A look back at Heneral Luna

(the first of two parts)

It's a bit early to start looking back, I know. But the curious phenomenon that is Heneral Luna is fascinating to me. In this internet age, and with our cinematic culture as it is, what happened to this film is nothing short of a miracle.

A lot of discussion has sprung up about the film with film writers, film enthusiasts, and regular moviegoers weighing in on their experience. Their opinions are varied and interesting.

So in this two part series, let's take a look at various things about the film and what it did to the moviegoing public. First, let's talk about some things I noticed after seeing the film a couple more times. In this case I will leave discussions about the film's aesthetics and its texture to more experienced writers than myself, and talk about the movie's themes and significance.

The Historical Luna and the Cinematic Luna

I think the movie made it clear, having put disclaimers on twice (one at the very beginning of the movie, and one during the end credits) that this is a work of fiction based on historical fact. Like the fictional character of Ysabel is composited from various women in Luna's life, the cinematic Luna comes from letters and accounts from the historical Luna and others. The movie has been dramatized in some parts to serve its narrative and its central thesis, which will inevitably cause some history purists to balk at the idea. This movie is not a history lesson, it's a fable of sorts that helps us examine our own situation as a country and as a people (more on that later.)

We have a knack of trying to emulate historical figures that we try to glorify through films and other media. What makes this film so appealing is its notion that they are not perfect, and that we should learn from their mistakes instead of repeating them. If I were to take something to admire from either the cinematic or the historical Luna, it wouldn't be his temper or his brashness, but his love for country. There is no reason for me or anyone else to emulate Luna's negative traits and go around randomly shouting at people and threatening to kill them to solve problems. It's ridiculous.

Difficulties of Waging War

One of the stranger criticisms leveled at the film is at Luna's character in the film. There is a sense from these criticisms that this is another case of a class struggle, that is, between an elite (an Illustrado or a well off citizen like Luna) and the lower classes (the soldiers, the civilians, and so on.) The ruler and his subjects. Authoritarianism. An empire of our own design. I see it as over-reading a very simple message.

Let us not forget that Luna was waging a war against the Americans, who were better disciplined, better trained, and much larger in number than our own revolutionary army. If ANY member of the Kawit brigade in the film did in the present day armed forces what they did to Luna back then (meaning: desertion, lack of discipline and insubordination,) a court martial would be the very least of their worries. Luna wasn't made the commander in chief of the army because he was rich; he was made commander in chief of the army because Aguinaldo wanted men with military experience, and Luna had it.

Luna both in the movie and in history wanted to have a capably trained, well disciplined army but egos inflated by victories in the Philippine-Spanish war and their own regional loyalties kept in the way. Sequestering a train to bring troops - necessary for quick troop movements - was done in the service of waging the war. Luna did not drive the soldier's relatives out of the train to spite them. He did it because he needed the train to transport troops, where the troops would not be tired from walking or riding on horseback to the site of the battle, to prevent catching diseases from some of the civilians (some of the relatives reportedly had smallpox), and to entrench themselves in their positions before the Americans had time to ambush them.

And yet, as the 'coffin' scene in Guagua shows, Luna was not immune to being influenced by his own temper. In this case, while he battles foes from outside and within his own country, he battles with himself as well - and such a battle is exhausting for any man. In giving way to his temper, he made a costly mistake that led to the Philippine forces retreating. His temper also led him to practice his shooting with a poor civilian's chicken (who to be fair, he had no intention of killing.) This only gave conspirators against him fuel to stoke the fires of a possible coup.

Luna was a disciplinarian, a sort of leader that anyone with military training has encountered in their lives. He wasn't running a sari-sari store or teaching in a university where you could quit or drop the class any time you wanted. And any man or woman who has undergone training from such a man know that when you are given orders by a superior officer to do something in the service of the country, you better damn well follow.

A Multifaceted Aguinaldo

Many are quick to rush to the conclusion that Aguinaldo was an evil mastermind who plotted Luna's assassination. But I think Aguinaldo is NOT the villain of this film. I think that he's not actually a villain at all. Whether he was responsible for the assassination or not, in the film he was clearly haunted by what happened, repeating his praise for the General over and over like a mantra: si Luna ang aking pinaka-mahusay na heneral. Mon Confiado brings these conflicted emotions out in his performance of the revolutionary leader.

I'm inclined to believe given the subjects of the next planned installments of the trilogy that 1) Aguinaldo's arc in this cinematic universe is not yet finished and that 2) the completion of his arc will probably paint him as someone not unlike Luna, a man whose heart is in the right place, but was swept along the waves of history. To misjudge him is like misjudging TJ Trinidad's character in Sana Dati - there is clearly more to him than what we see superficially.

History and A Sense of Country

History is a strange thing. It is, for lack of a better word, a story. We often see history as truth, but history is often told via historians, eyewitness accounts, notes, and so on. In the process, the story is often distorted by the storyteller - even the most objective historian will end up inserting their biases into their work; rarely do two eyewitnesses tell the same story, and notes can withhold intentions, thought processes, and deception.

That's why I'm happy that people are actually asking questions about the film and about its historical basis, even if the questions are as inane as 'why doesn't Mabini stand up during the film.' People are turning back and reading their history books, and they are starting to read these books critically, and not taking the facts given to them at face value. My daily conversations with friends, family and in social media has started to fill up with discussions and posts about Philippine history, and perhaps for that alone, this film has triumphed.

Back in my review of the film I quoted that the aim of historical films is to help us look at the past through the cinematic lens, with film helping us self-examine through its narrative. Heneral Luna, if anything, helps us look not only at our past, but also our present and future, and that's part of where the magic comes from.

And finally, even the film's sense of nationality has been criticized. Too much patriotism is indeed dangerous - look at the pasts of Germany and Japan for example - but there is nothing wrong in believing in a spirit of solidarity with our people. Without it, there would not be a Philippines, only a bunch of islands with a collective name. The film does not tell us to abandon our uniqueness; instead, it exhorts us to look beyond that and to use our unique talents to serve something that is greater than ourselves, or family, or culture.

We as Filipinos are still trying to find our national identity. Personally I think we haven't found it yet. But realizations stemming from films like these are baby steps towards the achievement of one Philippines, one that is not bound by regional territories or labels.

In the next part of this piece, let's talk about the unusual phenomenon that led to this film packing cinemas, and the positive critical and audience reception that led to us submitting the film for the best foreign film Oscar.