Category Archive for: pelikula

kultura

Fuschia fades

It was easy to fall for watching the movie Fuschia, directed by Joel Lamangan co-written by him and Ricky Lee. There was veteran actress Gloria Romero in the lead role, a really interesting title, and an even more interesting synopsis. More importantly, it is part of the Sine Direk project of the Director’s Guild of the Philippines, Inc. (DGPI), sold as a showcase of films created with unbridled freedom – no capitalist producers to consider.

But there’s more to good films than just a director’s freedom. In the case of Fuschia, it is about knowing when to stop. Unless of course the point is to befuddle the audience into confusion. (more…)

kultura

the enterprise of the impossible

their first movie, A Very Special Love was anything but believable. Laida, Sarah Geronimo‘s character, was too giddy, too pa-cute, too over the top, for comfort. And Miggy, John Lloyd Cruz’s character, was so confusingly inconsistent: one moment he was a scary boss, the next he was someone who would go to an employee’s birthday party; one moment he was singing videoke, the next he was downright mean.

the love story was also such a stretch, given the fact that Laida was a new employee in the office where Miggy was boss, and she does look younger (no matter the clothes and make-up) than him. given Miggy’s general attitude towards his employees, it was unbelievable that he would even be remotely interested in this girl who obviously had the hots for him.

it is in this sense that You Changed My Life was an interesting sequel, because it had to have more than just the kilig factor and John Lloyd’s laglag-panty looks — both of which are on overdrive here. while Laida’s character had evolved and matured, Geronimo’s take on her was still on “I love you John Lloyd!” mode. it was clear that Laida here had very little sense that love doesn’t equal dependence, and that she couldn’t save this man from messing up his new job as head of one of his family’s businesses, even with more love for him. even more interesting is the fact that Laida, even when in her head she could always help save Miggy from self-destruction and shame, had no idea what kind of help Miggy actually needed.

he, who wanted to revive the business by taking on the challenge of an account that would require more than the company’s standard quota. he, who decided that the only thing he could do was overwork his employees, hire more contractuals, and remove all incentives so that he could have more money to go around. he, who screamed at the workers, without realizing the kind of work they were doing.

it was clear here that what Miggy needed was a change in ideology — not just Laida saving his ass by, well, becoming his employee (which was what she wanted to do). when the movie dared allow for the workers to stage a rally and stand by their refusal to work, i couldn’t help but be hopeful that there would be a spiel on workers’ rights. instead, all the movie did was talk about the value of the worker in the context of this particular family enterprise. instead, all they talked about was the universal liberal notion of “our company is our people” and we must “care for them” — without realizing that this sounded more about charity than about valuing the worker.

without Laida’s help, Miggy is forced to take responsibility for the company and its people. meanwhile, Laida was kept in the dark about how horrible this man she had fallen in love with was, a tragedy in itself given that she comes from a working class family and is in fact an employee of Miggy’s family.

which does make it almost impossible that this rich, super guwapo, yummy young man — an eligible bachelor as he is wont to be created by the movie — would fall in love with this spit of a girl, who barely knows herself and is obviously of a different social class. in reality, someone like Laida would dream of a man like Miggy, but never get him. in reality, Laida’s social class would dictate a particular ideology, the kind that would allow her to take stock and realize that she is an employee and he is the boss, and nothing else.

but this is a Pinoy love story after all. the kind that wants us to believe that the impossible is possible, that we can all be Laida and have someone like John Lloyd take us on a helicopter ride, pick us up at work everyday, do the sundance with us, and will want our powerhug. and yes, when I shift from Geronimo’s Laida character to the real John Lloyd, i mean to say this: that like the images of real and true workers’ empowerment, in the context of capitalism, this remains as fiction. and it is almost entirely impossible.

p.s.: Rayver Cruz‘s acting here was priceless as Macoy. as the third member of a love triangle that never happens, his longing looks should be put in a bottle for the enterprise of the forlorn. this kid will give many of those hunks on ABS-CBN a run for their money — and i’m not even talking about his dancing.

kultura

in defense of Ploning

Much has been said, in print and online reviews, about the narrative structure of Ploning. For some, it was a distraction, something that just made the story confusing; for others, it was there to make things more difficult or complex, given that the story seemed simple enough. Across the reviews, this narrative structure has been pinpointed as the reason for the problems with plot and characterization. (more…)

kultura

why say sorry?

or the dynamic of women’s choices.

the romance as a genre in philippine movies has, since the turn of the millennium, been common and surprising in turn. the surprises i personally trace back to regine velasquez’s foray into her julia-roberts-type of romantic films, where situations are perfectly created for both her limited acting skills, and for the middle class women that she portrays (and has as audience). although it can be said that much much earlier than that, judy ann santos and piolo pascual, as well that ricoyan-claudinebarretto-dietherocampo movie were the beginnings of more interesting takes on the romance (hello, boksingero si judy ann? naman). (more…)

kultura

Lording it Over

published in the national daily newspaper Malaya, February 18, 2002

Rarely do I see an adaptation of any literary text without having first seen it on paper. Not out of some obsessive-compulsive need to know the story ahead of time, but out of the need to find out wherea given adaptation comes from, as this does not only give one a history of the text itself, but a sense of how it’s retold through another medium. The downside to this is the fact that most of the time, the adaptation – and in this day and age of “Disney-ized” fairytales, these are mostly movies – are such failures compared to the original texts. Too often, I’ve found myself regretting having paid 50 bucks for a movie that not only missed the point of the original text, but also added onto the original in an effort at selling the movie version. Think Rica Peralejo in the role of, uh, an originally old, fat, ugly maid who becomes the Tatarin.

Having been disappointed far too many times, for far too long, and quite recently (while Tatarin may be forgettable, Harry Potter is not) with movie adaptations, I wasn’t too hot about seeing the firstinstallment of the movie version of Lord of the Rings by J.R.R. Tolkien. But since I read the trilogy as an adolescent and didn’t really remember much of it, I figured I had less to lose. At least the disappointment in yet another adaptation will be hampered some by a certain level of unfamiliarity with the original text. At least, without my usual expectations, I could dismiss the movie as just another adaptation that miserably failed just because adaptations are meant to – what with producers who are only out to make money, directors who work against instead of with the original text, and writers who just decide to take on a text literally, albeit with some “needed” subplots and additions (a kissing/sex scene, an action scene, a god in a basket).

But director (and co-writer) Peter Jackson wasn’t one to disappoint. As the story of The Fellowship of the Ring was told me all over again, it didn’t matter that I could barely remember the original text. The movie took it upon itself to tell the story, without taking the easy way out and just putting the story on the screen word for word, event by event. Instead, it took on Tolkien’s original story and made a story of it for the big screen – choosing events and concepts that would tell a whole story. Too often movie adaptations suffer because there is an unthinking effort towards re-creating the whole text for the new medium. The Fellowship of the Ring doesn’t even work towards this goal, and in the process, the movie did not only remind me of what the original story was all about, it also brought me back to that point in adolescence when I was fascinated and awed by this world that Tolkien had created. The only way the movie could’ve done that was by being fascinating in itself, in the manner in which it told Tolkien’s story.

In the end, one realizes that the power of a text’s adaptation lies, not in its “faithfulness” to the original text, but in its ability to take the text and make it the medium’s own. A text that’s different altogether, but which is clearly and honestly tied down to the original. That Jackson, together with his co-writers Fran Walsh and Philippa Boyens, was able to do this is not only tremendous; it’s proof that one cannot give up a text to another person who does not admire and respect the text enough to give it as much work as it deserves. Jackson has spent the past 7 years of his life working on this film and the years before that being a fan of Tolkien’s writing. He had wanted to take on the film when there were countless others who could do it; then he feared having to do the film when it was obvious that he was the only one who cared enough to keep working at it. It is this kind of respect for a literary text, and for the writer who brought the text into being, that produces a retelling that becomes, not only a success for the director and writers, but for the writer of the text himself/herself. One finishes watching The Fellowship of the Ring not only awed at the cinematic experience that it was, but at J.R.R. Tolkien himself, more than 50 years after he wrote the piece.

This is not to say that this adaptation was so unlike others that it did not add onto the original text. As is the issue with practically every LOTR discussion, Arwen is given more mileage in the film than in the practically all of the (three!) Lord of the Rings books combined. But that the movie’s writers had found this to be the only worthy, major addition is admirable, as it does not make the text suffer. Instead, it re-invents Tolkien and makes him more, um… gender conscious, than he actually is in the original trilogy. That’s not a revision that Tolkien – or any male writer in the year 2002 – would (should) want to go against.

And yet I find that the most thrilling experience I’ve had in relation to this movie, is realizing that like British Harry Potter, The Fellowship of the Ring did not only have Finnish Tolkien for a writer, the author’s estate also decided to have a Kiwi director take this on. In this day and age of America touting itself as the savior of mankind from anything that’s remotely un- or anti-American, it’s just fantastic that some people can still ultimately, snub America.