Elsa

Spanky Manikan          as                     Orly

Gigi Dueñas                 as                     Nimia

Laura Centeno                         as                     Chayong

Ama Quiambao           as                     Sepa

Veronica Palileo          as                     Mrs. Alba

Vangie Labalan            as                     Aling Saling

Aura Mijares                as                     Mrs. Gonzales

Ben Almeda                 as                     Baldo

Cris Daluz                    as                     Igme

Joel Lamangan                         as                     Priest

Ray Ventura                as                     Bino

Pen Medina                  as                     Pilo (as Crispin Medina)

Joe Gruta                     as                     Mayor

Tony Angeles              as                     Chief of Police

 

Director: Ishmael Bernal

Writer: Ricardo “Ricky” Lee

 

Synopsis:

 

In the forgotten town of Cupang in the Philippines, a young woman named Elsa (Nora Aunor) announces that she has seen the Virgin Mary — and then demonstrates a new-found ability to heal the sick. Soon the whole village has become the center of international attention as people come from all over for statues of the saints and bottles of the village’s holy water. Among the hordes of visitors is a skeptical film director intent on visually recording Elsa’s healing powers — and without his knowing it, some frames capture a secret Elsa has kept from the world for a long time, a secret which led to her sister’s suicide.

 

Audience Stability:  PG13

 

Well honestly, I haven’t completed watching the movie because of some tech. difficulty. That’s why I forced to just read about the movie on the net and until now I already know 3/4s of it. Though it’s too impossible, I don’t have any bad criticisms about the movie because it is one of the best films that I read.

 

DELETED SCENES:

 

In scene 29, as Mrs. Alba and Mayor were talking about their plans for Cupang, there must be a jeepney roaming around but it was not shown in the movie.

In Scene 31 there were deleted lines.

 

Nimia: Kelangan ganda-gandahan nyo nman an gang mga suot nyo. Para kayong mga taga-baryo.

Nestoy: Putang ina!        

Intong: Kuya, bat ka nagmura? Sabi ng inay, magagalit ang Diyos!

Aling Pising begging alms to Orly. But Orly ignored her and Aling Piling said, Pupunta ka sa impiyerno, kuripot?

 

Line of the Driver (Kina Elsa na lng libre pa. Halika makiusap tayo do’n sa Intsik) as he was helping Narding who pretended that he was being hold-up.

 

Opinion:

 

These lines were deleted because these are not important.

 

 

ADDED SCENES:

 

Aling Pising carried her slippers and Elsa’s slippers while running after the ambulance after Elsa’s death.

In scene 23, Nimia was supposed to be holding a blanket but in the movie it was Igmeng Bugaw who was holding it.

 

Opinion:

 

They added to show the personality of Elsa.

 

RATING: *****

 

 

ORO, PLATA, MATA

 

HEINTJI SORIANO

 

Executive Producer:

Charo Santos-Concio

 

Cast of Characters:

            Manny Ojeda as Don Claudio Ojeda

            Liza Lorena as Nena Ojeda

            Sandy Andolong as Maggie Ojeda

            Cherie Gil as Trining Ojeda

            Fides Cuyugan-Asensio as Inday Lorenzo

            Joel Torre as Miguel Lorenzo

            Mitch Valdez as Jo Russell (as Maya Valdez)

            Lorli Villanueva as Viring Ravillo

            Ronnie Lazaro as Hermes Mercurio

            Abbo De La Cruz as Melchor

            Mely Mallari as Estrella

            Mary Walter as Yaya Tating    

            Agustin Gatia as Lucio

            Robert Antonio as Carlos Placido

            Benjamin Delina as Primo (as Ben Deliña)

 

Director:

            Peque Gallaga

Writers:

Jose Javier Reyes (screenplay)
Peque Gallaga,  Mario Taguiwalo, and Conchita Castillo (story)

 

Synopsis:

            Oro Plata Mata traces the changing fortunes of two aristocratic families in Negros during World War II. The Ojeda family is celebrating Maggie Ojedas (Andolong) debut. In the garden, Trining (Gil) receives her first kiss from Miguel Lorenzo (Torre), her childhood sweetheart. Don Claudio Ojeda (Ojeda) and his fellow landowners talk about war. The youngest guests mock Miguels refusal to join the army and brand him mamas boy. The celebration is cut short by news of the fall of the Corregidor. As war nears the city, the Ojedas accept the invitation extended by the Lorenzos, their old family friends, to stay with them in their provincial hacienda. Nena Ojeda (Lorena) and Inday Lorenzo (Asensio) try to deny the realities of war by preserving their pre-war lifestyle. Pining for her fiancé, Maggie goes through bouts of melancholy. Miguel and Trining turn from naughty children into impetuous adults.

 
Two more family friends a doctor, Jo Russell (Valdez), guerillas and Viring (Villanueva) join them. As the enemy advance, the families move to the Lorenzos forest lodge. A group of weary guerillas arrive and Jo tends to their injuries. The guerillas leave Hermes Mercurio (Lazaro) behind. Miguel endures more comments of the same kind when he fails to take action against a Japanese soldier who came upon the girls bathing in the river. It is Mercurio who kills the Japanese. Maggie comforts Miguel, who decides to learn how to shoot from Mercurio. Meanwhile, Virings jewelry is stolen by Melchor (de la Cruz), the trusted foreman. He justifies his action as a reward for his services. He tries his to break the other servants loyalty, but they force Melchor to leave. Later, Melchor and his band of thieves return. They raid the food supplies, rape Inday and chop off Virays fingers when she does not take off her ring. Trining goes with the bandits, despite all the crimes they have committed against her family. These experiences committed Maggie and Miguel closer together. Miguel urges the survivors to resume their mahjong games to help them cope. Miguel is determined to hunts the bandits down and bring Trining back. He catches them, but his courage is replaced with bloodlust, driving him to a killing spree. An epilogue follows the violent climax. The Americans have liberated the Philippines from Japan. A party is held in the Ojeda home to announce Maggie and Miguels betrothal. The survivors attempt to reclaim their previous lifestyle, but the war has changed the world, just as it has forever marked each of them.

 

POINTS OF OBSERVATION:

Hindi siya bastos no!

 

Ang pelikula ay tungkol sa pagbagsak ng dalawang aristokratikong pamilya sa Negros sa kapanahunan ng Digmaang Pasipiko, nagsimula ito sa dibu ni Maggie Ojeda (Andolong). Sa hardin, nagkaroon si Trining (Gil) ng kanyang unang halik mula sa kanyang kasintahan mula pagkabata na si Miguel (Torre). Si Don Claudio Ojeda (Ojeda) at ang kanyang kapwa asindero ay nagtalakayan sa digmaan. Ang di-pagsama ni Miguel sa hukbo ay nabanggit at tinutuya siya sa pagiging isang “Mama’s boy.” Ang balita sa pagbagsak ng Corregidor ay nagpatigil sa pagdiriwang. Medyo malalim yung mga salita ng mga artista dito kaya hindi ko rin maintindihan yung iba, isa pa dahil maingay sa room nung pinapanuod naming to. Nanahimik lang ng konti nung may mga nakahubad na sa lawa na lalaking naliligo.

 

Nang sumapit ang digmaan sa lungsod, ang mga Ojeda ay nagpasiya na tanggapin ang kanlungan sa mga Lorenzo, ang kanilang kaibigang angkan sa mahabang panahon, sa kanilang panlalawigang hacienda. Ang mga matriyarka ng dalawang pamilyang ito ay nagpatuloy sa kanilang aristrokratikong istilo ng pamumuhay. Ang kanilang mahinay na pagtanggi sa pagtanggap na ang digmaan ay naiga ng mga madalas na malubay na sasal ni Maggie na naghihimatong para sa kanyang katipan, at ang mga pagbabago nina Miguel at Trining mula sa mapaglarong bata sa mapagsapalarang balubata.

Ang dalawang kaibigan, Jo Russell (Valdez) at Viring (Villanueva), ay sumanib sa mga Ojeda at mga Lorenzo. Nang sumasapit ang mga kaaway, nagpasiya ang mga angkan na lumipat nang higit na malayo sa bahay-pahingaan sa kagubatan ng mga Lorenzo. Ang pangkamag-anak na kapayapaan ay nabasag nang dumating ang pangkat na madambong na gerilya. Hinilom ni Jo ang kanilang mga sugat. Naiwan ang isa sa mga sugatan, si Mercurio (Lazaro). Tinuya muli ng pamilya si Miguel ukol sa kanyang pananabang at karuwagan; sinabi ni Trining kay Miguel na walang ginawa nang ang sundalong Hapones ay pumapatay ng isang babaeng naliligo sa tabing-ilog. Si Mercurio ang pumatay sa Hapones. Inaliw ni Maggie si Miguel, at nagpasiya ang binata na mag-aral sa pamamaril mula kay Mercurio.

Pagkatapos ninakaw ni Melchor (De la Cruz) ang mga alahas ni Viring, nagbibigay-dahilan ng pagnanakaw bilang kabayaran para sa kanyang paglilingkod. Nagtangka siya na basagin na ang katapatan ng mga iba pang alila at tumaboy. Kinabukasan, tinutop ni Melchor ang paghihiganti nang bumalik siya sa kubo kasama ang mga tulisan. Kinuha ang mga pangangailangan, ginahasa si Inday (Asensio), iniwa ang daliri ni Viring nang tumanggi siyang isuko ang kanyang singsing. Sa kabila ng pinsala na ginawa sa kanyang pamilya, sumama si Trining sa mga tulisan.

Ang karanasan ay nakabuo ng isang bigkis sa pagitan nina Maggie at Miguel; ang mga naulila ay nakaraos sa pamamagitan ng pagpapatuloy ng kanilang mga pulong sa madyong. Nagpasiya si Miguel na tugisin ang mga tulisan at manumbalik si Trining. Nahanap niya ang mga tulisan, nguni’t ang kanyang bagong-hanap na giting ay pinalitan ng isang kaululang lunggati na pumatay. Ang madugong karurukan ay sumunod sa isang epilogo. Ang mga tagpo ay magkatulad, subali’t ang panahon ay katatapos lamang ng digmaan. Nagpahayag sina Maggie at Miguel ang kanilang tipanan. Ang mga naulila ay nagsumikap na ipagpatuloy ang kanilang lumang istilo ng pamumuhay sa kabila ng kanilang mga pilat mula sa digmaan. Nakuha ko tong buod na ito sa Wikipedia kasi hindi ko rin masyado nalaman yung gusting ipahatid ng storya dahil hindi ata naming natapos o hindi ko namalayan na tapos na. ang alam ko lang ay nagkaroon ng maraming parangal tong pelikulang ito at isa ito sa maraming pelikulang Pilipino na maipagmamalaki natin.

 

RATING: ****

 

 

Jan Dara

 

HEINTJI SORIANO

Movie Production Output (Producer): Peter Chan Ho- Sun and Allan Fung

 

Cast of Characters:

 

Sunwinit Panjamawat as Jan Dara at

Santisuk Promsiri

 

Christy Chung Lai-Tai as Khun Booleaung

Eekarat Sarsukh

Vipavee Charoenpura

Patharawarin Timkul as Jan Dara at

 

Director: Nonzee Nimibutr

Writer: Nonzee Nimibutr and Sirapak Paoboonkerd

 

Synopsis:

 

Jan is born into the wealthy Visanan family in Bangkok in the 30s. His mother died in childbirth. And his father is an officious civil servant who likes to be called Khun Luang (Master). He hates the boy so much that Jan comes to question his real parentage. Khun Luang exercises “droit de seigneur” with almost every woman in the household, starting from Jan’s nanny to the kitchen maid. Jan rebels against him. This is partly a matter of moral disgust. But when fate and one particular unwanted pregnancy overturn the balance of power in the household, Jan risks becoming the mirror image of the man he most despises.

 

 

Audience Stability: R18

 

POINTS OF OBSERVATION:

 

The story is one-of-a-kind. The struggles and conflicts in the movie were familiar but because of the different approach with the unfolding of the story, it’s as if everything stood out and gave an indelible mark. This movie was based on a very controversial novel that was deeply challenged and considered ‘unfilmable’ by the Thai community due to its steamy sex passages. The film tells the story of one young man’s growth into the mirror image of the father he despises and uses sex as its primary window into its character’s thoughts and emotions.

 

There is skin in this film, lots of it, and this is a major issue for a film coming out of Thailand, a country which to this day has strict rules against nudity on screen. Thus in making Jan Dara, maybe Nonzee Nimibutr picked himself one massive fight with Thai censors, a fight that acquired his film a sight-unseen international reputation as an on-the-edge erotic skin flick, a reputation that is somewhat deserved but, I think, entirely misses the point of what Nonzee Nimibutr is trying to do.

 

The film follows the lines of a typical coming of age story, but with a much darker edge. Most films of that type treat sex as a positive but, though the skin is present here in large quantity, sex is not particularly a positive force in Jan Dara’s life. At first, one may be drawn into the idea that this film is a Thai erotic film but I can surely say that sex here is all vaguely distasteful; the director used it to show how hollow these people are, how damaged, how unable to connect on any sort of meaningful level. The sexual content is used to show how Jan follows inevitably in Luang’s footsteps; the film does have an awful lot to say about the damage one generation can do to the next.

The film itself is absolutely gorgeous. The period detail is flawless and the entire production is bathed in warm amber light that gives everything a quiet glow. Every shot was bathed in a golden, sepia tone and a dreamy mood served as a foil to the story’s more sordid happenings. It moves at a measured pace and the literary roots come through clearly in a structure heavily dependent on voice over to move things from one event to another, from one era to the next.

Though none of the performers stand out as truly exceptional they are all perfectly solid, turning in good work from start to finish. But apart from that, I can say that Khun Boonleuang (Christy Chung) had a great performance. There were neither extraordinary shots nor transitions but the simplicity brought the film at its best. Nimibutr came through with some truly breath taking and shocking imagery in the final act.

The continuity is exceptional and the sequence gives you a chance to think of what is to happen and arouses one’s expectations, paving the way for one to delve deeply into the real message a certain part of the film. Audio per se, it’s all good. It heightened the predominance of whatever mood is prominent in a scene which is a positive aspect for the film.

Jan Dara, judging its narrative and stylistic approaches, is not a bright and cheery piece of entertainment but the film is stunningly beautiful with something to say about human nature and certainly worth a look.

RATING: ****

 

FAME

HEINTJI S. SORIANO, BBRC 3-3

Producer: Mark Canton,Gary Lucchesi, Tom Rosenbero, Richard Wright (Metro Goldwyn Mayer Pictures)

Cast of Characters:   

    Naturi Naughton as………………………………….. Denise Dupree

    Collins Pennie as…………………………………….. Malik Washburn

    Kay Panabaker as……………………………………. Jenny Garrison

    Asher Book as……………………………………….. Marco Ramone

    Kherington Payne as…………………………………. Alice Ellerton

    Walter Perez as………………………………………. Victor Taveras

    Anna Maria Perez de Taglé as……………………….. Joy Moy

    Paul Iacono as………………………………………… Neil Baczynsky

    Kristy Flores as………………………………………. Rosie Martinez

    Paul McGill as………………………………………… Kevin Barrett

    Debbie Allen as………………………………………. Principal Angela Simms

    Charles S. Dutton as………………………………….. Mr. Alvin Dowd

    Megan Mullally as……………………………………. Ms. Fran Rowan

    Kelsey Grammer as……………………………………. Mr. Joel Cranston

    Bebe Neuwirth as……………………………………… Ms. Lynn Kraft

 

Director: Kevin Tancharoen

Writer: Allison Burnett

Synopsis:

This movie is based upon the 1980 film which follows NYC talent attending the New York City High School for the Performing Arts, (Known today as Fiorello H. Laguardia H.S.) students get specialized training that often leads to success as actors, singers, etc. In 1936, New York City Mayor Fiorello H. LaGuardia founded the High School of Music & Art in order to provide a facility where the most gifted and talented public school students of New York City could pursue their talents in art or music, while also completing a full academic program of instruction. In 1948, the School of Performing Arts was created to provide training in performance skills to students who wished to prepare for professional careers in dance, music or drama.

Audience Stability: R13

MOVIE REACTION:

Dream It - Earn It - Live It! Well honestly, when I first saw the ad of Fame in the movie house, I just ignore it and put my attention into much interesting movie ads. The movie was ‘OKAY’ not as good as Step Up 1&2. Maybe because the ‘climaxes’ (yes, the many climax) of the movie are subdivide into four which is quite irritating.

 

According to the history, the movie was based upon the 1980 film which follows NYC talent attending the New York City High School for the Performing Arts, students get specialized training that often leads to success as actors, singers, etc. obviously that’s why in the first day of audition there are a huge number of aspiring artists. What I do recognize in the movie was the way they put-up the climax was quite weak and slightly irritating. Because it was like they made each year a separate story which made it hard to cope-up with (for me). I don’t any further comments like the movie Jan Dara which I find it interesting.ü just like what I observed, the movie was not too good nor bad, it was just “OKAY”.

 

 

Minsa’y Isang Gamu-gamo

 

HEINTJI S. SORIANO, BBRC 3-3

 

Movie Producer : Lupita Concio Kashiwara

 

Cast of Characters: Nora Aunor- Corazon Dela Cruz

                                   Jay Ilagan-  Bonifacio Santos

                                  Gloria Sevilla- Chedeng Dela Cruz

                                  Perla Bautista- Yolanda Santos

                                  Eddie Villamayor- Carlito

                                  Paquito Salcedo-  “Ingkong”  Menciong

 

Director:  Lupita Concio Kashiwara

 

Writer: Marina Feleo-Gonzales (story)

 

AUDIENCE: GENERAL PATRONAGE

 

MOVIE REACTION ESSAY:

 

Dahil ang pelikulang ito ay gawa ng pinoy, minabuti kong ilahad ang aking sarili sa natural na paraan. Ang Minsa’y Isang Gamu-gamo ay isang pelikula mula sa Pilipinas na pinagbidahan ni Nora Aunor bilang Corazon de la Cruz at ipinalabas noong 1976. Ito ang unang komersyal na pelikula na may elementong pagbatikos sa pamamalagi ng mga base militar ng Estados Unidos sa Pilipinas. Naisip ng mga prodyuser na hindi pahihintulutan ng Pangulo noon na si Ferdinand Marcos ang pagpapalabas ng isang pelikulang hindi sumasang-ayon sa base militar ng Estados Unidos. Kaya sa kadahilanang ito, pinili nila si Nora Aunor bilang pangunahing artista dahil naniniwala sila na may koneksyon si Aunor sa Pangulo at sa Unang Ginang Imelda Marcos.

Sa abot ng aking makakaya, sa kabila ng maiingay kong kapatid at madaldal kong nanay, pinanuod ko ito ng mataimtim at may hinahon. Maganda ang pelikula dahil ito’y sumasalamin sa buhay ng mga Pilipino ng panahon ng rehimeng Marcos. Ang pagkakaisip ng manunulat kung ano ang mangyayari sa kapatid ni Corazon ay nakakbigla dahil sa kadahilanang paalis na ng bansa si Corazon at nangyari ang mga bagay na iyon.

Ang pelikulang ito ay nasa direksyon ni Lupita A. Concio, panulat ni Marina Feleo-Gonzales, at pinagbibidahan nina Nora Aunor, Jay Ilagan, Perla Bautista, Gloria Sevilla, Eddie Villamayor, Paquito Salcedo, atbp. Kilala ang pelikulang ito sa linya “My brother is not a pig…” (Ang kapatid ko’y hindi baboy) na sinambit ng karakter ni Aunor na si Corazon de la Cruz. Madalas itong banggitin ng mga nanggagaya kay Aunor katulad nina Teri Onor at Ate Gay. Para naring nagging trademark na ni Nora itong linyang ito dahil sa paraan ng pagkakabigkas niya dito ay tunay nga na kakila-kilala.

 

 

 

 

 

 

a movie review by: Marc Andrew M. Maranan

November 14, 2009

 

ORO, PLATA, MATA- a movie review by Marc Andrew M. Maranan BBrC 3-1D(irreg) 

Executive Producer:

Charo Santos-Concio

 

Cast of Characters:

            Manny Ojeda as Don Claudio Ojeda

            Liza Lorena as Nena Ojeda

            Sandy Andolong as Maggie Ojeda

            Cherie Gil as Trining Ojeda

            Fides Cuyugan-Asensio as Inday Lorenzo

            Joel Torre as Miguel Lorenzo

            Mitch Valdez as Jo Russell (as Maya Valdez)

            Lorli Villanueva as Viring Ravillo

            Ronnie Lazaro as Hermes Mercurio

            Abbo De La Cruz as Melchor

            Mely Mallari as Estrella

            Mary Walter as Yaya Tating    

            Agustin Gatia as Lucio

            Robert Antonio as Carlos Placido

            Benjamin Delina as Primo (as Ben Deliña)

 

Director:

            Peque Gallaga

Writers:

Jose Javier Reyes (screenplay)
Peque Gallaga,  Mario Taguiwalo, and Conchita Castillo (story)

 

Synopsis:

            Oro Plata Mata traces the changing fortunes of two aristocratic families in Negros during World War II. The Ojeda family is celebrating Maggie Ojedas (Andolong) debut. In the garden, Trining (Gil) receives her first kiss from Miguel Lorenzo (Torre), her childhood sweetheart. Don Claudio Ojeda (Ojeda) and his fellow landowners talk about war. The youngest guests mock Miguels refusal to join the army and brand him mamas boy. The celebration is cut short by news of the fall of the Corregidor. As war nears the city, the Ojedas accept the invitation extended by the Lorenzos, their old family friends, to stay with them in their provincial hacienda. Nena Ojeda (Lorena) and Inday Lorenzo (Asensio) try to deny the realities of war by preserving their pre-war lifestyle. Pining for her fiancé, Maggie goes through bouts of melancholy. Miguel and Trining turn from naughty children into impetuous adults.

 
Two more family friends a doctor, Jo Russell (Valdez), guerillas and Viring (Villanueva) join them. As the enemy advance, the families move to the Lorenzos forest lodge. A group of weary guerillas arrive and Jo tends to their injuries. The guerillas leave Hermes Mercurio (Lazaro) behind. Miguel endures more comments of the same kind when he fails to take action against a Japanese soldier who came upon the girls bathing in the river. It is Mercurio who kills the Japanese. Maggie comforts Miguel, who decides to learn how to shoot from Mercurio. Meanwhile, Virings jewelry is stolen by Melchor (de la Cruz), the trusted foreman. He justifies his action as a reward for his services. He tries his to break the other servants loyalty, but they force Melchor to leave. Later, Melchor and his band of thieves return. They raid the food supplies, rape Inday and chop off Virays fingers when she does not take off her ring. Trining goes with the bandits, despite all the crimes they have committed against her family. These experiences committed Maggie and Miguel closer together. Miguel urges the survivors to resume their mahjong games to help them cope. Miguel is determined to hunts the bandits down and bring Trining back. He catches them, but his courage is replaced with bloodlust, driving him to a killing spree. An epilogue follows the violent climax. The Americans have liberated the Philippines from Japan. A party is held in the Ojeda home to announce Maggie and Miguels betrothal. The survivors attempt to reclaim their previous lifestyle, but the war has changed the world, just as it has forever marked each of them.

Recommended areas for study:

Government:

Our country was under the government of  America as how it was shown in the movie. And as the Japanese reached our shores they immediately  took over. Ths just shows that the our country’s sake lies in the hands of other countries during that time and our country was very weak it can’t even have it’s own government system.

Millitary:

The movie showed how weak our armed forces during the 2^nd world war. It was shown through scenes that shows our soldiers going home wounded and exhausted.

 

Poverty:

The ojedas and lorenzos experienced great poverty when they moved in the deep part of the forest. All of their wealth was left behind together with all of the luxuries they have  before the japanese reached their place.  When they moved in to the forest they relied with the supplies they saved. It was melchor who showed the bad effect of poverty. It is when he stole vinings jewelries that made realize the bad effects of poverty to him.

Survival:

Survival was the main theme of this movie. Almost all of the characters showed their desire for survival. Their struggle for survival started when the Japanese made their occupation in our country. Among the characters it was Trining Ojeda(Cherrie Gil) who showed great desperation for survival. She was so desperate to the point that she used her body in seducing men whom she thinks could save her.

Battle of the sexes:

In the movie it is the men who are the dominant sex. But even if men were the strongest and dominant  the woman could still be their weakness as what was shown in the  movie. Trining, I guess, is the best manipulator among the characters of this movie.

Audience Stability: R-18

Cinematic focus:

Its an experimantal and plot driven film. It was experimental because the movie presented three different periods which are the ORO, PLATA and MATA. Although  the setting of the movie is during the 2^nd World War the movie didn’t focused on the war but instead it focused on how will the characters survive the effects of the war. The plot of the movie was about survival of the characters and it was shown by the characters.

Points for Observation:

The movie was really good showing how flexible filipinos are. It was shown in the movie that Filipinos can adapt to change even if the situation is really crucial. It’s a good thing that this film was able to show that Filipinos could still act based with  their values no matter what the situations is.

Should not’s

They should have done the grose scenes much lighter than how it was done. The scene wherein Hermes killed a wounded Japanese soldier was very unhuman. With these kind of scenes the audience could loose their interest in watching the film.

Should Be’s

The movie should have been shortened. It somehow bores the audience when a movie is too long.

 

Well presented

Scenes which show the characters struggle for survival were the best scenes of the movie. The desperation for survival of each of the characters was really felt and present.

Rating:

4 starrs

 

Jan Dara- A movie review by: Marc Andrew M. Maranan BBrC 3-1D (irreg)

Movie Production Output:

Cinemasia; Peter Chan Ho-Sun

Cast of Characters:

Suwinit Panjamawat as teenage Jan Dara

Santisuk Promsiri as Khun Luang, Jan Dara’s father

Christy Chung as Boonlueang

Eakarat Sarsukh as adult Jan Dara

Wipawee Charoenpura as Aunt Waad

Patharawarin Timkul as Kaew

 

Director: Nonzee Nimibutr

Writer: Nonzee Nimibutr (screenplay)

Sirapak Paoboonkerd (screenplay)

Utsana Phleungtham (original story)

 

Synopsis:

Widely considered Thailand’s leading director of the late ’90s, Nonzee Nimibutr spins this erotic drama based on one of that country’s most popular and controversial literary works. Jan Dara was cursed from the beginning when his mother, Dara, died during childbirth. His autocratic, libidinous father, Khun Luang, cursed and abused the child, calling him a bastard. Meanwhile, Khun Luang dealt with his sudden widower status by engaging in perverse, licentious behavior, often right in front of a portrait of his late wife. When his mother’s friend, Waad, comes to Khun Luang’s estate to look after the child, the patriarch wastes no time in seducing her. Soon Waad bores Kaew, who Khun Luang teaches to hate Jan Dara. Later, the old man marries his former lover, the nymphomaniac Boonlueang, who teaches the teenage Jan Dara his first lessons in the ways of love. Eventually, our abused hero is thrown out of his father’s estate when Kaew frames him for raping her. Years pass and the formerly powerful Khun Luang, ravaged by age and disease, is a shell of the man he was before. Jan Dara is asked to return to his ancestral estate to marry Kaew, who is now pregnant, and only does so when he is promised the deed to the house. Once ensconced, Jan Dara begins taking the same libertine pleasures as his father, unwittingly becoming the very person he loathes.

Recommended Subject Areas for study:

Family:

Though jan dara grew up without a mother and hated by his father he still found and felt the love of a parent through his aunt Waad. I have seen how aunt Waad learned to love Jan Dara and treated him as if he was her own child. I also saw how she cared for Jan Dara when she proctected him from Khun Luang.

Wealth:

Khun Luang showed how wealthy he is when he gave a house to Khun B. though and by having many woman though he doesn’t have a job anymore.

Power:

Khun Luang is the most powerful character in the movie.  Everyone feared him to the point that no one even dares to oppose his decisions. No one could stop him especially from bringing different girls in their house.

Love :

I’ve seen different side of love in this movie. I saw the love of a mother to a child. Though Jan Dara was not Waad’s real son she still treated him as her’s. the love of a husband to his wife was shown by Khun Luang. He had so much love for his wife that even though his wife is already dead he still want to be with her. He can’t accept the death of his wife that’s why to remember her he have sex with woman infront of his wife’s portrait and assumes that is was his wife he’s having sex with. Sex have been his way to move on with the death of his wife.  Jan dara showed the love of a guy to lady. He showed that admiration could turn into love. His moments with Hyacinth were very romantic, especially their first meeting. The music, the camera shot emphasized the feeling in that scene.

Lust:

Lust was present all through out the movie. Every sex scene and every scene showing Jan Dara is being tempted lust was greatly emphasized.

Cinematic Focus:

The movie is a character driven movie. If focuses on how Jan Dara grew up and how his environment along with it’s elements affects his development. The movie focused on the struggles that Jan Dara had gone through as he tries to live a normal life and be accepted by his family.

Points for observation:

Luscious and a little bit malicious. By having may sex scenes I think the movie went very far away from being luscious and had almost become a bold film.

Should Not’s

The sex scenes that involves child should be deleted or replaced. Though these scenes were important I really think that these were very immoral and very inappropriate.

Should Be’s

They should have lessen the sex scenes. Some of these scenes were unnecessary.

Well presented:

Each scenes were well presented. on each scene emotions were highly emphasized. Every aspect and element gives and emphasis to the feeling they want the audience to feel.

Rating:

4 stars

 HIMALA- A movie review By: Marc Andrew M. Maranan BBrC 3-1D(irreg)

 

Movie production output (Producer): Charo Santos Concio

 

Cast of characters:

 

Nora Aunor as Elsa

Spanky Manikan as Orly

Gigi Dueñas as Nimia

Laura Centeno as Chayong

Ama Quiambao as Sepa

Veronica Palileo as Mrs. Alba

Vangie Labalan as Aling Saling

Aura Mijares as Mrs. Gonzales

Ben Almeda as Baldo

Cris Daluz as Igme

Joel Lamangan as Priest

Ray Ventura as Bino

Pen Medina as Pilo (as Crispin Medina)

Joe Gruta as Mayor

Tony Angeles as Chief of Police

 

Director: Ishmael Bernal

Writer: Ricardo “Ricky” Lee

 

Synopsis:

 

In the forgotten town of Cupang in the Philippines, a young woman named Elsa (Nora Aunor) announces that she has seen the Virgin Mary — and then demonstrates a new-found ability to heal the sick. Soon the whole village has become the center of international attention as people come from all over for statues of the saints and bottles of the village’s holy water. Among the hordes of visitors is a skeptical film director intent on visually recording Elsa’s healing powers — and without his knowing it, some frames capture a secret Elsa has kept from the world for a long time, a secret which led to her sister’s suicide.

 

Audience Stability:  PG13 (Children should be accompanied by adults.)

 

There is a huge difference between this movie ( HIMALA)  and the movies I’ve watched before. This film depicts  the grim consequences when people use faith to advance themselves.

 

While I’m watching the movie, I am handling an original copy of the screen play then, I observed that there were many words and lines added and changed. I don’t know if it is because of the artist or if it is because of the director.

 

After watching this movie, the writer of the Himala, Mr. Ricardo Lee talk something about the film. He said that there were  many lines/scenes that were deleted. Like for example, the  “putang ina” word that were  deleted by the MTRCB.  According to MTRCB, “putang ina” can be shown in the movie only if the scene requires too but if not, it rather not showed.  Deletion and addition of scenes were only made for morale purposes.

 

DELETED SCENES:

 

In scene 29, as Mrs. Alba and Mayor were talking about their plans for Cupang, there must be a jeepney roaming around but it was not shown in the movie.

In Scene 31 there were deleted lines.

 

Nimia: Kelangan ganda-gandahan nyo nman an gang mga suot nyo. Para kayong mga taga-baryo.

Nestoy: Putang ina!        

Intong: Kuya, bat ka nagmura? Sabi ng inay, magagalit ang Diyos!

Aling Pising begging alms to Orly. But Orly ignored her and Aling Piling said, Pupunta ka sa impiyerno, kuripot?

 

Line of the Driver (Kina Elsa na lng libre pa. Halika makiusap tayo do’n sa Intsik) as he was helping Narding who pretended that he was being hold-up.

 

Opinion:

 

I think these lines were deleted because these were unnecessary. 

 

 

ADDED SCENES:

 

Aling Pising carried her slippers and Elsa’s slippers while running after the ambulance after Elsa’s death.

In scene 23, Nimia was supposed to be holding a blanket but in the movie it was Igmeng Bugaw who was holding it.

 

Opinion:

 

They added this scene to show how they love Elsa.

 

Rating:

 

5 stars

 

FAME- A Movie review by: Marc Andrew M. Maranan BBrC 3-1D (irreg)

Director:  Kevin Tancharoen

Writers (WGA): Allison Burnett (screenplay)
Christopher Gore (1980 motion picture “Fame”)

 

Cast:

Kay Panabaker	…	Jenny Garrison
Naturi Naughton	…	Denise Dupree
Kherington Payne	…	Alice Ellerton
Megan Mullally	…	Ms. Fran Rowan
Bebe Neuwirth	…	Ms. Kraft
Debbie Allen	…	Ms. Angela Simms
Asher Book	…	Marco
Cody Longo	…	Andy Matthews
Walter Perez	…	Victor Taveras
Charles S. Dutton	…	Mr. James Dowd
Kelsey Grammer	…	Mr. Martin Cranston
Collins Pennie	…	Malik Washburn
Anna Maria Perez de Tagle	…	Joy
Paul McGill	…	Kevin Barrett
Paul Iacono	…	Neil Baczynsky

 

Synopsis:

 

This movie is based upon the 1980 film which follows NYC talent attending the New York City High School for the Performing Arts, (Known today as Fiorello H. Laguardia H.S.) students get specialized training that often leads to success as actors, singers, etc. In 1936, New York City Mayor Fiorello H. LaGuardia founded the High School of Music & Art in order to provide a facility where the most gifted and talented public school students of New York City could pursue their talents in art or music, while also completing a full academic program of instruction. In 1948, the School of Performing Arts was created to provide training in performance skills to students who wished to prepare for professional careers in dance, music or drama.

 

Recommended Subject areas fo study:

Family:

I saw in this film that family could sometimes be one of the hindrances from achieving our dreams.  Sometimes what we want is not what our parents want us to have.  Like for Malik, his mother has plans for his future and being a performer is not one them.

Youth:

The movie shows the stories of teenagers who are longing to be famous.  teenagers energy was shown in this movie and also the interpretaion of arts of our youths today was shown in the movie.

Dreams and aspirations:

The main theme of the movie was about achieving dreams and aspirations. Each character displayed their  desire to excel in their chosen form of art. Each character showed eagerness in achieving their dreams. Some even got desperate. Like jenny. Because of her desperation she ended up falling into the tricks of Andy Matthews. Joy also showed desperation on being famous when she worked and eventually neglected her studies.

Education:

The movie expressed how important and how essential  for a student to be guided by his/her teacher especially regarding their studies. In the movie, it was their teacher who have given them the motivation they to do good in their craft.

Arts:

The movie showed how the youth today expresses their perception of arts. It was seen through their usage of  different forms of arts.

Culture:

The movie showed that arts is always a part of any culture that even  time have passed art is still there. It also shows how the culture of the youth of this generation perceived and expresses arts.

Cinematice focus:

The movie is a story and character driven movie. The movie presented how each character achieves their dreams and aspirations.  Each character have their own story of success, sacrifices and tests.

Points for observatio:

Youthful that’s how I see this movie. with all of the songs played and the energy shown by the characters, there’s no doubt that this movie is indeed a movie that all youth should watch. 

Should nots:

They should have lessened the kissing scenes of the teenagers. I think that it would be better if they’ll keep this movie as wholesome and as conservative as they could so that lower age group could watch this movie.

Should Be’s:

They should replace the ending. Its better if they gave a different ending for each character.

Well presented:

The scene at the canteen was my favorite part of the movie. I love how a single drum beat became a very good music.  There were dancers and different music instrument players in that scene which was very entertaining because it adds variation to that scene.

Kadin- A movie review by: Marc Andrew M. Maranan BBrC 3-1D (irreg)

Title: Kadin (the goat)

A Cinemalaya Independent Film (2007) winner

 KADIN- A movie review by Marc Andrew M. Maranan BBrC 3-1D(irreg)

Producer: Adolfo Borinaga Alix Jr.

                Bicycle Productions with Ignite Media

Cast of characters:

Rico Mark Cardona as…………………. Peping (The young boy)

 Monica Joy Camanillas………………….Lita (The little sister)

Simon Ibarra…………………………….. Councilor

Angel Aquino…………………………….Councilor’s Wife

Director: Adolfo Borinaga Alix Jr.

Writer: Adolfo Borinaga Alix Jr.

Synopsis:

A goat named Gami was stolen from the Ivatan family of the young boy named Peping (Rico Mark Cardona). It was a goat that has been a part of the family – a care and a duty because it reminds them of their deceased mother. Gami was named and cared by the mother of the young boy because it easily get cold, until one day the both the goat and the mother got sick and eventually leads to the mother’s death. The movie was about the pursuit of this young boy to find and bring Gami (the goat) home before night falls. It has never been a good journey in finding Gami – hardships and failures came along, but like the resilient island of Batanes, the pursuit paid off.

Recommended subject areas for study:

Family:

It was Peping who have shown his love for his family. He looked for Gami because their family has treated this goat as one of its members. The movie shows how the Filipino culture values the preservation of love among the members of the family.

Values:

There was a great emphasis on the Filipino values in the movie.

Audience Stability: PG-13

Cinematic Focus:

It is more of a Technical and Experimental Driven story. The movie showcased the beauty of Batanes, not only the place itself but including the wonderful tradition and culture that some of us fail to even recognize. The beauty of batanes enhances the beauty of the whole movie. There was not enough emphasis on the story of the characters.

Points for Observation:

The movie was a little bit boring, there were scenes which I think are unnecessary and can be already deleted or shortened. I also wish that the tradition that was continually shown in the movie was somehow explained. The experimental way of making this movie is very subjective and can’t easily be understood. The shots are great though I really commend them for making the province of Batanes as their location. And also I like the way the story end because somehow in a way their great and long journey was worth it.

Ratings:  3 stars

Masahist- A movie Review by: Marc Andrew M. Maranan BBrC 3-1D (irreg)

 

Title of the Movie:

Masahista

 

Executive Producer:

Fedelyn T. Geling

Ma. Lourdes Geling

Marissa Cua

Dante Venus Mungcal

 

Cast of Characters:

Coco Martin as Iliac

Jacklyn Jose as Naty

Allan Paule as Alfredo / Marina Hidalgo

Katherine Luna as Tessa

Paolo Rivero as Andrew

Kristoffer King as Lester

 

Director:

            Brillante Mendoza

 

Writers:

Boots Agbayani Pastor (screenplay)

Boots Agbayani Pastor (story)

 

Synopsis:

Iliac (Coco Martin) is a young guy who has moved from the country side to Manila, and is now working in a gay massage house in Manila in order to earn a living. His job as a masseur includes catering to the whims of his clients, which often include sexual favours. The movie introduces us to the seedy world of gay massage parlors, where we see the masseurs servicing their clients in adjacent cubicles.

In the movie, Iliac meets Alfredo (Allan Paule), a romance novelist who is his first customer of that evening. Over the massage, they each share a little of their stories and we soon find out that Iliac must return home to prepare for his father’s funeral, who has died after a long illness.

The masseur examines the roles that Iliac has to fulfill – as a masseur who needs to fulfill his professional obligations to his clients; and as a son who needs to fulfill his family responsibilities. As the movie progresses, we find our love lorn protagonist trying to win the affection of Alfredo.

Recommended subject areas for study:

            *Society – The situation in our society was reflected in the movie. Stereotypically, men are usually the breadwinner, and they really struggle to earn a living.

*Lesbianism/Homosexuality – The movie shows the man man to man sex scenes. And this also happens in reality.

*Family and Culture – In our culture, the men are usually the breadwinner. In order for them to earn a living, some of them are engaged in doing different jobs. Some of them would sell their own body just to earn money and to support their family.

*Poverty – This is the main cause why people are engaged in doing jobs such as offering massage and sexual services.  The scene where iliac gave had sex with a gay shows how desperate he is to earn money.

 

Audience Stability:

            R18

 

Cinematic Focus:

            The movie is character driven and an experimental driven movie. There’s this scene where he moves from the protagonist life as a masseur, doing his thing in the massage parlor then intertwining to his life as a dutiful son consoling his mother and helping in preparing his father for burial then intertwining it again to the massage scene. The movie showed us on how he faces all the challenges in life and he kept his secret from his family.

 

Points for Observation:

            Should Not’s – Some of the scenes showing masseurs are not really needed. especially the scene wherein an old man was being foreplayed by a masseur.

            Sould Be’s – Lessen the sexual acts in the film.

            Well Presented – Pictured the family life and the consequences of distance between father and son.

 Rating:

4 stars

Jan Dara

Mary Ann V. Garcia

BBrc 3-3d

Title: Jan Dara

Synopsis:

Widely considered Thailand’s leading director of the late 90’s, Nonzee Nimibutr spins this erotic drama based on one of that country’s most popular and controversial literary works. Jan Dara was cursed from the beginning when his mother, Dara, died during childbirth. His autocratic, libidinous father, Khun Luang, cursed and abused the child, caling him a bastard. Meanwhile, Khun Luang dealt with his sudden widower status by engaging in perverse, licentious behavior , often right in front of a portrait of his late wife. When his mother’s friend, Waad, comes to Khun Luang’s estate to look after the child, the patriarch wastes no time in seducing her. Soon Waad bores Kaew , who Khun Luang teaches to hate Jan Dara. Later, the old man marries his former lover, the nymphomaniac Boonlueang, who teaches the teenage Jan Dara his first lessons in the ways of love. Eventually , our abused hero is thrown out of his father’s estate when Kaew frames him for raping her. Years pass and the formerly powerful Khun Luang, ravaged by age and disease, is a shell of the man he was before. Jan Dara is asked to return to his ancestral estate to marry Kaew , who is now pregnant , and only does so when he is promised the deed to the house. Once ensconced, Jan Dara begins taking same libertine pleasures as his father, un wittingly becoming the very person he loathes.

Director:  Nonzee Nimibutr

Writer:  Nonzee NImibutr

 

Cast of Characters:

 

§  Suwinit Panjamawat as teenage Jan Dara

§  Santisuk Promsiri as Khun Luang, Jan Dara’s father

§  Cristy Chung as Boonlueang

§  Eakarat Sarsukh as adult Jan Dara

§  Wipawee Charoenpura as Aunt Waad

§  Pathawarin Timkul as Kaew

 

 

 

Cinematic Focus:

Character driven – The movie start to  focused in the life of  Jan Dara whose story  begins when he was cursed by his father  Khun Luang. His miserable life begins with his father were at his young age he witnessed a sexual intercourse. Jan Dara begins taking same libertine pleasures as his father, un wittingly becoming the very person he loathes.

 

 

Reaction:

At first, I was totally shocked in the following scenes. Because for me it was too malicious and it’s very humiliating to be watched. But as the movie goes by, I knew that there’s a beautiful story beyond those love scenes. But, it is still confusing for those who will watch the movie.

 

2 stars

Olivhet D. Fernandez

Olivhet D. Fernandez

BBrc 3-3D

2007-202519-7

 

Title:  “Minsan may isang gamu-gamo” (                                      )

Movie Producer : Lupita Concio Kashiwara

Cast of Characters: Nora Aunor- Corazon Dela Cruz

                                   Jay Ilagan-  Bonifacio Santos

                                  Gloria Sevilla- Chedeng Dela Cruz

                                  Perla Bautista- Yolanda Santos

                                  Eddie Villamayor- Carlito

                                  Paquito Salcedo-  “Ingkong”  Menciong

Director:  Lupita Concio Kashiwara

Writer: Marina Feleo-Gonzales (story)

 

Recommended subject areas for study: Filipino-American relationship (past to present), socio-political problems.

Audience Suitability: General Patronage (GP) or General Audience (GA)

 

SYNOPSIS:

                            A lady nurse whose family resides near a U.S military base harbors an American dream. She wants to work and live in the land of milk and honey. Now that her departure papers are ready, she plans to avail of a green card after 1 year stint in a hospital, change her status to immigrant and finally petition her family. With her ambition, she ignores the gross injustices and abuses brought about by the American military presence in the country.  But on the eve of her travel, tragedy strikes. An American soldier accidentally shoots and kills her young brother.

 

 

 

 

Cinematic Focus:

“Minsan  may isang gamu-gamo” reflects the Philippines’ status in 1969 and the similarities of the Philippines now and then. Especially the rampant situation about nurses flying abroad and looking for a greener pasture it also tackle colonial mentality where in Filipinos are very much enticed with American products or (Imported). Patriotism is really in a risk that time.

Points of Observation

 I really like the technical aspect of the film because it’s very natural. I also like how Nora acts in this movie because she is very consistent. I just notice a scene of Nora and Eddie (his younger brother) that looks like they are lovers maybe because Nora looks as young as Eddie. So if you haven’t watched the film from the beginning you will think that they are not siblings.

Well Presented:

I think there is a scene in the film that enlightens every viewer it is when Corazon (Nora) suddenly refuses to fly and work abroad after what happened to her younger brother. And her mother Chedeng(Gloria Sevilla) still persistent of convincing her to go for her dreams. At the end she still chose not to go with the dialogue. “Para malaman nila na may isang gamu-gamo na hindi natakot sa lawin” that only proves that not all Filipinos that time are American underdogs.

Should not:

 However there is a scene in the film that I don’t want it is when Yolanda  was about to go out of the base and the Filipina lady guard checked her bag and found nothing. She asked Yolanda to go upstairs and started checking even her underwear until she asked to take it off. After that she waved it in front of the American soldiers to degrade Yolanda. Instead of helping Yolanda as her Countrymen I think the lady guard did that because she is blinded with power. 

Another scene in the film that is not good for Filipino image where Yolanda compromised with the Americans instead of pursuing the case because Philippine Justice is not reliable that time.

Should be:

It will be more believable if an American guard did that.

Finding the middle ground or to compromise I think is not the best solution in Yolanda’s case. The court should fight for the right and judge for the right especially we are in our own country. 

 

Olivhet D. Fernandez

BBrc 3-3D   

2007-202519-7

 

 

Title: “Endo” (                             )

Movie Producer: Michiko Yamamoto - UFO Pictures

     Cast of Characters:  Jason Abalos – Leo

                                        Ina Feleo- Tanya

                                        Angeli Bayani- Candy

                                        Ricky Davao- Itay

                                        Alcris Galuran- Younger brother

   

 Director/Writer: Jade Castro

Subject areas for study: Family,Love, Responsibility.

Audience suitability: Parental Guidance 13 (PG13)

 

Synopsis:

                Leo (Jason Abalos) belongs to a pover family. Because he did not finish his studies, his only option is to go as a contracted worker in various establishments. In one job, he met a high- spiritual girl named Tanya (Ina Feleo) with whom he got automatically involved romantically. In their relationship, he wishes to feel fulfillment and sense of security with her but he is not prepared for additional commitment.

 

Cinematic focus:

           The film clearly exposed the instability of jobs in the Philippines and how resilient filipinos are to meet both ends. Life is presented in a circular manner or round where you have to go back on where you are used to. Especially on jobs that sometimes “love” is never primary option because of your obligation to your family.

 

 Points of Observation:

       I noticed that the locations are not consistent from inside and outside the mall. But I really like the story because it gives you an idea about the reality of life here in the Philippines.

 

Well Presented:

There is a scene in the film that I really like the most because I think that it’s the most symbolic scene. It is when Leo (Jason Abalos) returned the cd player to his first girlfriend it symbolized that he wants to move on. That he won’t be stuck anymore to anything and learn to detach his self if necessary.

Should Not:

I think the love scenes of Tanya and Leo hasn’t been established so well and served its purpose of putting it. And also the scenes where Tanya is the one making the first move to court Leo it contradicts the conservative trait of a Filipina. I think it is more a western attribute.

Should Be:

I think the love scenes should be change in to more necessary scenes like establishing conflict between Candy and Tanya. And in the scene where Tanya is doing the first move to Leo it should be Leo for the character of Tanya not to look so desperate.

 

 

 

Olivhet D. Fernandez

BBrc 3-3D

2007-202519-7

 

 

 

 

Title of the Movie: Oro Plata Mata (                                 )

Movie Producer: Charo Santos Concio (Expiremental film of the Philippines)

Cast of characters:

           Cherie Gil – Trining Ojeda

Sandy Andolong – Maggie Ojeda

Liza Lorena – Nena Ojeda

Fides Cuyugan-Asencio – Inday Lorenzo

Manny Ojeda – Don Claudio Ojeda

Maya Valdez – Jo Russell

Lorli Villanueva as Viring

Ravillo Lazaro – Hermes Mercurio

Joel Torre – Miguel Lorenzo

 

 

Director: Peque Gallaga

Writer: Jose Javier Reyes

Audience suitability: Restricted for 18 (R18)

Recommended subject areas for study: societal changes, power, history and wealth

 

Synopsis:

In this flawed and overly long film, an aristocratic Spanish family caught in the throes of World War II in the Philippines has to make an escape into the jungle to survive the invading Japanese. Their members include the grandfather, several women, many servants, and two young men. One of the mothers in the group is snobby about herself and her money and passes this attitude on to her daughter. Another woman and one young man demonstrate exceptional bravery, and even the young man’s new girlfriend shows spunk. But in the end, it will be lucky if the family can survive their own internal conflicts, let alone the four years they must hide out during World War II.

 

 

 

 

 

Cinematic Focus:

            This film is a character driven because of the apparent progress of every character. Oro Plata Mata set in the middle of World War II gives a bigger picture of how the lives of the aristocratic families during the war. It shows the drastic changes of their life because of desperation from being wealthy to being frantic escapist and the pretentions of the people just to maintain social status.

 

Points of Observation:

            The consistency of the setting in the film was fantastic. I also noticed that the musical scoring help intensify some scenes in the film. Few fight scenes is enough to express or to show that there is a present war. The director was very wise on the execution and directing some technical aspect maintaining the same film texture from the start until the end of the film.

 

Should Not:

The only problem in the film is it tends to have a fast phasing or it leaps from one scene to another without clearly understanding the preceding scene. And the lines are sometimes too long and tend to be thrown in a fast manner.

 

Should Be:

I think there should be a sequel of this brilliant movie tackling the life of the aristocrats after the war.

 

Well Presented:

The part I like the most is the end part where in a party is held in the Ojeda home to announce Margarita and Miguel’s betrothal.It is revealed that Margarita’s ex-fiance, Ramon, actually survived the Fall of Corregidor,but is now reduced to a pathetic invalid,dressed in an army uniform, planted on his wheelchair.He sheds a tear for his now lost love.

Olivhet D. Fernandez

BBrc 3-3D

2007-202519-7

 

 

Title of the Movie: “FAME” (                        )

Movie Producer:  Mark Canton, Gary Lucchesi, Toni Rosenberg, Richard Wright

                                                      Metro-Goldwyn Pictures

 

Cast of Characters: Asher Book – Marco

                                     Kristy Flores – Rosie

       Paul Lacono – Neil

                                    Paul Mc Gill – Kevin

                                    Naturi Naughton – Denise

                                    Kay Panabaker – Jenny

                                    Kherington Payne – Alice

                                   Collins Pennie – Malik

                                   Walter Perez – Victor

                                   Anna Maria Perez de Tagle – Joy

                                   Debie Allen – Angela Sims

                                   Charles Dutton – James David

                                   Kesley Grammer – Martin Cranston

                                   Megan Mullaly – Fran Rowan

                                  Bebe Neuwirth – Lynn Kraft

 

Director: Kevin Tancharoen

Writer: Allison Burnett

Subject areas for study: Aspirations, hope, and love.

Audience suitability: General Patronage (GP)

 

Synopsis:

    This movie is based upon the 1980 film which follows NYC talent attending the New York City High School for the Performing Arts, (Known today as Fiorello H. Laguardia H.S.) students get specialized training that often leads to success as actors, singers, etc. In 1936, New York City Mayor Fiorello H. LaGuardia founded the High School of Music & Art in order to provide a facility where the most gifted and talented public school students of New York City could pursue their talents in art or music, while also completing a full academic program of instruction. In 1948, the School of Performing Arts was created to provide training in performance skills to students who wished to prepare for professional careers in dance, music or drama.

 

Cinematic Focus:

   Reality shows are said to be the highest rating programs on TV right now so many producers are engaging in this kind of projects. Many talented aspirants are also hoping to become famous because they believed fame will lead you to a luxurious life that everyone is dreaming of becoming. But there is no such thing as easy catch you have to work hard for your aspirations and conquer many obstacles that will hinder you to reach your dream. This is a character driven story because “FAME” is consist of multiple character each of them had an interesting story to tell before and after they have been involved in the world of dreams and competitive dreamers.

 

Points of Observation

 

Well Presented:

  I think the Graduation ceremony gave me a feeling of relief because after all of the trials in the school they are able to finish the program. And also the scene where the students showed each of their talents in the canteen I like the production.

Should Not:

Having multiple characters became the achiles heel of the movie because of so many different life stories told and lacking of time cause it to be mishmash.

Should Be:

The only thing I suggest that should have been done is the song “Fame” should be given importance.

Olivhet D. Fernandez

BBrc 3-3D

2007-202519-7

 

 

Title of the Movie: Jan Dara (                               )

Movie Producer: Peter Chan, JoJo Yuet-chun Hui, Duangkamol Limcharoen,                        Nonzee Nimibutr

 

Cast Of Characters: Suwinit Panjamawat – Teenage Jan Dara

                     Santisuk Promsiri – Khun Luang

                     Christy Chung – K. Boonlueang

                     Eakarat Sarsukh – Adult Jan Dara

                     Wipawee Charoenpura – Aunt Waad

                     Pathawarin Jimkul – Kaew

 

Director/Writer: Nonzee Nimibutr

Subject Areas For Study: Love, Lust, Family, Incest.

Audience suitability: Restricted 18 (R18)

 

Synopsis:

     Jan Dara grows up in a house lacking in love but abundant in lust. He quickly picks up the sinful way of life of the man who married his mother after she became pregnant from being raped. His ‘father’s’ mistress welcomes the young boy into her literal bosom. Wanting badly to know his real father, Jan leaves the house, only coming back after Khun Luang’s daughter falls pregnant out of wedlock. Jan does a favor to his ‘father’ by marrying her, even though he is deeply in love with the mistress. The truth about his birth, as Jan will later learn, is as confusing and messed up as his present life and the lives of those around him.

 

Cinematic Focus:

             Jan Dara is a character driven story because the story revolves only on how the character  develop  because of the effect of his environment. But before that his mother died because of his birth. Growing with his stepfather Jan Dara’s childhood was never a good one because he agonized the cruelty of his stepfather because he had been blamed for the death of his mother. At an early age he has been exposed by SEX because of his lusty stepfather, eventually he has his own sexual appetites and found his self like his stepfather.

Points Of Observation:

The setting was perfectly executed and has been consistent. I liked the direction of the story. The texture  of the film  and beautiful charaters add up some spice for the eyes.

 

Well Presented:

I like the end part where in the truth why things happened to Jan Dara was revealed. So at the end I am not left hanging because all of my questions are answered.

 

Should Not:

The director should delete some love scenes because it is tend to be repetitive and not important at all.

 

Should Be:

Instead of putting some love scenes the director should established more interesting things about Jan Dara.

 

 

.

 

 

 

Olivhet D. Fernandez

BBrc 3-3D

2007-202519-7

 

 

 

 

 

The Letter I Would Love To Read To You In Person

By Alexis Tioseco

 

As this letter to his beloved in Slovenia displays, his relationship with local cinema is still very much like a long-distance love affair.

 

My Dear Nika,

I’ve been asked to write a column for this issue of Rogue, and the topic given to me was myself. I’ve always felt it awkward to write in public spaces about personal motivations behind the work I choose to do, so I have decided to use you as an excuse: there are things that you must know, that you may sense but not understand unless I tell you, and so I shall use this opportunity to put them on paper.

 

Besides, how could I say no to this offer when just the other day you recalled how an essay that was written by the solicitor of this column—in a previous incarnation of this magazine—played a central role in our being together? One must pay back one’s debts . . .

 

When we met in Rotterdam last January there was something about you that struck me immediately. It was not your beauty, or rather, not just your beauty, but your manner of speaking: which now sixteen months later still demands so much of me. There is a precious intensity in your gestures, the way in which your eyes dart and hands reach out to grab the right word, that illustrates how strong a desire you have to communicate, especially when the conversation turns toward the things that matter to you—the integrity of your work, the importance of nature, the concern for your brother. (I know what you’re thinking—shut up! I’m not a native speaker!—but this isn’t a question of familiarity with language.)

 

We both did not arrive at the festival in the best of conditions: you in ill health and from the disappointment of not closing the latest issue of Ekran before leaving Slovenia (compounded by you missing your flight and multiplied by a year’s fatigue of battling for editorial independence) and I from the solitude of learning to live alone, and of not yet having come to terms with the abrupt death of my father seven months before (something which, as you know, I am still attempting to do).

 

I wasn’t in a very good place the months before we met, reckless and hurried in my interactions with new acquaintances, but in Rotterdam it was hard not to fight for clarity and calm when the person before you, beleaguered and weary as they were, would still refuse to let their words slip carelessly . . .

 

I know sometimes you may think that it was the fact that we worked in the same field that attracted me to you, but I must tell you that this couldn’t be farther from the truth. Why? Because one of the greatest joys I believe one can feel is to share that which they find beautiful with someone who otherwise wouldn’t have noticed it, and to see it appreciated. This is the main reason why I love teaching and why I refuse to show Lord of the Rings to my students (no matter how fervently my co-teachers insist). It is also the evidence that cinema isn’t what brings us nearer to each other: because in this regard, we are on equal footing, and I must instead find other things in me to share with you. For anyone who knows me, they know how difficult that is . . .

 

    Does a place mean more than a person? Does my work in the Philippines mean more than the possibility of a life with you, somewhere, anywhere else?

 

But Rogue wants to hear about cinema! Or at least about my work and what I have done in it. Why it means so much to me, and why I have done the things that I have. So it is about cinema that I must write! Some of this may seem like things you have heard, my dear Nika, but don’t worry, if I am successful it will all come together in the end, and you will see why it relates to you, to us, and to the future.

 

Allow me to begin with a story, one of which you may be quite familiar.

 

In 1997, my father decided that my brother Chris and I, together with my mother, should return to the Philippines (my father as you know had been going back and forth between Manila and Vancouver, never growing quite comfortable in Canada. Remind me to make you a copy of the essay “Where’s the patis?”).

 

We had moved to Canada in 1983, leaving the Philippines just a few months before the death of Ninoy Aquino and just a few months after my second birthday.

 

Like most teenagers, I was still growing comfortable in my own skin, or rather trying to, and the thought of moving to another country for my last two years of High School petrified me. I resisted: on one hand, I protested to my parents that I wanted nothing to do with a country that was so class conscious and so corrupt (though I didn’t mind going there for vacation . . . ), and on the other hand, inside, I just didn’t want to deal with attempting to infiltrate ill-fated High School social circles in a new country. I was also completely devastated about having to leave the first girl I ever slow danced with in my high school life—Melodie Pangan—who I’m sure never thought of me as anything more than a friend, but who I still called dramatically from the airport, in tears, telling her I loved her for the first time. But I digress . . .

 

My father seduced my brother and I with the promise of round-the-clock air conditioning and a driver to take us wherever we wanted, which admittedly made the move easier to take (so much for my 16-year old defiance of class consciousness). Both of which, as it turned, were just selling points: things he was able, but unwilling, to provide.

 

As you know, we are five children in my family, but only Chris and I, together with my Mom, moved back. The primary excuse for it being just he and I was that we were the two youngest, and since Chris was just preparing to enter College and I was finishing my last two years of High School, we would both be able to adjust easier. But the other reason was also that we were men and, as men in the Philippines, he had wanted to groom us to take over the family business, to help maintain what he had established, or build on top of it. The primary reason, I believe, for him wanting my mother to come back was so that Chris and I would. We had grown quite close to my Mom over the years in Vancouver, as my Dad was often away, and he knew that her agreeing to go was the key to being able to bring us back. On the part of my Mom, she was settled in Vancouver, she wasn’t comfortable having helpers live in the house, and was used to cooking and cleaning herself and looking after us. She moved back for him, because he asked her to.

 

Two years passed, and my mother moved back to Vancouver. She had been battling bouts of depression caused by their fights, by her lack of control of the family, and it was decided that she would go to Vancouver for a while for therapy. I didn’t know at the time that it would be for good, it was supposed to be for two months. She returned for the first time in 2006 for my father’s funeral.

 

My brother Chris never quite settled in the Philippines. One theory we have was that he never got to imbibe the culture in a manner deeper than gimmicks in Makati—and as a majority of his good friends were foreigners and he had no Tagalog classes, he didn’t learn the language much. The other possibility is that he just wasn’t used to living under my father’s watchful eye. He graduated from University in June of 2001, and by August he moved back to Vancouver.

 

    The first impulse of any good film critic, and to this I think you would agree, must be of love.

 

What was left of my Dad’s dream—of keeping the family together in the Philippines and of one of his sons taking a keen interest in the business? Me. And just me. With less people living in it, the house had more space, and I no longer shared my room with anyone, but I felt more and more suffocated. Upon graduating with my studies directed towards business management, I began working for my father. I lasted from June to November of 2004 before admitting that I couldn’t do it any longer. I would tell you I quit. My father told relatives at family gatherings he fired me. Either story will do now; it doesn’t really matter.

 

Sender: Dad

Date: 24-04-2006

Time: 05:19:51pm

 

“BF 2 GF’s rich dad: I wana mari ur dauter,

Dad: Do u work?

BF: Im a theology scholar.

Dad: Can u afford a weding?

BF: God wil provide.

Dad: Wat about a haus, raising a family & education of d kids?

BF: God wil provide.

Later…Mom: How’d it go dad?

Dad: D guy’s poor, & he thinks Im God!”

 

Sender: Dad

Date: 24-04-2006

Time: 05:22:32pm

 

“BF 2 GF’s rich dad: I wana mari ur dauter,

Dad: Do u work?

BF: Im a Unvrsty Profsor nd a film critic.

Dad: Can u afford a weding?

BF: God wil provide.

Dad: Wat about a haus, raising a family & education of d kids?

BF: God wil provide.

Later…Mom: How’d it go dad?

Dad: D guy’s poor, & he thinks Im God!”

 

I never wanted to be a film critic. To this day I abhor using the term for myself, but I’ve begun to do so regularly, just because it makes life easier.

 

Many filmmakers, especially filmmakers in the Philippines, have a problem with the word critic. We have little to no culture of healthy polemics in the country, as any attempt to consider fault is taken as a personal attack. Rare are those that are able to deal with it properly. One particular filmmaker took objection to the idea of a publication that I was to edit using the title “Criticine”: he had a problem with the word critic being included. A nasty term, I suppose he thought.

 

The first impulse of any good film critic, and to this I think you would agree, must be of love. To be moved enough to want to share their affection for a particular work or to relate their experience so that others may be curious. This is why criticism, teaching, and curating or programming, in an ideal sense, must all go hand in hand.

 

The first proper review of a Filipino film that I wrote was on Lav Diaz’s Batang West Side. I knew I liked movies, had even harbored thoughts of making them at one point, and I certainly took a measure of pride in being looked to by my peers as someone whose opinion was worth seeking. But despite this, and despite the surprising satisfaction of first seeing my name in print, I never had any interest in writing film criticism in any serious way.

 

It was not writing the review of Batang West Side (which I was quite proud of at the time, but look at with a bit of embarrassment for its simplicity today) that changed things for me, but rather what took place before and after writing it: the complete lack of engaging, intelligent writing on the film that engaged more than just the length. (Conrado de Quiros tried, and perhaps his championing was more important than the actual text.) Batang West Side, as you now, is 5-hours long, and if you read most of the articles that I mentioned (I dare not say discussed), this would likely be all that you knew. Even Jessica Zafra, after organizing a screening of the film through her engaging-if-but-short-lived FLIP Magazine (and having commissioned an article from Lav), proceeded to make crude jokes about the film in the letters section of the succeeding issue.

 

I was a junior in college when the film premiered, and in the five years I had lived in the Philippines, the closest I had come to connecting with culture via cinema were a few jokes in April, May, June, a film about three sisters starring the then quite popular Alma Concepcion and maybe SPO1 Don Juan: Da Dancing Policeman, starring the great Leo Martinez. Needless to say, Batang West Side was a departure, not only in length, but in aesthetic: its rhythm, the distance from the camera to its subject, the duration in which shots were held, the construction of the discourse (equally about past as about present), and most especially in its attitude towards its audience—its stubborn refusal to give in to our inherent need for a neat ending, instead forcing us to draw our own conclusions.

 

I wasn’t prepared for Batang West Side. I hadn’t heard of Lav Diaz and simply attended because it was during Cinemanila, and it’s not everyday someone makes a film of that length. I was curious. The film stuck with me. Especially so as one of the first films that made me think concretely about what it meant to be Filipino, about the pitfalls of migration. Perils that, I think for the first time now as I type this, my Dad probably understood better than anyone. It’s a shame he never got to see the film.

 

It was now a full year after Batang West Side premiered, a good few months after I wrote the article, and still little literature was available on the film. I contacted Lav and asked if I could interview him, to which he obliged graciously. The interview ran close to an hour, and I asked him all the questions I wished others had.

 

Happy with the results, which ran 12 pages long and was published on the website Indiefilipino.com (may she rest in peace, how I loved her so!), I used all the prepaid credit I had to text most everyone mildly interested in cinema in my modest phonebook to plug it. Hardly any of them responded, of course, but there were notes of appreciation on Indiefilipino’s forums, and it made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

 

There were people, it turned out, who were interested in reading serious writing on serious cinema—it just had to be written and published somewhere accessible.

 

The first impulse is always one of love.

 

The more films I saw, specifically local independent films, the more I wanted to see. The deeper I got, the more responsibility I felt, the stronger the need to do something, to share that which I found beautiful.

 

Writing in English, I never felt much of a need to write about foreign (non-Filipino) movies—though I’m often asked to, and mostly of Hollywood fare. While I love cinema in general, a passion that has grown exponentially over the years, I feel no need to put myself in service of that which doesn’t need it. The feeling has always been: why write about Juno when I’ve hardly read anything incisive put to print about the great animation of Roxlee? Why write about No Country For Old Men when there’s the brilliantly charming films of Antoinette Jadaone waiting to be discovered by readers? The same held true for a stint I had reviewing films every other week on The Breakfast Show on Studio 23. The informal terms of agreement: I could review anything I wanted, local or foreign, new or old, short or long, so long as they could get clips to show. It didn’t make waves by any means—it was but a single segment on a show for viewers with ADD—but I think it meant something to some people: Kris Villarino, the Cebu filmmaker who made the short Binaliw; the group of young upstarts from Davao starting a series of filmmaking workshops that has only grown over time; or the chaotic arrangement of an entire episode on independent filmmaking (before the term was abused) in Christmas 2005 that guested Raya Martin, Khavn De La Cruz, Mes De Guzman, Roxlee, Lav Diaz, Pam Miras, and a very shy John Torres speaking about his short films in public for the first time.

 

One thing has slowly progressed into another and, what began as a simple curiosity pursued with sincerity, has evolved into a commitment.

 

Philippine cinema has given much to me, and one must pay back one’s debts.

 

I never expected to have the opportunity to travel for/from film, especially not on the expenses of others—but, slowly, the opportunities presented themselves. Traveling is a privilege, and not one that I take lightly. In June 2004, as a fresh college graduate, I attended a conference in Singapore. A few months later, on the basis of my writing, I was selected to participate in the Asia-Europe Foundation’s Meeting of Young Film Critics from Europe and Asia. A few months later, I found myself in Berlin as part of the Berlinale Talent Press (though this was only partly subsidized, and it was a last minute loan from my brother in Canada that allowed me to go). A number of trips have ensued, to everywhere from Singapore (7x) to Hawaii, from New Dehli (2x) to Paris, Rotterdam, Oberhausen, and, of course, precious Slovenia, serving on juries and giving talks. All the time I’ve maintained the same stance: that it is important for people to write about their own cinemas and not let it be left to those outside to dictate what matters.

 

But these tickets, these travels, are expensive. Hotels are expensive. Time is expensive. The pollution caused by airplanes in the sky will cost us in the long run. When you put all these things together, it equals an investment: a serious investment made on and in an individual. Do I sound like I’m taking this too seriously? Allow me to phrase it another way: without the cultural investment made in me, for the work I have or can do with regard to Philippine cinema, I would have never met you. There is much to repay.

 

I don’t like writing about the Metro Manila Film Festival. I didn’t like it the first time I did it in 2003, nor did I the second or third time. I didn’t like it as well when, with the help of Erwin Romulo, we drafted a position paper seeking reforms in the festival and attempted to rally established filmmakers behind it (signatories included, among others, Eddie Garcia, Peque Gallaga, Jose Javie Reyes, Erik Matti). It’s not fun being told off like I was a two-bit journalist looking for a quote by filmmakers named Laurice. I didn’t like it, but I did it because part of me sincerely believed we could things. A belief that, for a few moments, was infectious, for even those that knew in the back of their mind that nothing would come of it still chose to take part. A friend whose couch I slept on for much of those weeks sent me a text sometime after, a message that now three years later is still saved on my phone:

There’s a line in AGUILA where a Moro secessionist is told his cause is lost. He replies to him that winning doesn’t matter, it’s doing what one feels one should do. That’s wisdom for you.

 

My dear Nika,

If there has been a single cause of strain that has stuck out in our relationship it is this: the idea of my attachment to the Philippines, the strong desire you see that I have to live and work here, and the way that, perhaps, you see this as a matter of misappropriate priorities. Does a place mean more than a person? Does my work in the Philippines mean more than the possibility of a life with you, somewhere, anywhere else? Must it be you that moves, makes the (I know you hate the word, but let us use it) sacrifice of moving? And what, if anything, does that say about us—that the scales of our love weigh more heavily on your chalice?

 

I know you’ve come to terms with the idea of moving here, hopefully next year, we discuss—but I still feel the need to talk a bit more about some of my reasons for wanting to stay, at the very least for the meantime. I’m not attempting to compare my affection for Manila with yours for Slovenia, but only to explain the thoughts that go through my head, the things I feel I must do, things that, perhaps, we can do together.

 

Yours,

Alexis

 

ADDENDUM

 

⊲ I wish that the Film Development Council of the Philippines would understand the value of the money they’re given and consider going to Paris and spending five million of their 25 million allotment for a showcase given by a young festival as an investment, and not just a vacation.

 

⊲ I hope they support filmmakers with finished work to go abroad to festivals for the pride they bring their country—I wish instead they would support their films locally, and help them get seen by larger Filipino audiences.

 

⊲ I cry for the loss of Manuel Conde’s Juan Tamad films.

 

⊲ I cry for a country that can’t convince a single Filipino-American who owns the only known print of Conde’s Genghis Khan in its original language to return (i.e. sell) the film back to his mother country.

 

⊲ I cry for the generations of Filipinos, myself included, that can no longer see Gerry De Leon’s Daigdig ng Mga Api, and instead have scans of movie ads to admire on the internet.

 

⊲ I mourn a heritage that has allowed the prints of Mario O’Hara’s Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos and Peque Gallaga’s Oro, Plata, Mata to turn flush sepia through neglect.

 

⊲ I cry for a Union and University of the Philippines that conspire in apathy to let the master negatives of treasures produced by Bancom to rot in rooms only air conditioned half the day and in cans untouched for years and years.

 

⊲ I pray for a Senator or Congressman to take the courageous step of drafting a bill to help establish a National Film and Sound archive.

 

⊲ I pray a city government or even enterprising and concerned theater owners will consider settings aside 50 centavos or a peso of a ticket to go toward the preservation of our national audiovisual heritage. There have been flood taxes siphoned from movie tickets. For crying out loud, this should be easy!

 

⊲ I wish Cinemalaya which, thanks to the media and government mileage behind it has a great festive excitement, would actually put their efforts in service of Philippine cinema, and not in their own self-involved attempt to start a micro-industry.

 

⊲ I wish filmmakers would stop listening to Robbie Tan.

 

⊲ I wish Cinema one, which often produces better films than Cinemalaya, would actually give filmmakers some rights to their work and stop swindling them.

 

⊲ I wish Lav Diaz had larger budgets to maneuver and shoot with.

 

⊲ I wish Raymond Red would get to make Makapili and return to making fantastic shorts in the experimental mode.

 

⊲ I wish Mike De Leon would make another movie. . . . Please . . . we need it.

 

⊲ I wish Roxlee would get enough money to buy the time to make an animated feature.

 

⊲ I wish everyone would buy a copy of Nicanor Tiongson and Cesar Hernando’s The Cinema of Manuel Conde.

 

⊲ I wish there were more books on Philippine cinema.

 

⊲ I wish there were a series of classic screenplays that would get published.

 

⊲ I wish Cinefilipino would have put out Maalaala Mo Kaya with the reels in the proper order.

 

⊲ I wish Cinefilipino would have put our their Brocka titles with just a little bit of care and affection, providing some writing on the film or some features, and didn’t just throw them out there to earn.

 

⊲ I wish Nestor Torre would open his eyes . . .

 

⊲ I wish the Manunuri books on Philippine cinema in the 70s and 80s would go back in print.

 

⊲ I wish the Manunuri actually cared about Philippine cinema today.

⊲ I wish the Manunuri actually reviewed films instead of just giving out awards.

 

⊲ I wish the Young Critics Circle were actually young.

 

⊲ I wish the Young Critics Circle were actually critics.

 

⊲ I wish Francis “Oggs” Cruz, Richard Bolisay, and Dodo Dayao would get space in the broadsheets, because they’re far more interesting than anyone writing regularly there today.

 

⊲ I wish Noel Vera would move back.

 

⊲ I wish Hammy Sotto was still alive.

 

⊲ I wish Hammy Sotto’s manuscripts would get published.

 

⊲ I wish Jo Atienza was still in Manila.

 

⊲ I wish we had a fully supported Film Museum.

 

⊲ I wish we had a Cinematheque.

 

⊲ I wish the UP Film Center had better seats and showed good films.

 

⊲ I wish more non-filmmakers from the Philippines would get to travel to festivals.

 

⊲ I wish film were taught in high schools.

 

⊲ I wish Teddy Co would get the recognition that he deserves for his selfless work.

 

⊲ I wish Teddy Co would write more, as his ideas deserve to be recorded.

 

⊲ I wish co-ops would co-operate.

 

⊲ I wish Khavn De La Cruz would get to make his musical EDSA XXX.

 

⊲ I wish the Max Santiago feature would get made, and that shorts would finally come to my hands on DVD (Hi Marla!)

 

⊲ I wish Tad Ermitaño never stops writing and playing in his cave.

 

⊲ I wish Lourd De Veyra continues writing on actors and cinema.

 

⊲ I wish Raymond Lee UFO successes.

 

⊲ I wish we had more regional feature films and more support for regional filmmakers.

 

⊲ I wish everyone would watch When Timawa Meets Delgado.

 

⊲ I wish someone would lower MTRCB rates for screenings fees, especially for festivals.

 

⊲ I wish someone, anyone, would make a good, thought-provoking film about the Philippine upper-class.

 

⊲ I wish Ketchup Eusebio would get more leading roles.

 

⊲ I wish Elijah Castillo gets to do a lot more films, soon.

 

⊲ I wish Cesar Hernando would get to transfer Botika, Bituka.

 

⊲ I wish filmmakers had some integrity and told Viva to screw themselves when offered another exploitation film.

 

⊲ I wish more people could see the film Bontoc Eulogy.

 

⊲ I wish Vic Del Rosario wasn’t presidential advisor on Entertainment, given the shlock they produce, and, yes, that includes the films which starred First-Son Mikey Arroyo.

 

⊲ I wish Star Cinema would stop . . . just stop.

 

⊲ I wish there was a film library that people could go to and read books on cinema.

 

⊲ I wish the MMFF wasn’t handled by the same people who install public urinals (admittedly useful).

 

⊲ I wish the MMDA didn’t call those circles and boxes Art.

 

⊲ I wish that MMDA Art wasn’t so much better than every MMFF film.

 

⊲  I wish Philippine cinema all the success in the world . .

 

A film review of Minsa’y isang gamu-gamo by: Madelle O. Balendo

November 13, 2009

   

Producer:                      Premiere Productions Inc.

 

Cast of Characters:

 

Nora Aunor                 …Corazon de la cruz

Jay Ilagan                   …Bonifacio Santos

Perla Bautista              …Yolanda Santos

Gloria Sevilla               …Chedeng de la cruz

Paquito Salcedo          …Inkong Menciong

Eddie Villamayor         …Carlito

Lily Miraflor       

 

Director:                     Lupita Concio

 

Writer:                        Marina Feleo-Gonzalez

 

Synopsis:

 

Cora (Nora Aunor) has high hopes of making it big in the land of milk and honey, as a nurse, to the point that she ignores the gross injustice plaguing her small community near the Olongapo military base. She even hears of news that a Filipino - turned American citizen (working in the military base, inspecting Filipinos, entering and leaving the facility, suspected of taking in contraband goods), disgraces a fellow Filipina (played by Perla Bautista) by stripping her and humiliating her that she has taken contraband items, which obviously she take, just a ploy to ruin her reputation. All of these things, Cora ignores, until the night of her departure, when her brother, she loves so dearly, is shot by an American, while picking used bullet shells off the perimeter of the military base. As she laments and grieve on her brother’s dead and liveless body, American sevicemen enter her house and tells her family that the American responsible mistook his brother for a boar, Thus, one of Nora Aunor’s famous lines, “My brother is not a pig!,” as cries in pain, “Hindi baboy ang kapatid ko!” All her dreams shattered, she has nothing to hope for even her one’s energetic grandfather, Inkong Menciong (played with patriotism by Paquito Salcedo), is left almost half dead by the incident. She then, carries on to bring justice and help serve her fellow Filipinos.

 

Recommended subject areas for study 

Power 

Power

In the movie Minsa’y isang gamu-gamo, the Americans are the powerful. The story is based on the time of Marcos regime, where in the government maintains good relationship with the Americans, and buiding up a military base in our country is one of their agreement. Unfortunately, they become manipulative and abusive to the Filipinos, which are not capable of defending their selves. The object of symbolism here is the apple and dollar. They represent influence and control of the Americans over the Filipinos.

  

Ambition

 

The character of Corazon De la Cruz (Nora Aunor) as a dreamer, represents the Filipinos who are searching for good fate in other country like the United States. Due to her ambition she remains blind of the abusiveness of the Americans in the Philippines.

 

Family

 

The story rotates between the two Filipino families living at Pampanga.  The love, good values and concern among the members of the family are emphasized. The Dela Cruz and Santos families have huge admiration in the kind of life of the Americans, except for one person, Inkong Menciong whois nationalist and very patriotic to his country.

Audience Stability:               PG-13

Cinematic Focus:                  Story driven

 

The movie focuses on the development of the story, from the ambition of a Filipina, Corazon Dela Cruz who would struggle hard just to be able to reach her ambition to be a nurse, and to learn more about the new technology in America., until the time when her own brother was killed by an American soldier from there she forgot her dreams and tried to seek justice.

 

Points of observation:

 

The story of the movie Minsa’y isang gamu-gamo written by Marina-Feleo Gonzales serves as an eye opener for us Filipinos. Although the film is old, it’s message still rings today. Most of our country men adore the western life style. The movie focuses on the dreams, disappointments, and seeking for justice which the system here in the Philippines cannot provide.

 

Nora Aunor showed a very good performance in playing the role of Cora. Though Nora’s acting is somehow stiff, with no so much facial expressions, you will feel the emotions being portrayed through her eyes and the way she delivers the lines. Nora’s feature marks the character of a true Filipina; short and has brown complexion, but full of determination. Most of the women who lives at provinces usually have long hairs but director Lupita Concio didn’t mind the hair of Nora.

 

Eddie Villamayor who played the role of Carlito, the younger brother of Corazon, which is her brother in real life, showed a  good performance in this film. But for me, I find Eddie a little bit older to be the Carlito in the story. Director Lupita Concio should have used a younger actor for this role. The character of Bonifacio played by Jay Ilagan, represents the activist during that time, but it has not presented well.  The role of Estel in the story maybe small, but she represents large number of Filipinos who easily believes that Americans should be adored.

 

The musical scoring is quite good, but they didn’t use any background music at first scenes which will help develop mood for the audience. They should have used music with strong attack that will surely strike the feelings of the audience. The songs of Nora Aunor were used in the film which became more effective for the movie.

 

The director lacks of being imaginative. He should be experimental when it comes to camera shots. You will notice that every time a scene will jump to another scene, they focus the camera on one object of activity and then zoom out to see the whole scenario being presented. In the scene 1: Santos family is closing the store, the camera stays in one place while the characters are moving for me is quite effective. You will also notice several blockings of the actors and too much shadow at some scenes which makes it difficult for the audience to see the facial expressions and reactions of the characters. Example of these scenes is: Cora talks about her dream to her family at the living area, Conversation of Cora and Bonifacio at the duyan, and the despedida party of Cora’s friend.

 

I have notice the scene when Yolanda (Perla Bautista) is talking to Estel about the strict security guard at the Clark Air Base. Yolanda is drying her undergarments at the kitchen. I ask myself, what’s the sense of hanging her undergarments there? until she was accused of taking contraband items and have been humiliated. The guard picked up her underwear using a pen and waved it. There you will see how one scene is related to another, that’s one way of the director of showing connections of things. There is one scene that fools the audience expectation: The arrival of the cruel guard to Yolanda’s house. The audience expected that the guard will apologize to Yolanda for her to unfiled the case but instead, she confiscated all the products in Yolanda’s store. At the court, upon the hearing of Carlito murder case, when the judge filed the decision, the people are almost simultaneously stand, with no convincing emotions and again simultaneously sit down when Nora reacted on the decision of the judge it is obviously scripted just like the in the ending. As the man driving a motorcycle has accident you will see a bunch of people at the side of the street obviously watching the shooting of the movie. This is still a problem in shooting films today, it was never been easy to control the crowds.  

 

The lines in the script of Marina Feleo-Gonzales have deep meaning, and of sense, unlike the most of the lines in the movies that we have nowadays.

  

Rating: 5 stars

    

A film review of “ Fame ” by: Madelle O. Balendo Bbrc 3-3d

  

Producers:                             Richard Wright

                                                  Tom Rosenberg

                                                  Gary Lucchesi

Executive Producers:         Mark Canton

                                                 Eric Reid

                                                 Beth Depatie

                                                 Harley Tannebaum

 

Cast of Characters:

 

	Kay Panabaker	…	Jenny Garrison
	Naturi Naughton	…	Denise Dupree
	Kherington Payne	…	Alice Ellerton
	Megan Mullally	…	Ms. Fran Rowan
	Bebe Neuwirth	…	Ms. Kraft
	Debbie Allen	…	Ms. Angela Simms
	Asher Book	…	Marco
	Cody Longo	…	Andy Matthews
	Walter Perez	…	Victor Taveras
	Charles S. Dutton	…	Mr. James Dowd
	Kelsey Grammer	…	Mr. Martin Cranston
	Collins Pennie	…	Malik Washburn
	Anna Maria Perez de Tagle	…	Joy
	Paul McGill	…	Kevin Barrett
	Paul Iacono	…	Neil Baczynsky

 

 

Director:         Kevin Tancharoen

 

Writer:            Allison Burnett  :  screenplay
                        Christopher Gore   :  1980 motion picture “Fame”

 

Synopsis:

This remake of the ’80s classic focuses on a group of young students attending a high school for the performing arts. Classmates study various aspects of performance, from dance to songwriting to acting, all of them hoping for the chance to one day become stars. Fame 2009 is a modern update on Alan Parker’s 1980’s version and international sensation Fame, which spawned a generation of worldwide fans and a subsequent global hit television series, and stage production of the same name - Fame. The story of “Fame 2009″ follows a group of students attending the renowned New York School of Performing Arts from audition through graduation as they discover their burgeoning talents and define their identities. Caught up in the intense atmosphere of a performing arts high school in New York, the student artists in the film confront both the tantalizing promise of success and the challenges of thriving in a highly competitive environment.

 

Recommended subject areas for study:

 

Dreams          

 

It focuses on the dreams of every teenage character in this film to reach out fame, the desires and aspirations to become future famous performers. They thought of achieving their dreams that fast, just like a snap, without thinking of what could happen along the way. At early stage of their struggle, they failed.

 

 

Youth

 

The characters here are composed of young students studying at school of performing arts. You can see the reflection of reality, that youth today are more aggressive and becoming more experimental as they go through life. Most of them didn’t realize that everything must undergo through process, and nothing in this world can be achieved easily.

 

Family

 

The family serves as the main factor in the development of the character or personality of an individual. The attitude of a person reflects the kind of family he/she have. They could be an inspiration or obstruction in the fulfillment of our goals.

 

Education

 

The school of performing arts helps in guiding, enhancing and developing the knowledge and talents that each and every students posses. School serves as the second home for the youth, and they are responsible of providing knowledge and awareness in order for the students to learn and be equipped in the future.

 

Society

 

The way we view the society affects one’s dreams and aspirations.

 

Arts

 

The movie shows the outstanding talents each unique individual have. You can also see the big importance of art in enhancing the talents, skills and abilities of a person. Art together with your talent also serves as an instrument in expressing one’s feelings and emotion.

 

 

Audience Stability:                PG-13

 

 

Cinematic Focus:                  Character driven

 

The movie focuses on the life and dreams of each character in the film. It didn’t focus much in the development of the story but rather in the development of the characters. The story presented the life of the students from their freshmen, sophomore, and junior to senior life at the university. There you will see the changes that are happening in their lives as aspiring successful future performers.  

 

 

 

Points of observation:

 

This remake of the 1980 film Fame is very difficult and risky knowing that the original Fame have became very successful. 2009 Fame movie of Kevin Tancharoen is quite simple and ordinary. The scenes and the whole story itself are very predictable. It is unsurprisingly expected that the characters will be very aggressive and raring to reach for their dreams but then will fail and surely won’t enjoy disappointments. There was a scene where Kevin tries to hurt his self in the subway, it is already expected that he will be saved by his friends. Allison Burnett and Christopher Gore should have been more experimental in developing the story. It should be much deeper, creative, and do not focus only in the characters. It seems like the writers didn’t pay much attention in making the story more beautiful and inspiring to watch for.

 

They got the idea of making the setting old and traditional; they based it on the original Fame, which is fine and considerable. But I think it would be more effective if they have changed the settings near to modern style.

 

Yes, the actors and actresses here got the talents but some of them are not convincing enough to play role of a talented dreamer. Only three characters here became outstanding in their performance. One is Naturi Naughton who played the role of Denise Dupree, she is definitely amazing when it comes to singing and playing the piano. Another actress who performed well in this movie is Kherington Payne as Alice Ellerton. She’s got the innovative moves when it comes to dancing and last, Marco or Asher book in real life, is also great and outstanding, he has a beautiful voice. The portrayal of Paul McGill as Kevin, is not that strong, late that you will realize that he is gay in the story. Kay Panabaker as Jenny is not that convincing for me and the character of Rose in the story was not emphasized.

 

Tancharoens’ camera shots are too close and fast facing; it has a documentary effect which somehow helps build a mood of tension or nervousness in the auditioning scene. The scene where Kevin is having a serious conversation with his mentor (rejecting to give him a letter of recommendation) while Allice and other students are dancing is very effective just like when Marco is singing while Malik is acting in the auditioning scene.

 

The ending is not that good, they’ve just graduated that’s it. They should have improved the ending because it is too simple, they should have put some twists on it to add some spice in the story. The ending would become beautiful if despite the failures that they’ve experienced, they still continue to struggle in reaching their goals. At the end, no one really got the fame which makes the movie weak. It is inevitable to compare this film to the modern attack of highschool musical because they both have the same genre. 2009 Fame cannot even be matched up to Highschool Musical.

 

   

Rating:           2 stars

 

 

A film review of Jan Dara By:Madelle O. Balendo Bbrc 3-3d

  

Producer:              Peter Chan

                                  Jo Jo Yuet-chun Hui

                                  Duangkamol Limcharoen
                                  Nonzee Nimibutr

 

Cast of Characters:       

• Suwinit Panjamawat…….teenage Jan Dara
• Santisuk Promsiri………..Khun Luang, Jan Dara’s father
• Christy Chung……………Boonlueang
• Eakarat Sarsukh…………adult Jan Dara
• Wipawee Charoenpura….Aunt Waad
• Patharawarin Timkul…….Kaew

 

Director:                 Nonzee Nimibutr

 

Writer:                     Nonzee Nimibutr
                                   Sirapak Paoboonkerd

                                   Utsana Phleungtham

  

Synopsis:                  

 

 Jan is a boy growing up in 1930s Siam in a wealthy, dysfunctional family where sex has a huge impact on everyone’s lives. Jan Dara is viewed by his father, Khun Luang, as cursed, since his mother died giving birth to him. The abusive Luang is a womanizer who has sex with many women in front of the portrait of his late wife.

The younger sister of Jan’s mother, Aunt Waad, is brought in to care for Jan. Luang has sexual relations with her, which causes young Jan to be jealous, since he has developed feelings for Waad. Waad and Luang have a daughter, Kaew, who is the apple of Luang’s eye. From the beginning, he teaches her to hate the “bastard Jan”. Waad, in return, treats Jan like her own son and despises Kaew.

Later, another of Khun Luang’s women, the sophisticated nymphomaniac Boonlueang, moves into a guesthouse on the estate, and she teaches Jan his first lessons in the ways of love.

Jan is then framed for the rape of Kaew, who was having relations with the son of one of the family’s maids. But it is Jan who ends up punished for Kaew’s transgressions. Later, it emerges that Kaew is pregnant, with the seed of her own father. To smooth over the damage to the family’s reputation, Jan is asked to return to the family estate and is forced into an arranged marriage with his half-sister Kaew. He does so, as long as he is promised the deed to the estate, which he views as a form of vindication against his father for the abuse he endured from him during his childhood.

Kaew gives birth to Luang’s child and curses it after it has emerged from her womb. The child displays classic dysmorphic features found in genetic mutations such as trisomy 21, commonly known as Down’s syndrome.

Kaew, meanwhile, enters into a lesbian relationship with Boonlueang. When Jan discovers this, he demands that Kaew give him his own child and forces himself upon her repeatedly. Kaew becomes pregnant with Jan’s child but she refuses to have the baby she is carrying, and with Boonlueang’s assistance, performs a bloody, self-administered abortion.

Jan subsequently finds himself repeating the libidinous patterns of his father, going as far as to have sex with a maid in his father’s sitting room, in front of the portrait of his mother. Jan wonders why he can’t escape the cycle of sexual abuse started by his father. Then it is revealed that Jan is the product of a gang rape of his mother.

 

Recommended subject areas for study:

 

Family

 

A personality of an individual reflects on what kind of family he has. Jan Dara didn’t grow up in a good family. His mother died early after giving birth to him and his never really felt to be loved by his father. Jan was early exposed to sexual activities of his father and as the story goes, it came to a point that Jan didn’t realize that he is repeating his father’s pattern.

 

 

Homosexuality

 

Homosexuality, lesbianism  appeared in the story when Khun Kaew had a relationship with Boonlueang. This kind of relationships still exist in the present, it is not completely accepted in the society.

 

Hatred

 

Jan Dara was never loved by his father Khun Luang. Luang hates Jan since the day he was born in this world. He even teaches his daughter Kaew to hate him too. Jan learned to hate his father too and kind of family he has, so he came back for revenge.

 

Lust

 

There are lots of sex scenes in the story. It shows the characters’ desire for sex not because of love, but lust. 

 

Incest

 

Khun Kaew gives birth to Luang’s child. She became pregnant with the seed of her own father. Incest was revealed in this part of the story. 

Audience Stability:    R-18

 

Cinematic Focus:     Character driven

The movie focuses on the development of the character of Jan Dara, from his childhood to adult. It shows the changes that had happened in his attitude towards life.   

Points of observation:

 

 The movie Jan dara directed by Nonzee Nimbutr is a gorgeous film . Although there is huge portion sex scenes, it should not be categorized as sex flick. It is a beautiful movie with a unique story and silent attack to its audience. For those who understands a film making, would say that the movie of Jan Dara is stunning. But still, some don’t consider this for public viewing.

 

The plot centers on a brutal, womanizing father who ruins Jan’s life because of the death of his mother during childbirth. The setting is great, and so is the musical scoring. They are both very suggestive. The film is shot in sepia, to emphasize the meanings and the mood of the story. It helps a lot to make the film stronger. It has an excellent  cinematography.

 

Suwinit Panjamawat who played the character of Jan Dara, is quite inflexible, but still was able perform quite good as Jan Dara.

Santisuk Promsiri as Khun Luang father of Jan, delivered a strong charater of antagonist which is perfectly convincing. The role of Christy Chung as sophisticated Boonlueang is highly decorative in this film, because of her strong sex appeal.

 

The story of the film shows lesbianism or homosexuality and Incest which are not accepted in the society. There are lots of sex scenes in the movie. These elements of the story make the film Jan Dara very controversial. Many people didn’t like it at first, but sooner, lots of film critiques began to appreciate the true message of the film. It is only the persons who understands filmmaking would value the essence of JanDara.

 

One thing that made me worried about this film are the scenes where the child actors are literally being exposed in some sex scenes. Although this is needed in the direction of the movie, it is very alarming.

 

One of the highlights of the movie is when Jan Dara after a long time, come back for a revenge. As he grows up, he never realized thathe is starting to follow the patterns of his father. This is well presented, because even the audience will not be able to notice that part easily. A stunning creation for the Nonzee Nimbutr and the rest of the production staff!

 

Rating:                        4 stars

 

 

A film review of Endo By:Madelle O. Balendo Bbrc 3-3d

Producer:                               UFO Pictures, Inc.

 

Cast of Characters:

 

Jason Abalos 

Ina Feleo

Angeli Bayani

Ricky Davao

Alcris Galura

  

Director:         Jade Castro

 

Writer:            Jade Castro

 

Co writers:     Michiko Yamamoto and Raymond Lee

 

Synopsis:

Leo (Jason Abalos) belongs to a poor family. Because he did not finish his studies, his only option is to work as a contractual worker in various establishments. In one job, he met a high-spirited girl named Tanya (Ina Feleo) with whom he got romantically involved. In their relationship, he wishes to feel fulfillment and sense of security with her but he is not prepared for this additional commitment.

The title “Endo” comes from a slang expression that is used when a contractual worker goes to work for the last time, “Endo” being a shortened form of the term “end of contract”.

  

Recommended subject areas for study:

 

Education

 

You will definitely see the importance of education in this film. Leo, a contractual worker is an example of a person who failed to finish his studies and wasn’t able to find stability in life. Everything for him when it comes to occupation is temporary. There’s no progress and development because nothing is permanent.

 

Love

 

Endo is a love story between two contractual workers, named Leo and Tanya. The story shows how their love story started in exchange of papers and ended in a dramatic separation, when Tanya decided to pursue her dream of working in cruise line while Leo was left in the Philippines continuing his life as a contractual worker. 

Poverty

 

There is no permanent job for people like Leo. He is only a representation of hundreds of people here in the Philippine who works temporarily in small companies or factories and experiencing poverty. There are many people like him who don’t have a stable life and the government can’t do anything to help them. 

Family

 

Many Filipino families are like the family of Leo in this film. Some members of a family instead of helping become the black sheep. Leo serves as the bread winner instead of his father. He is a understanding son and a good brother.  

  

Audience Stability:                PG-13

 

Cinematic Focus:                  Story driven

 

This movie is a story driven. The whole flow of the plot is really related to it’s title “Endo”. It focuses on the endings of things in the life of Leo both in his jobs and relationships.

 

Points of observation:        

 

The concept of endo made by Jade Castro is very unique. It is simple, plain but well-built.  This is not like a typical story which has a beginning, middle and end because this film is really focused on different endings of things in life of Leo both with his jobs and his relationships that is why Jade entitled this “endo” which means “end of contract”. The arrangement of the film is not as formal as the movies made by main streams. It is definitely easy to identify whether a movie is an independent film or not.

 

Jason Abalos is a great actor in this movie. He performed well the character of a Leo as a contractual worker, a good son of Ricky Davao and a brother to Alcris Galura. His leading lady, Ina Feleo as Tanya also perfoms well in this film. Physically, you will notice that Ina and Jason are not well-matched because Ina is much bigger to look at than Jason, it is also important to consider the physical aspect of the characters. But when you watch endo, you will see that they have chemistry.

 

The ending of the story is unpredictable. Most of the audience would never think it won’t be a happy ending for Leo and Tanya. If you will based it on ordinary Pinoy love stories, it is expected that they would still end up as a couple, but it didn’t happened in this movie. Again, it is still focused on the title itself, endo.

 

Jade have used lots of close-up shots in order to emphasize the important objects of symbolism and facial expressions of the actors. The cinematography is great. The fast pacing of shots is helpful it maintains the originality of the film. It keeps the continuity of the story and the character of the movie. Even the sound effects and musical scoring is good and the fade in, fade out of the music are on right timing.

 

Jade Castro’s work is absolutely beautiful and unique. The film endo is a huge reflection of reality, where everything in this world is really temporary.

  

Rating:           3 stars

  

A film review of Oro Plata Mata by:Madelle O. Balendo Bbrc 3-3d

 

Producer:

 

Experimental Cinema of the Philippines

 

Cast of Characters:

 

Manny Ojeda ……….Don Claudio                       

Liza Lorena …………Nena Ojeda                       

Sandy Andolong……Maggy Ojeda                                 

Cherie Gil ……………Trining Ojeda                                             

Fides Asenio….……  Inday Lorenzo                   

Loel Torre ……….…  Miguel Lorenzo                 

Lorli Villanueva…….. Viring Ravillo                     

Ronnie Lazaro…….…Hermes Mercurio 

Abo De la Cruz………Melchor                                         

Mely Mallari………..   Estrella                               

Mary Walter………….Yaya Tating            

Agustin Gatia…….….Lucio                                                           

Carmelo Sta.Maria… Milo                                     

Wilbert Cardenas….  Tibo                                     

Noel Soriano………  Termiong                            

Kuh Ledesma……… Diwata

Chita Castillo……….Inez

Ma.Teresa Urra……  Natty

Robert Antonio…….Carlos Placido

 

Director:        Peque Gallaga

 

Writer:          Peque Gallaga and Jose Javier Reyes

 

Synopsis:

 

Oro Plata Mata traces the changing fortunes of two aristocratic families in Negros during World War II. The Ojeda family is celebrating Maggie Ojedas (Andolong) debut. In the garden, Trining (Gil) receives her first kiss from Miguel Lorenzo (Torre), her childhood sweetheart. Don Claudio Ojeda (Ojeda) and his fellow landowners talk about war. The youngest guests mock Miguels refusal to join the army and brand him mamas boy. The celebration is cut short by news of the fall of the Corregidor. As war nears the city, the Ojedas accept the invitation extended by the Lorenzos, their old family friends, to stay with them in their provincial hacienda. Nena Ojeda (Lorena) and Inday Lorenzo (Asensio) try to deny the realities of war by preserving their pre-war lifestyle. Pining for her fiancé, Maggie goes through bouts of melancholy. Miguel and Trining turn from naughty children into impetuous adults.

Two more family friends a doctor, Jo Russell (Valdez), guerillas and Viring (Villanueva) join them. As the enemy advance, the families move to the Lorenzos forest lodge. A group of weary guerillas arrive and Jo tends to their injuries. The guerillas leave Hermes Mercurio (Lazaro) behind. Miguel endures more comments of the same kind when he fails to take action against a Japanese soldier who came upon the girls bathing in the river. It is Mercurio who kills the Japanese. Maggie comforts Miguel, who decides to learn how to shoot from Mercurio. Meanwhile, Virings jewelry is stolen by Melchor (de la Cruz), the trusted foreman. He justifies his action as a reward for his services. He tries his to break the other servants loyalty, but they force Melchor to leave. Later, Melchor and his band of thieves return. They raid the food supplies, rape Inday and chop off Virays fingers when she does not take off her ring. Trining goes with the bandits, despite all the crimes they have committed against her family. These experiences committed Maggie and Miguel closer together. Miguel urges the survivors to resume their mahjong games to help them cope. Miguel is determined to hunts the bandits down and bring Trining back. He catches them, but his courage is replaced with bloodlust, driving him to a killing spree. An epilogue follows the violent climax. The Americans have liberated the Philippines from Japan. A party is held in the Ojeda home to announce Maggie and Miguels betrothal. The survivors attempt to reclaim their previous lifestyle, but the war has changed the world, just as it has forever marked each of them

 

Recommended subject areas for study:

 

Government

 

The government shows dictatorship. Only the rich and powerful persons can leave normally during the war.

 

Politics

 

The wealthy and powerful persons hold the political system. They’re the ones who run the government and manipulate the country. 

 

Activist

 

The guerillas are the activists in the story. They are one of the products of war. They decided to form a group and hide along the forests and mountains for they choose to live as bandits and oppose the government rather than to follow its administration. The saddest truth is, they also victimize Filipinos. People like them still exist at the present.

 

Poverty

 

Even the aristocratic families felt the life near to poverty. They were forced to move to a smaller place in the forest to avoid the damage of war. They have no choice but to lessen their luxurious life and began to live in a simpler way. Everyone, no matter how wealthy you are may experience poverty during the time of war.

 

 

Audience Stability:  Rated-R

 

Cinematic Focus:   Character driven

 

It is noticeable how the attitudes of the characters have changed, like the Filipinas (Trining)from being conservative somehow have changed to liberated. Also the females at the river showed liberalism. The transformation of Miguel (Joel Torre), from being a mama’s boy, and torpe, became a brave fighter and defender of the family. Nena, is a strict mother yet part of her has big concern for her daughters.

 

Points of observation:     

 

The Oro Plata Mata movie is all about the story of two aristrocratic family who lives under the war. The title of this movie has representations. Oro stands for gold, the luxurious life of aristocratic family. Plata represents pilak, is when they continue their life style in a provincial hacienda. Mata means death or kamalasan during the time when they were victimized by the guerillas.

 

In this movie of Peque Gallaga, you will definitely feel the presence of war even if there were no scenes that literally show the exchange of gun shots and bombs between the soldiers.

 

Peque Gallaga did a very great job in directing this film. At the first scene, the panning of the camera from left to right and following the actors where ever they go, I think is his one way of introducing the characters. The Obb of this film is quite very long which makes the introduction boring. Knowing the Oro Plata Mata movie, it has a lot of characters and showing all their movements, expressions and reactions while others are delivering their lines is very difficult to emphasize, but Peque made this thing possible by setting the camera in the right position and perfect movement. Some of the scenes where Jo is stitching the wounded tongue of Mercurio is very convincing.

 

The musical scoring is great. The sound tracks used for every scene were all appropriate. They have used several types of background music with different attacks which are based on what type of mood the director wants the audience to feel. The music used in the first scene was also used at the ending of the story which brings back the mood felt by the audience from the very first scene of the movie.

 

Although the movie is beautiful, there are some questions leaved hanging. First, how do the aristocrat families got their lives back to normal? After Trining was rescued by Hermes and Miguel, the scene jumped to an engangement party that fast. They should have showed there, “4 years later…” before jumping to the last scene. Also, the character of Kuh Ledesma was not emphasized. What is she in the movie? Puque Gallaga said that she is a socialite that was raped during that time. Another thing, what really happened to Mary Walter? What did she saw and was not able to come back?

 

The idea of starting the scenes in a party and ending it in a party too is quite good. In the end you’ll see the scars left by the war in the lives of every individual in this story which makes the story very strong.

 

 

Rating:          4 stars

 

The Letter of Alexis Tioseco for Nika By: Madelle O. Balendo BBRC 3-3D

My Dear Nika,
I’ve been asked to write a column for this issue of Rogue, and the topic given to me was myself. I’ve always felt it awkward to write in public spaces about personal motivations behind the work I choose to do, so I have decided to use you as an excuse: there are things that you must know, that you may sense but not understand unless I tell you, and so I shall use this opportunity to put them on paper.

Besides, how could I say no to this offer when just the other day you recalled how an essay that was written by the solicitor of this column—in a previous incarnation of this magazine—played a central role in our being together? One must pay back one’s debts . . .

When we met in Rotterdam last January there was something about you that struck me immediately. It was not your beauty, or rather, not just your beauty, but your manner of speaking: which now sixteen months later still demands so much of me. There is a precious intensity in your gestures, the way in which your eyes dart and hands reach out to grab the right word, that illustrates how strong a desire you have to communicate, especially when the conversation turns toward the things that matter to you—the integrity of your work, the importance of nature, the concern for your brother. (I know what you’re thinking—shut up! I’m not a native speaker!—but this isn’t a question of familiarity with language.)

We both did not arrive at the festival in the best of conditions: you in ill health and from the disappointment of not closing the latest issue of Ekran before leaving Slovenia (compounded by you missing your flight and multiplied by a year’s fatigue of battling for editorial independence) and I from the solitude of learning to live alone, and of not yet having come to terms with the abrupt death of my father seven months before (something which, as you know, I am still attempting to do).

I wasn’t in a very good place the months before we met, reckless and hurried in my interactions with new acquaintances, but in Rotterdam it was hard not to fight for clarity and calm when the person before you, beleaguered and weary as they were, would still refuse to let their words slip carelessly . . .

I know sometimes you may think that it was the fact that we worked in the same field that attracted me to you, but I must tell you that this couldn’t be farther from the truth. Why? Because one of the greatest joys I believe one can feel is to share that which they find beautiful with someone who otherwise wouldn’t have noticed it, and to see it appreciated. This is the main reason why I love teaching and why I refuse to show Lord of the Rings to my students (no matter how fervently my co-teachers insist). It is also the evidence that cinema isn’t what brings us nearer to each other: because in this regard, we are on equal footing, and I must instead find other things in me to share with you. For anyone who knows me, they know how difficult that is . . .

Does a place mean more than a person? Does my work in the Philippines mean more than the possibility of a life with you, somewhere, anywhere else?

But Rogue wants to hear about cinema! Or at least about my work and what I have done in it. Why it means so much to me, and why I have done the things that I have. So it is about cinema that I must write! Some of this may seem like things you have heard, my dear Nika, but don’t worry, if I am successful it will all come together in the end, and you will see why it relates to you, to us, and to the future.

Allow me to begin with a story, one of which you may be quite familiar.

In 1997, my father decided that my brother Chris and I, together with my mother, should return to the Philippines (my father as you know had been going back and forth between Manila and Vancouver, never growing quite comfortable in Canada. Remind me to make you a copy of the essay “Where’s the patis?”).

We had moved to Canada in 1983, leaving the Philippines just a few months before the death of Ninoy Aquino and just a few months after my second birthday.

Like most teenagers, I was still growing comfortable in my own skin, or rather trying to, and the thought of moving to another country for my last two years of High School petrified me. I resisted: on one hand, I protested to my parents that I wanted nothing to do with a country that was so class conscious and so corrupt (though I didn’t mind going there for vacation . . . ), and on the other hand, inside, I just didn’t want to deal with attempting to infiltrate ill-fated High School social circles in a new country. I was also completely devastated about having to leave the first girl I ever slow danced with in my high school life—Melodie Pangan—who I’m sure never thought of me as anything more than a friend, but who I still called dramatically from the airport, in tears, telling her I loved her for the first time. But I digress . . . 

My father seduced my brother and I with the promise of round-the-clock air conditioning and a driver to take us wherever we wanted, which admittedly made the move easier to take (so much for my 16-year old defiance of class consciousness). Both of which, as it turned, were just selling points: things he was able, but unwilling, to provide.

As you know, we are five children in my family, but only Chris and I, together with my Mom, moved back. The primary excuse for it being just he and I was that we were the two youngest, and since Chris was just preparing to enter College and I was finishing my last two years of High School, we would both be able to adjust easier. But the other reason was also that we were men and, as men in the Philippines, he had wanted to groom us to take over the family business, to help maintain what he had established, or build on top of it. The primary reason, I believe, for him wanting my mother to come back was so that Chris and I would. We had grown quite close to my Mom over the years in Vancouver, as my Dad was often away, and he knew that her agreeing to go was the key to being able to bring us back. On the part of my Mom, she was settled in Vancouver, she wasn’t comfortable having helpers live in the house, and was used to cooking and cleaning herself and looking after us. She moved back for him, because he asked her to.

Two years passed, and my mother moved back to Vancouver. She had been battling bouts of depression caused by their fights, by her lack of control of the family, and it was decided that she would go to Vancouver for a while for therapy. I didn’t know at the time that it would be for good, it was supposed to be for two months. She returned for the first time in 2006 for my father’s funeral.

My brother Chris never quite settled in the Philippines. One theory we have was that he never got to imbibe the culture in a manner deeper than gimmicks in Makati—and as a majority of his good friends were foreigners and he had no Tagalog classes, he didn’t learn the language much. The other possibility is that he just wasn’t used to living under my father’s watchful eye. He graduated from University in June of 2001, and by August he moved back to Vancouver.

The first impulse of any good film critic, and to this I think you would agree, must be of love.

What was left of my Dad’s dream—of keeping the family together in the Philippines and of one of his sons taking a keen interest in the business? Me. And just me. With less people living in it, the house had more space, and I no longer shared my room with anyone, but I felt more and more suffocated. Upon graduating with my studies directed towards business management, I began working for my father. I lasted from June to November of 2004 before admitting that I couldn’t do it any longer. I would tell you I quit. My father told relatives at family gatherings he fired me. Either story will do now; it doesn’t really matter.

Sender: Dad
Date: 24-04-2006
Time: 05:19:51pm

“BF 2 GF’s rich dad: I wana mari ur dauter,
Dad: Do u work?
BF: Im a theology scholar.
Dad: Can u afford a weding?
BF: God wil provide.
Dad: Wat about a haus, raising a family & education of d kids?
BF: God wil provide.
Later…Mom: How’d it go dad?
Dad: D guy’s poor, & he thinks Im God!”

Sender: Dad
Date: 24-04-2006
Time: 05:22:32pm

“BF 2 GF’s rich dad: I wana mari ur dauter,
Dad: Do u work?
BF: Im a Unvrsty Profsor nd a film critic.
Dad: Can u afford a weding?
BF: God wil provide.
Dad: Wat about a haus, raising a family & education of d kids?
BF: God wil provide.
Later…Mom: How’d it go dad?
Dad: D guy’s poor, & he thinks Im God!”

I never wanted to be a film critic. To this day I abhor using the term for myself, but I’ve begun to do so regularly, just because it makes life easier.

Many filmmakers, especially filmmakers in the Philippines, have a problem with the word critic. We have little to no culture of healthy polemics in the country, as any attempt to consider fault is taken as a personal attack. Rare are those that are able to deal with it properly. One particular filmmaker took objection to the idea of a publication that I was to edit using the title “Criticine”: he had a problem with the word critic being included. A nasty term, I suppose he thought.

The first impulse of any good film critic, and to this I think you would agree, must be of love. To be moved enough to want to share their affection for a particular work or to relate their experience so that others may be curious. This is why criticism, teaching, and curating or programming, in an ideal sense, must all go hand in hand.

The first proper review of a Filipino film that I wrote was on Lav Diaz’s Batang West Side. I knew I liked movies, had even harbored thoughts of making them at one point, and I certainly took a measure of pride in being looked to by my peers as someone whose opinion was worth seeking. But despite this, and despite the surprising satisfaction of first seeing my name in print, I never had any interest in writing film criticism in any serious way.

It was not writing the review of Batang West Side (which I was quite proud of at the time, but look at with a bit of embarrassment for its simplicity today) that changed things for me, but rather what took place before and after writing it: the complete lack of engaging, intelligent writing on the film that engaged more than just the length. (Conrado de Quiros tried, and perhaps his championing was more important than the actual text.) Batang West Side, as you now, is 5-hours long, and if you read most of the articles that I mentioned (I dare not say discussed), this would likely be all that you knew. Even Jessica Zafra, after organizing a screening of the film through her engaging-if-but-short-lived FLIP Magazine (and having commissioned an article from Lav), proceeded to make crude jokes about the film in the letters section of the succeeding issue.

I was a junior in college when the film premiered, and in the five years I had lived in the Philippines, the closest I had come to connecting with culture via cinema were a few jokes in April, May, June, a film about three sisters starring the then quite popular Alma Concepcion and maybe SPO1 Don Juan: Da Dancing Policeman, starring the great Leo Martinez. Needless to say, Batang West Side was a departure, not only in length, but in aesthetic: its rhythm, the distance from the camera to its subject, the duration in which shots were held, the construction of the discourse (equally about past as about present), and most especially in its attitude towards its audience—its stubborn refusal to give in to our inherent need for a neat ending, instead forcing us to draw our own conclusions.

I wasn’t prepared for Batang West Side. I hadn’t heard of Lav Diaz and simply attended because it was during Cinemanila, and it’s not everyday someone makes a film of that length. I was curious. The film stuck with me. Especially so as one of the first films that made me think concretely about what it meant to be Filipino, about the pitfalls of migration. Perils that, I think for the first time now as I type this, my Dad probably understood better than anyone. It’s a shame he never got to see the film.

It was now a full year after Batang West Side premiered, a good few months after I wrote the article, and still little literature was available on the film. I contacted Lav and asked if I could interview him, to which he obliged graciously. The interview ran close to an hour, and I asked him all the questions I wished others had.

Happy with the results, which ran 12 pages long and was published on the website Indiefilipino.com (may she rest in peace, how I loved her so!), I used all the prepaid credit I had to text most everyone mildly interested in cinema in my modest phonebook to plug it. Hardly any of them responded, of course, but there were notes of appreciation on Indiefilipino’s forums, and it made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

There were people, it turned out, who were interested in reading serious writing on serious cinema—it just had to be written and published somewhere accessible.

The first impulse is always one of love.

The more films I saw, specifically local independent films, the more I wanted to see. The deeper I got, the more responsibility I felt, the stronger the need to do something, to share that which I found beautiful.

Writing in English, I never felt much of a need to write about foreign (non-Filipino) movies—though I’m often asked to, and mostly of Hollywood fare. While I love cinema in general, a passion that has grown exponentially over the years, I feel no need to put myself in service of that which doesn’t need it. The feeling has always been: why write about Juno when I’ve hardly read anything incisive put to print about the great animation of Roxlee? Why write about No Country For Old Men when there’s the brilliantly charming films of Antoinette Jadaone waiting to be discovered by readers? The same held true for a stint I had reviewing films every other week on The Breakfast Show on Studio 23. The informal terms of agreement: I could review anything I wanted, local or foreign, new or old, short or long, so long as they could get clips to show. It didn’t make waves by any means—it was but a single segment on a show for viewers with ADD—but I think it meant something to some people: Kris Villarino, the Cebu filmmaker who made the short Binaliw; the group of young upstarts from Davao starting a series of filmmaking workshops that has only grown over time; or the chaotic arrangement of an entire episode on independent filmmaking (before the term was abused) in Christmas 2005 that guested Raya Martin, Khavn De La Cruz, Mes De Guzman, Roxlee, Lav Diaz, Pam Miras, and a very shy John Torres speaking about his short films in public for the first time.

One thing has slowly progressed into another and, what began as a simple curiosity pursued with sincerity, has evolved into a commitment.

Philippine cinema has given much to me, and one must pay back one’s debts.

I never expected to have the opportunity to travel for/from film, especially not on the expenses of others—but, slowly, the opportunities presented themselves. Traveling is a privilege, and not one that I take lightly. In June 2004, as a fresh college graduate, I attended a conference in Singapore. A few months later, on the basis of my writing, I was selected to participate in the Asia-Europe Foundation’s Meeting of Young Film Critics from Europe and Asia. A few months later, I found myself in Berlin as part of the Berlinale Talent Press (though this was only partly subsidized, and it was a last minute loan from my brother in Canada that allowed me to go). A number of trips have ensued, to everywhere from Singapore (7x) to Hawaii, from New Dehli (2x) to Paris, Rotterdam, Oberhausen, and, of course, precious Slovenia, serving on juries and giving talks. All the time I’ve maintained the same stance: that it is important for people to write about their own cinemas and not let it be left to those outside to dictate what matters.

But these tickets, these travels, are expensive. Hotels are expensive. Time is expensive. The pollution caused by airplanes in the sky will cost us in the long run. When you put all these things together, it equals an investment: a serious investment made on and in an individual. Do I sound like I’m taking this too seriously? Allow me to phrase it another way: without the cultural investment made in me, for the work I have or can do with regard to Philippine cinema, I would have never met you. There is much to repay.

I don’t like writing about the Metro Manila Film Festival. I didn’t like it the first time I did it in 2003, nor did I the second or third time. I didn’t like it as well when, with the help of Erwin Romulo, we drafted a position paper seeking reforms in the festival and attempted to rally established filmmakers behind it (signatories included, among others, Eddie Garcia, Peque Gallaga, Jose Javie Reyes, Erik Matti). It’s not fun being told off like I was a two-bit journalist looking for a quote by filmmakers named Laurice. I didn’t like it, but I did it because part of me sincerely believed we could things. A belief that, for a few moments, was infectious, for even those that knew in the back of their mind that nothing would come of it still chose to take part. A friend whose couch I slept on for much of those weeks sent me a text sometime after, a message that now three years later is still saved on my phone:
There’s a line in AGUILA where a Moro secessionist is told his cause is lost. He replies to him that winning doesn’t matter, it’s doing what one feels one should do. That’s wisdom for you.

My dear Nika,
If there has been a single cause of strain that has stuck out in our relationship it is this: the idea of my attachment to the Philippines, the strong desire you see that I have to live and work here, and the way that, perhaps, you see this as a matter of misappropriate priorities. Does a place mean more than a person? Does my work in the Philippines mean more than the possibility of a life with you, somewhere, anywhere else? Must it be you that moves, makes the (I know you hate the word, but let us use it) sacrifice of moving? And what, if anything, does that say about us—that the scales of our love weigh more heavily on your chalice?

I know you’ve come to terms with the idea of moving here, hopefully next year, we discuss—but I still feel the need to talk a bit more about some of my reasons for wanting to stay, at the very least for the meantime. I’m not attempting to compare my affection for Manila with yours for Slovenia, but only to explain the thoughts that go through my head, the things I feel I must do, things that, perhaps, we can do together.

Yours,
Alexis

 

ADDENDUM

 

⊲ I wish that the Film Development Council of the Philippines would understand the value of the money they’re given and consider going to Paris and spending five million of their 25 million allotment for a showcase given by a young festival as an investment, and not just a vacation.

 

⊲ I hope they support filmmakers with finished work to go abroad to festivals for the pride they bring their country—I wish instead they would support their films locally, and help them get seen by larger Filipino audiences.

 

⊲ I cry for the loss of Manuel Conde’s Juan Tamad films.

 

⊲ I cry for a country that can’t convince a single Filipino-American who owns the only known print of Conde’s Genghis Khan in its original language to return (i.e. sell) the film back to his mother country.

 

⊲ I cry for the generations of Filipinos, myself included, that can no longer see Gerry De Leon’s Daigdig ng Mga Api, and instead have scans of movie ads to admire on the internet.

 

⊲ I mourn a heritage that has allowed the prints of Mario O’Hara’s Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos and Peque Gallaga’s Oro, Plata, Mata to turn flush sepia through neglect.

 

⊲ I cry for a Union and University of the Philippines that conspire in apathy to let the master negatives of treasures produced by Bancom to rot in rooms only air conditioned half the day and in cans untouched for years and years.

 

⊲ I pray for a Senator or Congressman to take the courageous step of drafting a bill to help establish a National Film and Sound archive.

 

⊲ I pray a city government or even enterprising and concerned theater owners will consider settings aside 50 centavos or a peso of a ticket to go toward the preservation of our national audiovisual heritage. There have been flood taxes siphoned from movie tickets. For crying out loud, this should be easy!

 

⊲ I wish Cinemalaya which, thanks to the media and government mileage behind it has a great festive excitement, would actually put their efforts in service of Philippine cinema, and not in their own self-involved attempt to start a micro-industry.

 

⊲ I wish filmmakers would stop listening to Robbie Tan.

 

⊲ I wish Cinema one, which often produces better films than Cinemalaya, would actually give filmmakers some rights to their work and stop swindling them.

 

⊲ I wish Lav Diaz had larger budgets to maneuver and shoot with.

 

⊲ I wish Raymond Red would get to make Makapili and return to making fantastic shorts in the experimental mode.

 

⊲ I wish Mike De Leon would make another movie. . . . Please . . . we need it.

 

⊲ I wish Roxlee would get enough money to buy the time to make an animated feature.

 

⊲ I wish everyone would buy a copy of Nicanor Tiongson and Cesar Hernando’s The Cinema of Manuel Conde.

 

⊲ I wish there were more books on Philippine cinema.

 

⊲ I wish there were a series of classic screenplays that would get published.

 

⊲ I wish Cinefilipino would have put out Maalaala Mo Kaya with the reels in the proper order.

 

⊲ I wish Cinefilipino would have put our their Brocka titles with just a little bit of care and affection, providing some writing on the film or some features, and didn’t just throw them out there to earn.

 

⊲ I wish Nestor Torre would open his eyes . . .

 

⊲ I wish the Manunuri books on Philippine cinema in the 70s and 80s would go back in print.

 

⊲ I wish the Manunuri actually cared about Philippine cinema today.

⊲ I wish the Manunuri actually reviewed films instead of just giving out awards.

 

⊲ I wish the Young Critics Circle were actually young.

 

⊲ I wish the Young Critics Circle were actually critics.

 

⊲ I wish Francis “Oggs” Cruz, Richard Bolisay, and Dodo Dayao would get space in the broadsheets, because they’re far more interesting than anyone writing regularly there today.

 

⊲ I wish Noel Vera would move back.

 

⊲ I wish Hammy Sotto was still alive.

 

⊲ I wish Hammy Sotto’s manuscripts would get published.

 

⊲ I wish Jo Atienza was still in Manila.

 

⊲ I wish we had a fully supported Film Museum.

 

⊲ I wish we had a Cinematheque.

 

⊲ I wish the UP Film Center had better seats and showed good films.

 

⊲ I wish more non-filmmakers from the Philippines would get to travel to festivals.

 

⊲ I wish film were taught in high schools.

 

⊲ I wish Teddy Co would get the recognition that he deserves for his selfless work.

 

⊲ I wish Teddy Co would write more, as his ideas deserve to be recorded.

 

⊲ I wish co-ops would co-operate.

 

⊲ I wish Khavn De La Cruz would get to make his musical EDSA XXX.

 

⊲ I wish the Max Santiago feature would get made, and that shorts would finally come to my hands on DVD (Hi Marla!)

 

⊲ I wish Tad Ermitaño never stops writing and playing in his cave.

 

⊲ I wish Lourd De Veyra continues writing on actors and cinema.

 

⊲ I wish Raymond Lee UFO successes.

 

⊲ I wish we had more regional feature films and more support for regional filmmakers.

 

⊲ I wish everyone would watch When Timawa Meets Delgado.

 

⊲ I wish someone would lower MTRCB rates for screenings fees, especially for festivals.

 

⊲ I wish someone, anyone, would make a good, thought-provoking film about the Philippine upper-class.

 

⊲ I wish Ketchup Eusebio would get more leading roles.

 

⊲ I wish Elijah Castillo gets to do a lot more films, soon.

 

⊲ I wish Cesar Hernando would get to transfer Botika, Bituka.

 

⊲ I wish filmmakers had some integrity and told Viva to screw themselves when offered another exploitation film.

 

⊲ I wish more people could see the film Bontoc Eulogy.

 

⊲ I wish Vic Del Rosario wasn’t presidential advisor on Entertainment, given the shlock they produce, and, yes, that includes the films which starred First-Son Mikey Arroyo.

 

⊲ I wish Star Cinema would stop . . . just stop.

 

⊲ I wish there was a film library that people could go to and read books on cinema.

 

⊲ I wish the MMFF wasn’t handled by the same people who install public urinals (admittedly useful).

 

⊲ I wish the MMDA didn’t call those circles and boxes Art.

 

⊲ I wish that MMDA Art wasn’t so much better than every MMFF film.

 

⊲  I wish Philippine cinema all the success in the world . .

THE LETTER I WOULD LOVE TO READ TO YOU IN PERSON BY ALEXIS TIOSECO

 

THE LETTER I WOULD LOVE TO READ TO YOU IN PERSON

BY ALEXIS TIOSECO

 

BUENA,JONATHAN C.                                                          2007-0188606

BBRC 3-3D

 

As this letter to his beloved in Slovenia displays, his relationship with local cinema is still very much like a long-distance love affair.

My Dear Nika,
I’ve been asked to write a column for this issue of Rogue, and the topic given to me was myself. I’ve always felt it awkward to write in public spaces about personal motivations behind the work I choose to do, so I have decided to use you as an excuse: there are things that you must know, that you may sense but not understand unless I tell you, and so I shall use this opportunity to put them on paper.

Besides, how could I say no to this offer when just the other day you recalled how an essay that was written by the solicitor of this column—in a previous incarnation of this magazine—played a central role in our being together? One must pay back one’s debts . . .

When we met in Rotterdam last January there was something about you that struck me immediately. It was not your beauty, or rather, not just your beauty, but your manner of speaking: which now sixteen months later still demands so much of me. There is a precious intensity in your gestures, the way in which your eyes dart and hands reach out to grab the right word, that illustrates how strong a desire you have to communicate, especially when the conversation turns toward the things that matter to you—the integrity of your work, the importance of nature, the concern for your brother. (I know what you’re thinking—shut up! I’m not a native speaker!—but this isn’t a question of familiarity with language.)

We both did not arrive at the festival in the best of conditions: you in ill health and from the disappointment of not closing the latest issue of Ekran before leaving Slovenia (compounded by you missing your flight and multiplied by a year’s fatigue of battling for editorial independence) and I from the solitude of learning to live alone, and of not yet having come to terms with the abrupt death of my father seven months before (something which, as you know, I am still attempting to do).

I wasn’t in a very good place the months before we met, reckless and hurried in my interactions with new acquaintances, but in Rotterdam it was hard not to fight for clarity and calm when the person before you, beleaguered and weary as they were, would still refuse to let their words slip carelessly . . .

I know sometimes you may think that it was the fact that we worked in the same field that attracted me to you, but I must tell you that this couldn’t be farther from the truth. Why? Because one of the greatest joys I believe one can feel is to share that which they find beautiful with someone who otherwise wouldn’t have noticed it, and to see it appreciated. This is the main reason why I love teaching and why I refuse to show Lord of the Rings to my students (no matter how fervently my co-teachers insist). It is also the evidence that cinema isn’t what brings us nearer to each other: because in this regard, we are on equal footing, and I must instead find other things in me to share with you. For anyone who knows me, they know how difficult that is . . .

Does a place mean more than a person? Does my work in the Philippines mean more than the possibility of a life with you, somewhere, anywhere else?

But Rogue wants to hear about cinema! Or at least about my work and what I have done in it. Why it means so much to me, and why I have done the things that I have. So it is about cinema that I must write! Some of this may seem like things you have heard, my dear Nika, but don’t worry, if I am successful it will all come together in the end, and you will see why it relates to you, to us, and to the future.

Allow me to begin with a story, one of which you may be quite familiar.

In 1997, my father decided that my brother Chris and I, together with my mother, should return to the Philippines (my father as you know had been going back and forth between Manila and Vancouver, never growing quite comfortable in Canada. Remind me to make you a copy of the essay “Where’s the patis?”).

We had moved to Canada in 1983, leaving the Philippines just a few months before the death of Ninoy Aquino and just a few months after my second birthday.

Like most teenagers, I was still growing comfortable in my own skin, or rather trying to, and the thought of moving to another country for my last two years of High School petrified me. I resisted: on one hand, I protested to my parents that I wanted nothing to do with a country that was so class conscious and so corrupt (though I didn’t mind going there for vacation . . . ), and on the other hand, inside, I just didn’t want to deal with attempting to infiltrate ill-fated High School social circles in a new country. I was also completely devastated about having to leave the first girl I ever slow danced with in my high school life—Melodie Pangan—who I’m sure never thought of me as anything more than a friend, but who I still called dramatically from the airport, in tears, telling her I loved her for the first time. But I digress . . .

My father seduced my brother and I with the promise of round-the-clock air conditioning and a driver to take us wherever we wanted, which admittedly made the move easier to take (so much for my 16-year old defiance of class consciousness). Both of which, as it turned, were just selling points: things he was able, but unwilling, to provide.

As you know, we are five children in my family, but only Chris and I, together with my Mom, moved back. The primary excuse for it being just he and I was that we were the two youngest, and since Chris was just preparing to enter College and I was finishing my last two years of High School, we would both be able to adjust easier. But the other reason was also that we were men and, as men in the Philippines, he had wanted to groom us to take over the family business, to help maintain what he had established, or build on top of it. The primary reason, I believe, for him wanting my mother to come back was so that Chris and I would. We had grown quite close to my Mom over the years in Vancouver, as my Dad was often away, and he knew that her agreeing to go was the key to being able to bring us back. On the part of my Mom, she was settled in Vancouver, she wasn’t comfortable having helpers live in the house, and was used to cooking and cleaning herself and looking after us. She moved back for him, because he asked her to.

Two years passed, and my mother moved back to Vancouver. She had been battling bouts of depression caused by their fights, by her lack of control of the family, and it was decided that she would go to Vancouver for a while for therapy. I didn’t know at the time that it would be for good, it was supposed to be for two months. She returned for the first time in 2006 for my father’s funeral.

My brother Chris never quite settled in the Philippines. One theory we have was that he never got to imbibe the culture in a manner deeper than gimmicks in Makati—and as a majority of his good friends were foreigners and he had no Tagalog classes, he didn’t learn the language much. The other possibility is that he just wasn’t used to living under my father’s watchful eye. He graduated from University in June of 2001, and by August he moved back to Vancouver.

The first impulse of any good film critic, and to this I think you would agree, must be of love.

What was left of my Dad’s dream—of keeping the family together in the Philippines and of one of his sons taking a keen interest in the business? Me. And just me. With less people living in it, the house had more space, and I no longer shared my room with anyone, but I felt more and more suffocated. Upon graduating with my studies directed towards business management, I began working for my father. I lasted from June to November of 2004 before admitting that I couldn’t do it any longer. I would tell you I quit. My father told relatives at family gatherings he fired me. Either story will do now; it doesn’t really matter.

Sender: Dad
Date: 24-04-2006
Time: 05:19:51pm

“BF 2 GF’s rich dad: I wana mari ur dauter,
Dad: Do u work?
BF: Im a theology scholar.
Dad: Can u afford a weding?
BF: God wil provide.
Dad: Wat about a haus, raising a family & education of d kids?
BF: God wil provide.
Later…Mom: How’d it go dad?
Dad: D guy’s poor, & he thinks Im God!”

Sender: Dad
Date: 24-04-2006
Time: 05:22:32pm

“BF 2 GF’s rich dad: I wana mari ur dauter,
Dad: Do u work?
BF: Im a Unvrsty Profsor nd a film critic.
Dad: Can u afford a weding?
BF: God wil provide.
Dad: Wat about a haus, raising a family & education of d kids?
BF: God wil provide.
Later…Mom: How’d it go dad?
Dad: D guy’s poor, & he thinks Im God!”

I never wanted to be a film critic. To this day I abhor using the term for myself, but I’ve begun to do so regularly, just because it makes life easier.

Many filmmakers, especially filmmakers in the Philippines, have a problem with the word critic. We have little to no culture of healthy polemics in the country, as any attempt to consider fault is taken as a personal attack. Rare are those that are able to deal with it properly. One particular filmmaker took objection to the idea of a publication that I was to edit using the title “Criticine”: he had a problem with the word critic being included. A nasty term, I suppose he thought.

The first impulse of any good film critic, and to this I think you would agree, must be of love. To be moved enough to want to share their affection for a particular work or to relate their experience so that others may be curious. This is why criticism, teaching, and curating or programming, in an ideal sense, must all go hand in hand.

The first proper review of a Filipino film that I wrote was on Lav Diaz’s Batang West Side. I knew I liked movies, had even harbored thoughts of making them at one point, and I certainly took a measure of pride in being looked to by my peers as someone whose opinion was worth seeking. But despite this, and despite the surprising satisfaction of first seeing my name in print, I never had any interest in writing film criticism in any serious way.

It was not writing the review of Batang West Side (which I was quite proud of at the time, but look at with a bit of embarrassment for its simplicity today) that changed things for me, but rather what took place before and after writing it: the complete lack of engaging, intelligent writing on the film that engaged more than just the length. (Conrado de Quiros tried, and perhaps his championing was more important than the actual text.) Batang West Side, as you now, is 5-hours long, and if you read most of the articles that I mentioned (I dare not say discussed), this would likely be all that you knew. Even Jessica Zafra, after organizing a screening of the film through her engaging-if-but-short-lived FLIP Magazine (and having commissioned an article from Lav), proceeded to make crude jokes about the film in the letters section of the succeeding issue.

I was a junior in college when the film premiered, and in the five years I had lived in the Philippines, the closest I had come to connecting with culture via cinema were a few jokes in April, May, June, a film about three sisters starring the then quite popular Alma Concepcion and maybe SPO1 Don Juan: Da Dancing Policeman, starring the great Leo Martinez. Needless to say, Batang West Side was a departure, not only in length, but in aesthetic: its rhythm, the distance from the camera to its subject, the duration in which shots were held, the construction of the discourse (equally about past as about present), and most especially in its attitude towards its audience—its stubborn refusal to give in to our inherent need for a neat ending, instead forcing us to draw our own conclusions.

I wasn’t prepared for Batang West Side. I hadn’t heard of Lav Diaz and simply attended because it was during Cinemanila, and it’s not everyday someone makes a film of that length. I was curious. The film stuck with me. Especially so as one of the first films that made me think concretely about what it meant to be Filipino, about the pitfalls of migration. Perils that, I think for the first time now as I type this, my Dad probably understood better than anyone. It’s a shame he never got to see the film.

It was now a full year after Batang West Side premiered, a good few months after I wrote the article, and still little literature was available on the film. I contacted Lav and asked if I could interview him, to which he obliged graciously. The interview ran close to an hour, and I asked him all the questions I wished others had.

Happy with the results, which ran 12 pages long and was published on the website Indiefilipino.com (may she rest in peace, how I loved her so!), I used all the prepaid credit I had to text most everyone mildly interested in cinema in my modest phonebook to plug it. Hardly any of them responded, of course, but there were notes of appreciation on Indiefilipino’s forums, and it made me feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

There were people, it turned out, who were interested in reading serious writing on serious cinema—it just had to be written and published somewhere accessible.

 

 

The first impulse is always one of love.

The more films I saw, specifically local independent films, the more I wanted to see. The deeper I got, the more responsibility I felt, the stronger the need to do something, to share that which I found beautiful.

Writing in English, I never felt much of a need to write about foreign (non-Filipino) movies—though I’m often asked to, and mostly of Hollywood fare. While I love cinema in general, a passion that has grown exponentially over the years, I feel no need to put myself in service of that which doesn’t need it. The feeling has always been: why write about Juno when I’ve hardly read anything incisive put to print about the great animation of Roxlee? Why write about No Country For Old Men when there’s the brilliantly charming films of Antoinette Jadaone waiting to be discovered by readers? The same held true for a stint I had reviewing films every other week on The Breakfast Show on Studio 23. The informal terms of agreement: I could review anything I wanted, local or foreign, new or old, short or long, so long as they could get clips to show. It didn’t make waves by any means—it was but a single segment on a show for viewers with ADD—but I think it meant something to some people: Kris Villarino, the Cebu filmmaker who made the short Binaliw; the group of young upstarts from Davao starting a series of filmmaking workshops that has only grown over time; or the chaotic arrangement of an entire episode on independent filmmaking (before the term was abused) in Christmas 2005 that guested Raya Martin, Khavn De La Cruz, Mes De Guzman, Roxlee, Lav Diaz, Pam Miras, and a very shy John Torres speaking about his short films in public for the first time.

One thing has slowly progressed into another and, what began as a simple curiosity pursued with sincerity, has evolved into a commitment.

Philippine cinema has given much to me, and one must pay back one’s debts.

I never expected to have the opportunity to travel for/from film, especially not on the expenses of others—but, slowly, the opportunities presented themselves. Traveling is a privilege, and not one that I take lightly. In June 2004, as a fresh college graduate, I attended a conference in Singapore. A few months later, on the basis of my writing, I was selected to participate in the Asia-Europe Foundation’s Meeting of Young Film Critics from Europe and Asia. A few months later, I found myself in Berlin as part of the Berlinale Talent Press (though this was only partly subsidized, and it was a last minute loan from my brother in Canada that allowed me to go). A number of trips have ensued, to everywhere from Singapore (7x) to Hawaii, from New Dehli (2x) to Paris, Rotterdam, Oberhausen, and, of course, precious Slovenia, serving on juries and giving talks. All the time I’ve maintained the same stance: that it is important for people to write about their own cinemas and not let it be left to those outside to dictate what matters.

But these tickets, these travels, are expensive. Hotels are expensive. Time is expensive. The pollution caused by airplanes in the sky will cost us in the long run. When you put all these things together, it equals an investment: a serious investment made on and in an individual. Do I sound like I’m taking this too seriously? Allow me to phrase it another way: without the cultural investment made in me, for the work I have or can do with regard to Philippine cinema, I would have never met you. There is much to repay.

I don’t like writing about the Metro Manila Film Festival. I didn’t like it the first time I did it in 2003, nor did I the second or third time. I didn’t like it as well when, with the help of Erwin Romulo, we drafted a position paper seeking reforms in the festival and attempted to rally established filmmakers behind it (signatories included, among others, Eddie Garcia, Peque Gallaga, Jose Javie Reyes, Erik Matti). It’s not fun being told off like I was a two-bit journalist looking for a quote by filmmakers named Laurice. I didn’t like it, but I did it because part of me sincerely believed we could things. A belief that, for a few moments, was infectious, for even those that knew in the back of their mind that nothing would come of it still chose to take part. A friend whose couch I slept on for much of those weeks sent me a text sometime after, a message that now three years later is still saved on my phone:
There’s a line in AGUILA where a Moro secessionist is told his cause is lost. He replies to him that winning doesn’t matter, it’s doing what one feels one should do. That’s wisdom for you.

My dear Nika,
If there has been a single cause of strain that has stuck out in our relationship it is this: the idea of my attachment to the Philippines, the strong desire you see that I have to live and work here, and the way that, perhaps, you see this as a matter of misappropriate priorities. Does a place mean more than a person? Does my work in the Philippines mean more than the possibility of a life with you, somewhere, anywhere else? Must it be you that moves, makes the (I know you hate the word, but let us use it) sacrifice of moving? And what, if anything, does that say about us—that the scales of our love weigh more heavily on your chalice?

I know you’ve come to terms with the idea of moving here, hopefully next year, we discuss—but I still feel the need to talk a bit more about some of my reasons for wanting to stay, at the very least for the meantime. I’m not attempting to compare my affection for Manila with yours for Slovenia, but only to explain the thoughts that go through my head, the things I feel I must do, things that, perhaps, we can do together.

Yours,
Alexis

 

ADDENDUM

⊲ I wish that the Film Development Council of the Philippines would understand the value of the money they’re given and consider going to Paris and spending five million of their 25 million allotment for a showcase given by a young festival as an investment, and not just a vacation.

⊲ I hope they support filmmakers with finished work to go abroad to festivals for the pride they bring their country—I wish instead they would support their films locally, and help them get seen by larger Filipino audiences.

⊲ I cry for the loss of Manuel Conde’s Juan Tamad films.

⊲ I cry for a country that can’t convince a single Filipino-American who owns the only known print of Conde’s Genghis Khan in its original language to return (i.e. sell) the film back to his mother country.

⊲ I cry for the generations of Filipinos, myself included, that can no longer see Gerry De Leon’s Daigdig ng Mga Api, and instead have scans of movie ads to admire on the internet.

⊲ I mourn a heritage that has allowed the prints of Mario O’Hara’s Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos and Peque Gallaga’s Oro, Plata, Mata to turn flush sepia through neglect.

⊲ I cry for a Union and University of the Philippines that conspire in apathy to let the master negatives of treasures produced by Bancom to rot in rooms only air conditioned half the day and in cans untouched for years and years.

⊲ I pray for a Senator or Congressman to take the courageous step of drafting a bill to help establish a National Film and Sound archive.

⊲ I pray a city government or even enterprising and concerned theater owners will consider settings aside 50 centavos or a peso of a ticket to go toward the preservation of our national audiovisual heritage. There have been flood taxes siphoned from movie tickets. For crying out loud, this should be easy!

⊲ I wish Cinemalaya which, thanks to the media and government mileage behind it has a great festive excitement, would actually put their efforts in service of Philippine cinema, and not in their own self-involved attempt to start a micro-industry.

⊲ I wish filmmakers would stop listening to Robbie Tan.

⊲ I wish Cinema one, which often produces better films than Cinemalaya, would actually give filmmakers some rights to their work and stop swindling them.

⊲ I wish Lav Diaz had larger budgets to maneuver and shoot with.

⊲ I wish Raymond Red would get to make Makapili and return to making fantastic shorts in the experimental mode.

⊲ I wish Mike De Leon would make another movie. . . . Please . . . we need it.

⊲ I wish Roxlee would get enough money to buy the time to make an animated feature.

⊲ I wish everyone would buy a copy of Nicanor Tiongson and Cesar Hernando’s The Cinema of Manuel Conde.

⊲ I wish there were more books on Philippine cinema.

⊲ I wish there were a series of classic screenplays that would get published.

⊲ I wish Cinefilipino would have put out Maalaala Mo Kaya with the reels in the proper order.

⊲ I wish Cinefilipino would have put our their Brocka titles with just a little bit of care and affection, providing some writing on the film or some features, and didn’t just throw them out there to earn.

⊲ I wish Nestor Torre would open his eyes . . .

⊲ I wish the Manunuri books on Philippine cinema in the 70s and 80s would go back in print.

⊲ I wish the Manunuri actually cared about Philippine cinema today.
⊲ I wish the Manunuri actually reviewed films instead of just giving out awards.

⊲ I wish the Young Critics Circle were actually young.

⊲ I wish the Young Critics Circle were actually critics.

⊲ I wish Francis “Oggs” Cruz, Richard Bolisay, and Dodo Dayao would get space in the broadsheets, because they’re far more interesting than anyone writing regularly there today.

⊲ I wish Noel Vera would move back.

⊲ I wish Hammy Sotto was still alive.

⊲ I wish Hammy Sotto’s manuscripts would get published.

⊲ I wish Jo Atienza was still in Manila.

⊲ I wish we had a fully supported Film Museum.

⊲ I wish we had a Cinematheque.

⊲ I wish the UP Film Center had better seats and showed good films.

⊲ I wish more non-filmmakers from the Philippines would get to travel to festivals.

⊲ I wish film were taught in high schools.

⊲ I wish Teddy Co would get the recognition that he deserves for his selfless work.

⊲ I wish Teddy Co would write more, as his ideas deserve to be recorded.

⊲ I wish co-ops would co-operate.

⊲ I wish Khavn De La Cruz would get to make his musical EDSA XXX.

⊲ I wish the Max Santiago feature would get made, and that shorts would finally come to my hands on DVD (Hi Marla!)

⊲ I wish Tad Ermitaño never stops writing and playing in his cave.

⊲ I wish Lourd De Veyra continues writing on actors and cinema.

⊲ I wish Raymond Lee UFO successes.

⊲ I wish we had more regional feature films and more support for regional filmmakers.

⊲ I wish everyone would watch When Timawa Meets Delgado.

⊲ I wish someone would lower MTRCB rates for screenings fees, especially for festivals.

⊲ I wish someone, anyone, would make a good, thought-provoking film about the Philippine upper-class.

⊲ I wish Ketchup Eusebio would get more leading roles.

⊲ I wish Elijah Castillo gets to do a lot more films, soon.

⊲ I wish Cesar Hernando would get to transfer Botika, Bituka.

⊲ I wish filmmakers had some integrity and told Viva to screw themselves when offered another exploitation film.

⊲ I wish more people could see the film Bontoc Eulogy.

⊲ I wish Vic Del Rosario wasn’t presidential advisor on Entertainment, given the shlock they produce, and, yes, that includes the films which starred First-Son Mikey Arroyo.

⊲ I wish Star Cinema would stop . . . just stop.

⊲ I wish there was a film library that people could go to and read books on cinema.

⊲ I wish the MMFF wasn’t handled by the same people who install public urinals (admittedly useful).

⊲ I wish the MMDA didn’t call those circles and boxes Art.

⊲ I wish that MMDA Art wasn’t so much better than every MMFF film.

⊲ I wish Philippine cinema all the success in the world . .