MMFF 2012: Sisterakas

SISTERAKAS (2012)

d. Wenn Deramas

p. Star Cinema

c. Ai-Ai delas Alas, Vice Ganda, Kris Aquino

Pitch: Half-siblings get separated and lead different lives. They meet again as clashing adults. Tapos may isang entity na sumisingit sa kuwento na wala namang rele. Si Kris Aquino ‘yun.

Catch: Halatang tinipid ang prod, and of course if it’s from Direk Wenn, there must be a DJ Durano in here!!! Lech.

 

‘Yung wala naman talaga akong balak pag-aksayahan ng pera ang pelikulang walang kuwenta sa akin dahil sa mga past works ng mga involved dito. Ilang beses na ba naming inokray nirebyu ang mga pelikula ni direk Wenn? Na di ko na talaga alam kung ano pa ang mga katuturan ng ilan sa kanila. Heniwey tapos andyan pa si Kristeta na ang huli pa yatang good performance niya ever ay ang ummmm hmmmm FATIMA BUEN STORY? Pinanganak ka na ba nung pinalabas ‘yun? Ewan ko ba. Hayst.

Anyway wala akong choice kundi panoorin ito kasi andito si Ate Ai-Ai at si Vice. Na sila lang naman talaga ang tumawid ng kuwento dito, na medyo lame-o na rin naman. Kebs na sa pagka lame-o, kasi produkto na naman ito malamang ng Star Cinema kind of meddling the story brainstorming. Been there been that! But anyway, may saysay sana ang kuwento in fairness kung ginawa na nilang uber-camp sana ito. ‘Yung todo na sa pagkaka-satire sana sa kung anuman ang sina-satire sana nila dito. Ibig sabihin, sana tinodo na nila ang pagkaka-lampoon nila sa kulturang ito ng fashyown-fashyown, sa katatawanan o humor, at kung anupaman.

Eh ang kaso, wala, typical movie story lang ito of rags to riches kuning then ex-rags turned riches now fights ex-riches turned rags. Or something. Actually, ni hindi nga klaro kung bakit imbey ang character ni Vice sa character ni Ai–Ai, ‘yung exacting revenge type of imbey na dahil pinabayaan nito daw ang nanay ni Vice noong bata pa sila eh napilay and such. Whatevs! Hindi klaro ang mga motibasyon ng karakter na gawin ang mga ginagawa nila sa buhay teh. Wafung itey.

Pero mas wafung ang istilo ng pagpapatawa nila. Kadalasan, self-referencing na naman ang moda ng mga taga-Star kung magsulat ng script. Meaning kung di mo alam kung ano ang mga lintek na TV shows ng mga artistang ito, kung di ko alam ang mga latest commercials nila (lalo na ‘yang lintek na rubadabango potang ‘yan) at kung di mo alam ang latest chismax sa mga love life nila (lalo na ‘yang lintek na hiwalayang James Yap na ‘yan), hindi ka matatawa sa karamihan ng real-life references ng mga jokes sa pelikulang ito. Same old same old, Star. Chakaness.

Pero I swear, kung wala ang mga hirit-banat ni Vice dito, waley itong film na itich. ‘Yung mga one-liner hirit niya na tulad ng nasa PETRANG KABAYO dati, ganun. Lintek, nakakatawa!!! ‘Yun lang ang keri dito, saka ‘yung pagpapatawa din ni lola Ai-Ai mo. ‘Yun lang. Kaya ‘yung character ni Kris dito, puwede nang itapon. Palitan na lang ng iba, tipid pa sa TF.

Speaking of tipid, ito rin ang isang imbey sa production mismo. Halatang tinipid nila ito. As in haller, may isang eksena dito na ‘yung potangenang PE tshirt nina Daniel Padilla ay potangenang plain white shirt lang na potangenang dinikitan lang ng potangenang sticker(!!!) ng school logo. Potangenah!  Ginagago niyo ba kami!??! Halata siya!!! Tengeneng trabahong tamad.

That stupid PE tshirt. Yes isyu sa ‘kin ‘yan!

Hay naku. Tapos may mga linya pang obvious na self-mocking ang Kristeta sa mga maraming bagay patungkol sa kanya. Di kinaya ng powers ko ‘yung unang bungad niya na parang “this is worse than a Kris Aquino horror film” ba ‘yun or something? Leche, self-deprecating humor doesn’t become her. Huwag na muling subukang sulatin; nakamamatay.

Ewan. Labo. Hayst buti na lang talaga andun ‘yung humor ni Vice Ganda. For that, naisalba. As for naitawid, o siya sige, highest grossing film siya chenes. Kayo na. Kung gagawa kayo ng sequel, utang na loob paki-chugi na ‘yung character na walang silbi.

At bumili ng totoong potangenang PE tshirt! Lech.

Next!

MMFF 2012: Thy Womb

THY WOMB (2012)

d. Brillante Mendoza

s. Henry Burgos

dop. Odyssey Flores

mscore. Teresa Barrozo

c. Nora Aunor, Bembol Roco, Lovi Poe, Mercedes Cabral

Pitch: In a Muslim community down south, an infertile wife agrees to find another wife for her husband so they could have a child in the house.

Catch: ‘Yun na ‘yun. Maniwala ka bang the pitch is also the catch? Basa kung bakit!

Kasi ganito ‘yun teh. ‘Yung pelikula, maganda. ‘Yung scenery lalo na. Tahimik lang siyang nilatag, imahe after imahe, na ipinapakita ang buhay ng isang particular na lugar na ito sa Muslim community somewhere in Mindanao. Culture kung culture spectacle teh. May pinakitang kasal ng isang lalaki at babae (si Mercedes Cabral the indie cutie) na kahit parang may pumipilit na suma-subplot na naghahabulang saglit na military vs. rebels chuva, kebs pa rin si ati at may-I-dance siya ng ritual dance ng kinasal, to the tune of that dayang dayang song na sikat ay may rele pala sa kanila doon.

Tahimik ding pinakita ‘yung buhay ng mag-asawang ginampanan ni Kuya Bembol at ni Ate Guy. Na gumagawa sila ng mga special colorful na banig tapos binebenta nila. May moments na ‘yun lang ang pinapakita, na naghahabi lang hibla by hibla si Ate Guy. Tapos si Kuya Bembol nagluluto at nagkukulay ng hibla. Tapos tahimik ding pinakita na minsan, fisherfolk sila. May maliit silang bangka na may motor tapos nangingisda sila sa vast Mindanao waters, na minsan may rebels at nahagingan sila ng baril tapos kinulimbat ‘yung fishes na nahuli nila. Ganun lang.

Tapos tahimik ding nag-usap ang mag-asawa na ‘yun nga, kumuha ng bagong asawa para maanakan ni Kuya Bembol. Nalulungkot kasi sila na walang bata sa bahay kaya naghanap sila ng bagong babaeng may silbi ang bahay-bata. Enter frame si Lovi Poe the mainstream cutie. Pinakita din dito ang struggle ng mag-asawa na mahanap ang perfect yet affordable next wife na afford nilang bayaran ang dowry. Ito interesting for me as a feminist. Mas mahal pala ang gelay kapag titulado at nakapag-kolehiyo. Parang 120,000 pesoses yata siya or something. Tapos may extra pa, mga tinapay saka magarang belo saka reams ng yosi para sa padir at madir ng gelay. Interesting makita ang kalakarang ito.

In fairness, sa kuwento, affordable ang byuti ni Lola Lovi. ‘Yun din pala, tahimik na pinakita kung paano nag-raise ng 80,000 pesoses yata or more ang mag-asawang mananahi ng banig at sometime fisherfolk para afford nilang bayaran ang Lola Lovi dowry. Kelangang ibenta ang motor ng boat at nag-pitch in ang community for fundraising. Pero may request ang lola, na pagkaanak niya, palayasin na daw ni Kuya si Ate sa balur at silang dalawa na lang ang magsasama. Yes, finally, conflict! Na dumating mga makalipas ang isang oras at kalahati ng katahimikang paglalahad ng mga imaheng kultural.

Tapos eto na, nang manganak na nga ang lola mo, si ati ang nagpaanak at pinutol pa ang umbilical cord at tinago for souvenir. Tapos tinitigan lang siya ni kuya at lola and then pagkaputol ng cord, BAM! Pinutol na rin ang pelikula, literal. Credits na. The end.

And I was like, Thy Whut???

Napaganun na lang ako. parang naglalatag pa lang ang kuwento, naglalatag pa lang ng istorya, parang ang mga pangyayari sa naratibo ay nagsisimula pa lang maging interesante pero malabong tinapos na ito ni Brillante. Kamusta naman. Sige, maganda ang katahimikan ng mga imahe, fine. Magaling ang pag-arte nilang lahat dito impernez, fine. Pero naman teh, asan ang script??? Asan ang laman ng istorya??? Naman eh. Nalurkey akey. Di ko knows kung ano naganap. Kaya ayun, bitin lola mo. Buti na lang at biased ako at naisalba ang mga oras ng katahimikan ng pelikulang ito sa pagtitig sa ganju mode ni Mercedes my crush at ng alindog-in-a-shawl mode ni Lovi my lust. Pramis ‘yun lang tumawid teh. Haynakuh beks di ka na natuto. Di ba ganitich din naman ang reak mo sa ibang pelikula ni koya BM? Oo ‘pag naiimbey ako I talk to myself, di ka kasali dito, beh.

Hay Lovi, why so pretty?

Hay nakuh. Sayang. Andun na sana e. Maganda na sana ‘yung mga katahimikang subtleties na sinusubukang isaksak ni direk sa pelikula. Pero walang direktang story consciousness ang pelikula. In short, wala kang masyadong kakapitan na kuwento. Scenery na lang, fine. Konting filmic nuances (esp. acting, cinematog) fine. Pero kuwento? Wiz! Balik sa workshop ‘yan. Now na.

Saka sana Tinagalog na lang nila ang titulo. Saka lost ako sa choice na “thy” kasi di ba associated itich sa Christian/Catholic writings? “Thy will be done/on earth as it is in heaven.” Um mga followers po ni Allah ang characters. May counterpart ba ang thy chuvaness sa Quran? Just wondering. Parang mali, eh. Maling-mali.

Hayst. Sayang. Wala, ang lola Mercedes at ang lola Lovi ay nasayang lang ditich. Anyway kebs, naka-rampage naman sila sa Venice Filmfest saka sa Cannes din yata. Hm bakit kaya nanalo ito sa Venice? Siguro relate ang judges dahil puro tubig ang nakikita dito sa film. Di ba Venice canals chorva mode? Wala lang, wafung na akiz. Naubusan ng popcorn.

Next!

Are we ready ka na ba Pinas?

O ano mga teh, MMFF 2012 season na naman soon. Magkakaltas ka ba ng pera para manood ng pelikula o aabangan mo na lang ang mga ito sa dibidi next year?

Naaliw ako sa tallying ng Wikipedia kasi andito sa page nila ang list of entries, na impressive naman kahit papaano. A far cry from earlier years in recent history. Tapos meron ding list ng independent films na kasali at mabuti naman may slots na for them.

Pero tumbling din ako sa list ng rejected entries hehehe. And if you’ll check them out, aliw at nod to the nth levels lang akesh kung bakit sila na-reject hahaha! Taray. Yeah, next year na ‘yang mga yan teh hehe.

O siya, kitakits na lang sa sinehan mga teh. Yes, yes, I will start reviewing na ulit, actively, soon. Abangan!

Roll cam, roll life

Did you miss me? I know you did. Aminin!

Life was just sweepingly hectic in more ways than one. But since this hibernation break, I thought of blogging more in order to get back on track.

 

Teaching teachers how to tackle theatrical trailers. Teh totoo ‘to! [October 2012 Pagadian City]

 

But before I do that, I’ll ease into it a bit. I actually wrote some stuff which are film-related and are now out — but in other venues.

 

My editor at Philippine Online Chronicles’ (POC) Pinoy LGBT Channel asked me to review the Philippine Oscars rep this coming year, the recent Cinemalaya entry BWAKAW written and directed by Jun Lana.

My review appeared there in POC since the film is about this aging old gay man.

Here is that review. Seriously, I think this time, we have a contender.

Read up why.

 

 

And then, a paper that I have written early this year, presented in a cinema studies conference in Hong Kong last March, is now officially published in the Kritika Kultura ejournal. The journal has a special issue of Ishmael Bernal’s MANILA BY NIGHT and I was invited to submit a paper. I wrote about the lesbian character of Cherie Gil and intersected that with the genderqueer identity. It’s entitled “To conform or not to conform, that is the genderqueer question: Re-examining the lesbian identity in Manila By Night.” That paper is available here. The rest of the journal’s issue is here and could be downloaded as a pdf file like my paper. Enjoy cinema geeks!

Genderqueering academia. Story of my persecuted queer scholarly life. Hahaha don’t ask! Offer me beer and I will do tell. Charaught! [March 2012 Hong Kong University]

Yes, I have been busy. No, film-watching and critiquing were not forgotten, just overtaken by other avenues. But I promise that now, it will be back here again, ready for more.

Okay roll cam!

Film whiz whizzing wishes

Not that I haven’t been watching films — I have been watching lots, actually — but I have been reluctant to say things about them. I don’t know why. Must be the weather.

But you can take a peek at the film-related articles I have been writing for Philippine Online Chronicles’ Pinoy LGBT channel where I regularly contribute. Of course they are queer-centric but still, they intersect with movies and filmmaking so it might be worth your interest.

I will be back in reviewing films in this space soon. In the meantime, enjoy these:

Si Pidol sa pelikula ng sangkabaklaan part one and part two written during the comedy king’s demise. Also discussing some controversial issues there.

My Cinemalaya 2012 salvo-ish take on the gay depictions and transwomen discourse in some films I saw.

 

Unrealistically yours, officially

So much hype on a film that’s supposed to present “taboo” subjects in local cinema. Ang tanong: define taboo. Baka tabo – tumabo ng konseptong di naman talaga bago sa kultura natin pero dahil konserbatibo (read: takot) ang ating media gatekeepers, wow, hype it up yo! Wasup wasup! Lech.

But I’m getting ahead of myself.

UNOFFICIALLY YOURS (2012)

d. Cathy Garcia Molina

p. Star Cinema

c. Angel Locsin, John Lloyd Cruz

Pitch: Boy dentist turns lifestyle journalist trains under a former one night stand fling and of course love is renegotiated.

Catch: Aside from Google, my dear creatives, real-life research is your best friend. Just sayin’. At ang chaka ng poster design. 

So of course my main beef with this film is its authenticity in depicting the world of lifestyle-entertainment journalists. And why is that? Because I belong to that beat, is why! Like haller, you don’t go to coverage events to ambush interview like political beat reporters noh. Most coverage work in this beat are pre-arranged or writers and editors are invited to a press event where we don’t have to outscoop each other. We are spoiled like that.

So to have that kind of trainee-reporter-trained-by-veteran-writer blah is truly not not not authentic. Not to mention accepting a newbie writer without the benefit of, er, previous sample writing works??? That he needed to be trained to be a writer??? Hello naman sa non-suspension of disbelief sheesh. Puwede na kong himatayin sa portion na ito teh. Please lang. Lifeline: show me the popcorn.

But of course that’s just for people like me who want to nitpick. (Chos!) The real deal is, of course, the one night stand/fuck buddy storyline, something oooohhh sooooo controversial in Philippine cinema daw. Anubeh. Di ba kayo nanonood ng mga lumang sine? Di pa nga uso ang cougar term, may cougars na tayong karakter sa pelikula (see ’80s BAGETS especially the subplot of JC Bonnin) or any other film during that decade. In short, please do your homework. Bawal ang tamad.

So the next best thing is to explore instead how fubus or no label relationships are interpreted in this day and age. While the film makes a sexy effort, talagang A for ayfort lang siya teh. For one, the cinematography is so uneven that you tend to think if they want to show an unflattering angle of Angel during sex (read: hindi siya delicious tignan ever, which is so taliwas in real life dahil naglalakad na alindog ang ate mong ito noh), not to mention you wouldn’t believe that Lloydie really had an orgasm in some shots (read: beks pretend na hindi nala-lock ang patotoy this time. Kung totoo man ‘yun). I mean man, ganyan ba mukha ng isang naligayahan sa kama? Porn acting looks more believable than that, man. Geez. Just saying. And it doesn’t help that the camera seems to be more biased towards showing Lloydie as prettier than Angel. Success iyon actually. But not that palatable. O baka sa akin lang iyon bilang iba ang bias ko sa larangang iyan. Chos.

And then there’s the issue of past emotional baggage getting in the way of present love prospects. Mukhang ito lang ang success sa pelikulang ito bilang ito lang ang swak na nadebelop sa brainstorming. Sure, it’s very relatable and that’s a good thing. I just wish it wasn’t treated in a teleserye way. The film also suffered that way, like the first half of the film was so cinematically tight in concepts-visuals-pacing but the rest is melodramatically loose na. You’d actually think that there were two different directors who helmed this pramis. Sobrang nag-iba ang timpla. Labo.

Oh well. And another thing is, I just wish they didn’t fall into the trap of stereotyping women again, na dahil lang nasaktan sa pag-ibig chever ay “loose morals” na ang dating kaya parang pakawalang pukengkeng na lang siya. Hello creatives, read mga magazines naman like Cosmo, Preview, mga ganun, all those women-centric glossies, to see na hey, may mga single women naman na empowered enough to fubu because they prefer it, without so much emotional baggage. May underlying panghuhusga kasing bumabalot sa pelikula kaya parang mas kakaawaan mo ‘yung character ni Lloydie because he’s the stupid dork who seriously wants a relationship with his fubu and yet he’s being dismissed. Hello damsel-in-distress plot device isdatchu? Hm.

Sayang. I really had high hopes for this film but okay I have to commend it for at least trying. I hope next time, they try harder. We audiences would love to see more storylines like these, veer away from the usual kilig rom-coms and actually depict Pinoys as sexually active beings — because we are. Kasi naman, look at how our society is so scared of talking about sex, much more regulating things connected to it (read: pass the RH bill! Now na!) and of course because of conservative Catholicism, we have been so culturally sex-negative for so long. It’s time to change that. And damn well film it!

Next!

of wrong timings and wasting time

Cinema-watching, for me, is not really a waste of time as some people treat it. Kanya-kanyang habit lang iyan, I suppose. We all have our favorite ways of spending our time or we have techniques in wasting time. Walang basagan ng trip, ‘ika nga.

But it’s a totally different thing if a film wastes my time. Of course it’s not guaranteed that all films that look promising will make it worth your while. Some are truly time-wasters. But there are also those you will value for a long time.

Anyway enough segue. Here are two samples of how I spent my time one rainy evening in Cubao, while waiting for traffic to subside (which, in Metro Manila, is a loooong time).

Heniweyz…

PRAYBEYT BENJAMIN (2011)

d. Wenn Deramas

p. Star Cinema and Viva Films

c. Vice Ganda and a bunch of talents that appear as stringers in local cinema, meaning they string along as a cast of an ensemble to pad the story even if it’s not necessary

Pitch: an openly swishy gay man turns discreetly closeted, but not really, when he enters the military in order to represent his father and continue their heroic (read patriarchal) family lineage in combat

Catch: I sincerely hope the makers of this movie know that Goldie Hawn has a Private Benjamin film in the ’80s. If this is where they got the title, they need to buy a new pair of things needed in this industry, namely creativity and imagination.

I don’t know why I wasted my time watching this film. Maybe it’s out of curiosity. I like Vice Ganda’s humor which I saw on film for the first time in the PETRANG KABAYO remake. I found that totally funny even if it was ludicrous. But somehow, this time, this film doesn’t do it for me.

Sure, it’s a comedy not to be taken seriously, but lately, Philippine cinema doesn’t know how to do funny comedies anymore. They’re all crass, pander to the lowest of the low, full of cheap thrills for a few laughs. In short, we’ve lost the intelligent kinds of comedies. And I don’t mean lowbrow; what I mean is comedy that really makes us laugh because the humor is in the situation, and it’s not even pure slapstick. Something like that.

Sadly, this BENJAMIN film doesn’t cut it for me. Aside from having such a silly plot (simple doesn’t mean silly; this here is just plain pffft) of having the country under the rule of rebels who want to kill the top generals of the land that every misfit imaginable in crass cinema fare (don’t even get me started on characterizations) had to be drafted, the film carried very outdated views on being gay. Of course they milked this for whatever it’s worth, using it as a major plot device to heighten the dramatic irony of the plot, but it’s also dangerous because they’re propagating homophobia once again. I mean sure, the gay guy saves the day in the end, but to reflect deeper, quieter realities that discriminate against gay guys is just the pits.

What I’m talking about here is the fact that, in the end, the gay guy’s love interest — a hunky straight man (Derek Ramsay) — reveals that he has a girlfriend, and that girlfriend looks a lot like Benjamin (actually, it’s Vice dressed as a woman playing a woman). When Benjamin asked why his captain chose to be with this woman which looked like him instead of just choosing him, the captain answered “Because she’s a woman!” So dahil may keps and boobs ang babae, kahit kamukha siya ng gay guy, doon na ang het guy. How progressive. Please lang. Stop spreading this shit that LGBTQs are doomed because, in the end, the people they fall in love with will eventually end up with straight people din naman. How irritating.

What’s also irritating is the fact that the pa-macho lesbian is being promoted here. Not all lesbians are like that. This is also a step backward but hell, the pa-macho lesbian was more accepted in the military than the pa-girl gay man. Can you spell patriarchy? Sumasakit bangs ko sa pelikulang ito, sa totoo lang.

Another disappointing thing in this film is perhaps the humor. I don’t know if Vice Ganda is already overexposed on television, but I find the style waning na in punch. Or maybe that’s just me. With the ticket sales skyrocketing, I guess there are more people who enjoy his brand of comedy now more than ever. But that’s also cool. Maybe this part is just me. But that’s also why I’m worried, because as popular as this film is becoming, so is the spreading of discriminatory plot lines about gays and lesbians. Hay naku bakit pa ba ako naninibago? But the thing is, I sincerely hope that filmmakers become more responsible next time. It’s just sad because maybe they also carry the same prejudices in their body. I just hope they keep it to themselves na lang.

Anyway, win some, lose some. While that was such a freaking time-waster for me, this next one was not.

IN TIME (2011)

d., s. Andrew Niccol

dop. Roger Deakins

Costume design. Colleen Atwood

c. Justin Timberlake, Amanda Seyfried

Pitch: In the not-so-distant future, people need time stamped on their being as currency to stay alive and buy things, but what happens if one gets an overload of time, and one runs out of time?

Catch: Nothing!!!!!! This film is plain awesome! Why wasn’t it hyped up!

And this is why I love this film: THE TRUMAN SHOW, GATTACA, S1M0NE, THE TERMINAL, LORD OF WAR. The dude who directed this film wrote all of those earlier films, which I happen to like a lot, especially THE TRUMAN SHOW and GATTACA. Are you freaking kidding me! Whoever could think up of such set-ups is plain brilliant for me.

Gosh, opening sequence pa lang, I already love the concept — people stop aging at 25 years. Once it kicks in, they are time-stamped, literally, on their arm, to reflect how much time they have remaining on earth. Once they reach 25, they’re given one more year lang. Thus, they have to work on it, like hard labor or stuff, and they get paid in time (haha gives a whole new meaning to working time and a half and such!). So of course they also use time to pay for stuff, like “How much is a bus fare?” “Two hours.” And if you didn’t have that much time, you’re doomed. Galing!!!! To use time as currency like that! Sheer genius.

I am completely blown away by such concepts because I always like concepts that play around with time, especially messing with it hehe or toying with it like in time travels and such. Plus I also have a similar concept in development (er, for years now) which also tells of playing with time just like this film. Grabe, I should finish writing that concept na! Hehe.

Anyway, I also liked the idea that people run out of time, literally, and they die if they do. The there’s also that concept of having people — Big Brother types — control how much time a person could trade around, kinda like oligarchs of time, to which Seyfried’s character belongs: the rich and the elite. Then we have Timberlake’s proletariat working class character who lives in a second-to-second kind of existence, because having one whole day’s worth is actually a luxury. This is where the concept of “I don’t have time” kicks in, especially when it’s taken both literally and figuratively, especially when Timberlake’s character Will Salas says that he doesn’t have time to fall in love or have a girlfriend. Oo nga naman, you’re dying and you have a girlfriend pa — time waster! Haha! Wagi lang.

Anyway, the premise and act one is interesting enough, but then here’s the inciting moment that changes everything: Will helps a stranger in a bar and in return, the stranger gives him a century. Yes, you can live forever in this concept since if you have much time on your hands, er, arm pala, then you’re set for life. But it also makes you suspicious because people can give each other time and people can also steal time from each other (by locking wrists).  Grabe, take away one’s time, literal! Sobrang benta ang concept na ito!

And then it gets complicated as Will crosses specific time zones where you have to pay for each boundary you cross, kind of like economic zones in a way, since you need more currency to pass through each one, the higher the zone, the higher the pay. So his goal is to reach the top zone where the rich people are (to discover how to redistribute the wealth–or time–which the stranger said the oligarchs are controlling), and one girl, Sylvia (Seyfried) notices it, also some of the workers in this rich zone. How could they tell that he doesn’t belong there? Because he moves too fast, always rushing as if he’s running out of time (which he is, in his lower class existence experience). But these rich people have lots and lots and lots of time on their hands, so they have time to take things slow, move slower, stuff like that. Wagi lang sa concept, teh!!! I tell you, I was so engrossed in this film’s details that I forgot to eat my obligatory chichirya hehehe. Yes, that’s how good this film is!

What I like about a film that has some sci-fi bent is the fact that it could tackle philosophical things like this on a practical basis. You know, without being highfalutin about concepts that make us stop and ponder or without being too melodramatic or cliche in approach (or appear as being “pa-profound” and hence “pa-deep”), such as having time, wasting time, and other more complicated things. And yes, being existential without being pa-profound lang. You know what I mean. S1M0NE revolved around manufactured existence, THE TRUMAN SHOW revolved around manipulated existence, THE TERMINAL revolved around an interrupted existence, and GATTACA revolved around a borrowed existence, and then IN TIME is about making one’s existence meaningful and relevant before time goes out. I mean my gosh, Niccol, can I sit down with you and have coffee while we chat about these things!!! Seriously!!! I am happy you exist! You are my man right now, my cinematic man. I can’t wait to discover what you’re going to write and film next. Grabe lang!

Anyway, enough fan girl mode-ing. I’ve never been excited about a film’s concept in a looooong time, so I have to celebrate these things in my own little cinematic way. What the hey. I hope they put this film back when the current (over)run of that film with that unsmiling girl with the sparkling undead boyfriend is over. I hope that’s tomorrow. Skipping that one! But please don’t miss this one. It’s really worth your time, I kid you not.

Go!

Awaaard si vakler dahil tegi sa logic

Or in short, here’s my review of the “independently-produced” movie still showing in commercial cinemas right now. Wagi in fairness sa longevity ha. Ikaw na, Remington! Chos.

ZOMBADINGS 1: PATAYIN SA SHOKOT SI REMINGTON (2011)

d. Jade Castro

p. Origin8

s. Raymond Lee, Michiko Yamamoto, Jade Castro

c. ayan read the poster obvious naman haller imbey ka

Pitch: A homophobic boy in Quezon province gets cursed to become gay when he grows up in a town where gays are being murdered and later turned into zombies until the boy-turned-teen’s curse gets lifted. Trust me, it’s really that convoluted.

Catch: It’s that convoluted. Did I already say that? It’s convoluted.

Yesterday, I accompanied one of my superfriends to watch a movie that has been running in cinemas since the end of last month even if I’ve already seen te film during the Cinemalaya closing last July. Not bad for a supposed independently-produced film, no? When I say “supposed,” it means the producers made this film outside the commercial mainstream studio systems that most — if not all — of them served at one point in their careers (or still currently serving it, actually, for some of them at least). I guess their sensibilities trickle down to the product they create, because it still reeks of commercial mainstream-ish fare. Let me elucidate.

The film is lost in its identity since it doesn’t know if it’s going to be campy or just a plain comedy. From what I discovered, the filmmaker said in a forum that they didn’t intend to make it camp. And this is where we hyperventilate. Kalurkey itey!

I don’t know if you trust the Wikipedia entry on it, but the first definition of camp there is “an aesthetic sensibility that regards something as appealing because of its bad taste and ironic value.”

Hmm may ganung factor? Maybe Susan Sontag’s “Notes on Camp” would help, as she wrote:

…the Camp sensibility is one that is alive in a double sense in which some things can be taken. But this is not the familiar split-level construction of a literal meaning, on the one hand, and a symbolic meaning, on the other. It is the difference, rather, between the thing as meaning something, anything, and the thing as pure artifice.”

Well, let’s just put it this way: Zombadings didn’t have that kind of camp sensibility to me because it felt more like it had a Star Cinema sensibility to it — a bad case of Star Cinema cookie-cutter formula pander-to-the-lowest-denominator type of comedy film which most of the time makes you want to slash your wrists because, even if it’s a comedy, IT AIN’T FUNNY. And since the director said nga in that forum that they just set out to do a comedy film, it gave me more shivers. As in. Chaka Khan ever.

Now why is a comedy film about gays being killed in a small town because they’re gay not funny? BECAUSE KILLING GAYS AREN’T FUNNY, PERIOD. (Or please educate yourself and read this article.) Regardless whether they get zapped by an out-of-this-world kinda-sci-fi-ish subplot of a thingamajig called the gaydar controlled by a macho man that would be later on revealed as a super-huge closeted homo, hmmm… perpetuating self-hatred, anyone? That’s project number one. Luz Valdez!

Project number two would be this: why is a comedy film about a straight guy cursed to be gay not funny? BECAUSE BEING GAY IS NOT A CURSE TO BE CURED FROM BY SHAMANS, DIVINITY EXPERTS, OR WHATNOT. We are gay because we are gay, people. And news flash, we love being gay, we’re proud to be gay, and we’re happy we’re gay — even if the rest of homophobic society isn’t happy for us. KEBS! We don’t mess with your life so don’t certainly mess with ours. Kajirita Jackson ha.

And why is a comedy film about a straight man turning effeminate gay not funny? BECAUSE NOT ALL GAYS ARE EFFEMINATE. There’s nothing wrong with the section of our populace who are effeminate, but the key word there is “section” meaning “not everyone” and hence do not generalize about us and most especially do not stereotype us as being just of one kind, as mainstream media has been doing for decades now. Like the rainbow flag we out and proudly wave during LGBTQ pride marches, we are a community of diverse people who come in all shapes and sizes, forms and content, so please, do not peg us to just merely one type and one type alone. Keribels?

Now the major major problem with this film is that we from the LGBTQ circles, those who know camp and could define it, who follow pop culture to a fault, who are academic/knowledgeable etc. etc. chenelyn boomboom (to quote my lesbian beki friend) about such issues regarding sexual orientation and gender identity or SOGI, we could very well distinguish if something is being literal or being symbolic, like what Sontag said. But if the film is not being camp, it surely will be taken on a mere literal level in the sense that the message people (who are not attuned to the issues and concerns surrounding the LGBTQ community) will get  is this: “See? [Parlor swishy] gays are doomed to die and become zombies because they’re a menace to society, so it’s good that this cursed-to-be-gay straight boy is being rescued by the girl of his dreams and his friends and family so he won’t be gay.” Of course I’m kidding about the being zombies part but what the hey, let’s just thrown it in na rin! For more!

Oh man. I don’t even know why this film was made the way it was made, given that I know the history of the producers and such, their backgrounds but most of all their own SOGI. Well yeah, I know, not all women are feminists and not all LGBTQs fight for equal rights but what they hey, they should have known better than to produce a film that not only reinforces general stereotypes about Filipino gays but also propagate such negative images of gays and gay behavior. And I haven’t even forgiven them for writing in the term “third sex” in the script, as uttered by one character. Yes, read about that specific rant here in my other article.

So is the film totally hopeless? I’d like to say so, but it really has its moments and it’s ironic that its moments are highlighted by non-gay scenes. It’s just purely hilarious whevener Eugene Domingo appears in the film as the grieving mother in rollerblades of the girl of Remington’s dreams. And I also like the way the latest gay lingo is incorporated there and propagated. Hey, I lurv the lingo! Read my articles about it here and here.

Hay naku. Anyway, there are still a gazillion things to say about this film but perhaps I will reserve my other thoughts for another time. For now, just relax and enjoy a movie — another movie, not this one.  And if ever they do take the title seriously, perhaps Zombadings 2 could be a better fare.

Taray lang ng lola mo.

NETPAC 2011: Local Girls

NETPAC means Network for the Promotion of Asian Cinema. Yearly, they do a selection of independently-produced full-length films and shortlist two handfuls of them flicks, showcase them and then select one winning film from that batch. Or something like that. This year, the NETPAC films from the Philippines were also showcased during the Cinemalaya independent film fest at the CCP and this week, they’re being showcased at UP Cine Adarna.

Let’s take a look at one of them.

 

LOCAL GIRLS

d. Ned Trespeces

p. Onnah Valera

Pitch: Shot entirely in the province of Iloilo in the Visayas region of the Philippines, the story revolves around two girls working in a resort who resort to some illegal shenanigans as a result of needing money.

Catch: The film language sometimes intends another thing other than the one intended, aney? Ehehe basta, read on.

Cooked up by the indefatigable tandem behind Dirty Kitchen Productions, namely my friends from film school Ned and Onnah, it’s amazing how this duo could come up with full-length films in the true spirit of the term “independent” or “indie.” I mean, suddenly they disappear for months and then bam! They have a new film hehe. I admire them for just doing it. It’s something I really need to do myself hehe. You inspire me guys, really!

But talking about the film, it’s just a simple fare, really, only it’s set in the colorful Dinagyang Festival in Iloilo. A good opportune time to shoot a film, like how another NETPAC filmmaker, Zig Dulay, went up to Baguio during the Panagbenga flower festival and shot a film there using the festival as backdrop/milieu/setting. LOCAL GIRLS also did that, and the simple story set in this space worked naman for the narrative it was trying to tell — that of two minimum wage-earners finding an opportunity presented to them by fate or circumstance perhaps, and they decide to take a chance and go towards the “darker side” of life. The opportunity being illegal (i.e. finding a huge stash of marijuana inside a dead resort guest’s room and then reselling it during the festival), of course they are bothered by their conscience sometimes, but their life ambitions are larger than these circumstances (one of the girls wants to apply to law school) so they move on, but of course not without external elements surrounding them as well (i.e. one of the girls’ friends is a narcotics agent or something officer-of-the-law ek like that).

Simple, right? But it works in its simplicity. Being set in Iloilo as well, it doesn’t come off as just another film with beautiful touristy shots but we also get to see snippets of Iloilo as the girls roam around their area. I also like the way the duo shot the characters mingling with the real festivities of Dinagyang so that was something.

But talking about film language, sometimes it speaks of a different thing from the original intent. Like I’m not so sure if there are overt undertones (overt na, undertones pa! Chos!) of a Sapphic kind when it comes to the girls’ interactions. Somehow, this feeling that there are some sort of lesbian undertones happening is very prominent… or maybe it’s just me, and the way I am extra-sensitive about such things, picking them up in my queeradar or maybe naghahanap ng kakampi mode hehe. I usually pick this up when I see the scenes of intimate friendship going on with the two characters: quiet moments by the beach, drinking sessions, stuff like that. It doesn’t help that the musical score or the song picked during such scenes have some sort of “love story” feel (especially the lyrics), so it heightens my queeradar readings of the two hehe. But again, maybe that’s just me. Or that’s film language for you.

Di ba Sapphic? Chos.

For a full-length film, it’s rather short (just a little over an hour) but it’s also enough, I think, for the story it’s trying to tell. Not too overpowering, just right. And this being indie, we forgive some technical glitches here and there (i.e. the marijuana props, dude hehe but I already told Ned) because it comes with the package and the territory.

Try to catch the film at the UP Cine Adarna theater this Friday, 05 August at 2:30pm.

Cinemalaya 2011: Bahay Bata

I was able to watch a bunch of Cinemalaya films this year so here’s what I think of some of them. I’m starting with this one since this is the last I watched in the U.P. run and I think it’s somehow my favorite. SPOILER ALERT! moments abound here so don’t read if you don’t want the plot to be uncovered.

BAHAY BATA (Baby Factory)

d. Eduardo Roy Jr.

s. Jerome Zamora, Eduardo Roy Jr.

e. Bebs Gohetia

sc. Toni Munoz

c. Diana Zubiri

Pitch: Days before Christmas and we see a day in the life of a nurse working in the free ward of a public hospital where new mothers just gave birth to babies. The nurse’s life weaves with the patients’ and fellow nurses’ lives around her, making her reflect on the things she sees around her in connection with her own personal inner struggles.

Catch: Needs another script doctor’s eye to polish some contrived dialogues, but minimal.

This film should have the subtitle “And this is why the Philippines needs the RH bill now!”

The story is very, very simple yet in its simplicity, it truly works. It’s just a day in the life of a nurse as she works. We see Sarah the nurse, played emphatically by Diana Zubiri, go around in her usual nurse routine during her day shift, and then she gets extended to the night shift as well. But the difference here is, we also see the people and the area around this routine, perhaps something we don’t get to see often in cinema.

Here, we see an in-depth look of what a free ward inside a public hospital looks like: hospital beds with two persons/patients occupying one bed. Yes, you read that right: they share beds. As Sarah and the other characters walk around, the camera follows them and in its full wide angle lens glory, we see these beds lined one after the other, claustrophobic in its proximity to one another, yet the women who occupy them don’t seem to mind. In fact, some of the women — especially the young girls — forge bonds as they exchange their love stories as they sat in one bed.

And this is why I love this film: the visuals speak for the messages the film tries to subtly convey. No unnecessary histrionics emanating from “over-workshopped acting actors” or didactic expository dialogues. Aside from discovering the look inside such hospital wards, we also get to know how they run things there. Of course there’s the usual issue of not being able to check out the mother and the baby if one hasn’t settled their bills, but that wasn’t presented melodramatically. There was that particular storyline about a mother who just had her 13th baby — yes, 13th, again a “typical” issue in the country — and she ran out of breast milk. Her husband tried to bring her powdered milk but he was banned from entering the hospital because it is a strictly “breastfeeding only zone” hospital. I never knew that and through this film, now I know that such rules exist. Interesting. Plus another interesting issue for me is having someone else breastfeed another’s baby. That is what happened to that mother of 13 kids, as a young mother aged 17 — yes, 17 years old, yet another “typical issue” in our society — was brought to her to breastfeed her baby. And speaking of age, there was also this scene of young girls exchanging stories of how they got pregnant and all, and one of them was 13 years old. No judgment by the others, as the 17 year-old casually commented “Ay, ang bata mo pa, nabuntis ka na” saying “How young of you to get pregnant.” without any tone of condemnation, just plain commentary, like it’s just “typical” an occurrence. Sadly, it is typical, indeed.

The way such issues and concerns crop out of the film in bits and pieces, sporadically sprinkled here and there, and presented nonchalantly is why I think this film is so powerful. Quiet, unassuming, but carrying loads and loads of things for audiences to think about, without being so rah-rah about such issues.

We also get to see interpersonal relationships of people who work in these spaces as we also discover facets of their lives familiar to us. We see very old nurses get treated shabbily by arrogant doctors younger than them. We see some nurses filling out application forms for job openings in Canada. We see how nurses form and forge friendships in these spaces. Very interestingly executed as well, as we see very realistic portrayals we forget that this is a fiction film sometimes.

I also like the way it subtly comments on the hypocrisy that is abortion in this country. Sarah’s character gets devastated near the end as she gets dumped by the man that impregnated her, leaving her a day before Christmas Eve dinner happens, because his affair with the nurse was found out by his wife. Even this moment was executed well: no melodramatic histrionics as we see the man and the nurse in the middle of their conversation, just staring at each other, obviously the man having just delivered the bad news and Sarah’s eyes were already welling up as she tries to find the  words to say. After, she wanders with a preoccupied mind, running an errand of picking up medicines from the pharmacy and walks back to her ward, but in the middle passing the post-abortion ward section of the hospital, which at first was defocused and unseen, and as she passes and exits the film frame, we see the sign and the entrance to the post-abortion ward focus and the camera lingers in this image — a foreshadowing of things to come. (But even the foreshadowing wasn’t presented that forcefully, just hinted at. Then the result of the foreshadowing was also presented sparingly, not blatantly, in that scene where she faced the mirror and started quietly taking some pills. Powerful!) I mean, the very existence of such a ward in a public hospital really reflects realities that should be faced by lawmakers and if they really want to help women, that should be acknowledged and addressed humanely, not condescendingly (and certainly out of the domain of the Catholic church), to really be pro-women and all that.

I like this film. It really works for me. I do hope people who get to see this get the message. It’s about time some sectors did. Paging CBCP?

Kudos to the team who did this. A special mention to my friend who made the musical score of this. Congrats for your first full-length, Toni! More to come!

Plus P.S. it’s interesting how the title has this word-play going on, like its English title is baby factory but in Filipino, bahay bata literally means a woman’s womb, or specifically that thingie inside the womb that “houses” a fetus. Interesting. Wala lang, pansin ko lang. Anyway, try to catch this if it shows somewhere.