A quickie review of Friend Zone

The Thais sure make really nice mainstream rom-coms. They kind of remind me of Star Cinema, but better in some aspects. These films are carefully calculated to appeal to as many viewers as possible. They even operate with the same tropes. Make a movie in an exotic location? Surprise, Friend Zone is all about traveling to several locations! There's product placement, and the film even lampshades it! There's even a blooper reel at the end that reminds me of several Star Cinema films. What ends up so fun about Friend Zone is that, even though its premise is super flimsy, it somehow manages to work.

Like the title says, Friend Zone is about two best friends, Palm and Gink. Palm has been carrying a torch for this lady for ten years, but part of the blame is also on him: he's content to be a friend instead of risking it all on romance, even though it's clear that he likes her a lot (and she, him.) Gink at this point in time is taken, but she always turns to Palm for emotional support.

It's a loopy relationship, and it's no surprise that this leads to all sorts of tension, some of it sexual. The film knows this too, and I wish it would have gone more into their thoughts, especially during the scene where they pour out their real feelings."Both of you, just get a room!" is basically the premise of the film, and it's stretched out a bit thin for two hours. However, it's still pretty entertaining. Of the two leads, it's Baifern Pimchanok who gets the meatier role and she does it well.

 

Otherwise, Friend Zone is a pleasant experience. I personally hope more Thai movies make their way to our shores (and vice-versa), because it could be an interesting learning opportunity for our two countries.

Love; Life's roughness becomes its downfall

So yeah, I'm spoiling the hell out of this movie. Spoiler warning I guess.

It's clear that Love; Life is a bit rough around the edges production-wise. Well, even that's a bit of an understatement. Shots don't match up, the timeline is a bit confusing, and some of the acting leaves much to be desired. It means well, but its storytelling flaws destroy any enjoyment I might've had in watching this disaster.

Most of the story is told as a flashback. When a hotshot music exec (Dino Imperial) learns that his daughter is writing suicidal messages on her notebook, he confronts her and she gets angry at him. This isn't some "life is pain" shit, it's literally "I want to Fucking Die." (The "fucking" is obscured, perhaps to earn a lower MTRCB rating.) He then leaves a video message on his computer, with no indication that his daughter will watch it, that tells the story of... him finding himself?

As it turns out, way back in the past, after a proposal gone wrong, music exec decides to jump off a bridge, where he meets a girl (Sachzna Laparan) who is planning to do the same thing. Calling each other by pseudonyms, the guy (now named Elvis) decides to take the girl (now Madonna) along on a little road trip. Yes, this movie rips off plotlines from other, better movies and does it terribly.

Madonna seems to have a backstory, but since this is viewed through the man's point of view, we don't really know much about her. As for Elvis, "yipes" would be a perfect descriptor of the guy. We see that Elvis' would-be fiancee rejected the proposal for a reason: Elvis is a complete asshole. He's the perfect example of an overdramatic, toxic, insensitive man who treats women as objects of desire that should act according to his whims. He romanticizes these things in his descriptions of his ex, but the flashbacks tell a different story. One would think that by the time he meets Madonna, he's changed for the better, but no, it gets worse. As it turns out, he brought Madonna on his little road trip because he wanted to dress her up in his ex's clothes and take Madonna to all the places where he and his ex spent their time together, all before killing himself.

I don't think I have to say it, but since people can be dense sometimes, THIS PREMISE IS FUCKING MESSED UP. Madonna is horrified to be used this way, and understandably so. She leaves, he follows (? the editing is really bad in this part) and he gets hit by a car.

Unfortunately, he survives, and the first thing he does is hit on his nurse, who becomes the mother to his suicidal child.

The film eventually reunites Elvis and Madonna in an unexpected way, but why should I be rooting for these two? There is no reckoning or indictment of Elvis' actions. He gets away scot free for dragging this poor lady along for the sake of his own self healing. And no wonder the child wants to kill herself, she reads books about men psychologically abusing women to comfort his own hugot. It's fucking ridiculous.

Maybe there is something in this film about loving what life has to offer (...?) But thanks to bad storytelling, it becomes a tale where men can be as assholey as they want while women exist as magical creatures that help solve their problems. It's horrible. But hey, love life!

Stranded

If you've seen the trailers for Ice Idanan's Stranded, you'd know it's based on an interesting conceit: during a particularly nasty typhoon, two strangers bond, even though they seem like polar opposites. Julia (Jessy Mendiola) seems sure of her path in life, even though it has led to her missing out on important things. Spencer (Arjo Atayde), on the other hand is aimless, and even though he's chugging along, he's doing so on the backs of his friends.

The actual stranding acts as the movie's meet-cute, though there's a catch. Julia's taken, and Spencer is smitten and somewhat flirtatious, even though he'd be shut down with just one "I have a boyfriend." It's a fine line between charming and creepy, and I think Arjo Atayde pulled it off. One would expect, following rom com tradition, that Julia would leave her controlling boyfriend immediately and take a chance on this guy, but that doesn't really happen. The film is grounded in reality and once the giddy glow of that meet cute ends, things kinda return to the status quo.

What sets Stranded apart from other conventional rom coms is that it expands on its central conceit. Though Julia and Spencer return to their lives after that event, it's clear that they have profoundly affected each other's lives. It's a two-fold expansion of Idanan's earlier film Sakaling Hindi Makarating (2016), where the romance is tangential to self-discovery and self-improvement.

Ultimately, Stranded is a pleasant experience, and fans of Idanan's lush cinematographic work will not be disappointed.

Sinag Maynila 2019: Jino to Mari

Jino to Mari begins with shots of meat, all lined up and ready to be sold. Perhaps one would expect the rest of the movie (about two sex workers tasked with filming a porno) to show how, through the commodification of sex, people are turned into nothing but pieces of meat to be bought and sold.

But the film does not start with sex. Nothing really salacious happens for most of the film. Instead, the film establishes its two titular protagonists' humanity before getting into the details. These are not just bodies, these are flesh and blood human beings, with loved ones, hopes and dreams just like the rest of us. As stated in Oggs Cruz's review of the film, Gino and Marie assert their rights by creating personal boundaries for themselves. Consent forms a major part of the film.

There is considerable build up to the eventual sex scene, and it feels ritualistic. Gino and Marie both take baths - part of standard procedure before doing sex work, but depicted here as a sort of ablution and viewed through voyeuristic framing. The sex begins, and the rights Gino and Marie have established are challenged. The directors of the scene try to take Gino and Marie's dignity away, but they doggedly hold on to it, though there is slight compromise for the sake of earning money. This reminds one of films like Brillante Mendoza's Masahista (2005), whose titular masseur exchanged sex work for cash. (Also an appropriate comparison, considering Mendoza also wrote the story for this film.) There is a kiss in the middle of the climax that signifies either a final surrender, and the completion the process of Gino and Marie's degradation, or a final defiant act of humanity.

Multiple interpretations emerge from behind the frames, carefully and meticulously crafted by Altarejos and DP Mycko David. The radio broadcasts heard during bus rides or at home lampshade the toxicity of Filipino culture and our tendency to objectify, from the highest office of the land down to its most lowly citizen. The camera's focus tends to drift towards bodies: an extension of our characters' eyes, and even our own, making us aware of our gaze. The film's music is mostly classical, its central motif arguably Leo Delibes' Flower Duet from his opera Lakme. Lakme is an opera about doomed love, ending with a defiant death to preserve honor. Classical music in itself feels ethereal and pure, providing a disturbing level of contrast when used during the film's most extreme scenes. 

The casting of a Japanese man as the director of the pornographic film, juxtaposed with historical accounts of their occupation of our lands, perhaps signifies a broader, political meaning, depicting a history of colonialism that continues to this day. And in a metafictional sense, considering that this ostensible Japanese porno is a film within a film, it is curious that the title of this movie is in Japanese. Is this Altarejos placing himself in the shoes of the Japanese director, saying that, in the making of such a steamy film, he too may be no different, his effort to humanize his characters serving as some sort of atonement? The film also asks the question: in the creation of art, how should the creator treat the performer? Should they treat them with respect, or merely as glorified props who spout lines?

Dense with meaning and open to interpretation, Jino to Mari will not be to everyone's taste, but I personally consider it one of Altarejos' better works.

Sinag Maynila 2019: Jesusa, Shorts A

To what lengths will a viewer stomach suffering on screen? The cinema of misery will always find a place with viewers, but to this reviewer, I've come to the conclusion that miserablist cinema isn't for me. I feel that the process of making a film's protagonist an endless vessel for degradation walks hand in hand with the removal of their dignity as characters.

This endless train of suffering defines Jesusa's plot. Its titular character (played ably by Sylvia Sanchez) is unloved by almost everyone else in her life, even though she herself has so much love to give. While the story's setting definitely indicates poverty, it would be simplistic to call this poverty porn, as Jesusa's misery isn't directly impacted by her social condition - her misery is a function of her character flaw to love every asshole who comes into her life. Of course one could argue that  indirectly, yes, a few aspects of her life would have been easier had she not been poor, but Jesusa the character, with the same masochistic tendency to seek abuse, would probably be miserable in other ways regardless of social standing.

The plot of the film segues into drug use as Jesusa turns to them to lessen her misery. Drugs are everywhere in this film; it is depicted as an unkillable pest that pervades society. There is merit in trying to find out Jesusa's motivations, as people turn to drugs to escape the stark realities of everyday life, but the execution of that idea comes up a bit short.

And perhaps Jesusa the film's greatest failing is the lack of redemption in Jesusa the character, which also serves to undermine any message the film might have with regards.to rehabilitation. Granted, Jesusa lacks the emotional support systems to prevent a relapse, but the ending of the film just feels mean-spirited about the whole thing. Hopelessness and cynicism, like illegal drugs, are tempting to come back to in the realm of the cinema of misery. But in this reviewer's honest opinion, I don't think it necessarily makes for great cinema.

We Want Short Shorts Short Shorts Reviews Sinag Maynila 2019 Edition

Shorts A

Lawrence Fajardo's Memories of the Rising Sun is set during the Japanese Occupation, where a woman saves a Japanese soldier's life, creating a bond between the two. There are occasionally interesting ideas in this short, but they don't come out fully formed, and the ending has too many loose ends.

A sudden spurt of violence underlines Marian, a story about the monsters we create through abuse. It's decent enough and pretty straightforward stuff.

Based on a true story, Kilos feels like sketches, bits and pieces of a larger film. As it is, it feels relatively incomplete.

Bisperas feels like an advocacy film, but it is an advocacy worth sharing. There are also some pretty great shots in this film, which is pretty remarkable considering how short it is.

And finally we have Kiss, which is well-written, quirky and self contained. It doesn't go deeper into the specifics of its central idea, but it doesn't have to, and the way it ends creates a pleasant little loop. 

Sinag Maynila 2019: Persons of Interest

I'm going to talk about the plot of this film in depth, so if you haven't watched it, this is your warning. Better yet, don't read this. Haha.

Let me begin this review (?) by telling you a story. I'm a relatively big fan of Star Trek: The Next Generation, and one of the episodes of that series is a murder mystery. Episode 139 is titled Aquiel, about a mysterious streak of deaths in a remote space station. Aquiel is one of the apparent casualties, and a prime suspect in the case. But surprise surprise, the culprit turns out to be the dog all along! Yes, you read that right, the dog was actually an alien that murdered the victims, and also Aquiel is actually alive.

Let's just say that Aquiel isn't exactly one of the most well-regarded episodes of Star Trek: The Next Generation. It's a boring mystery with annoying or bland characters, but the resolution was pretty neat.

Now I don't know if Ralston Jover watches Star Trek, but when I was watching his latest (?) film, Persons of Interest, I caught myself wondering: did this film just perform an Aquiel? As it turns out, the answer is yes and no, and I'm going to tell you all why.

Jover's filmmaking modus operandi seems to be to make a quirky, interesting character and build a story around him or her. In this case, it's Ramil (Allen Dizon), a blind cook living with his geriatric live-in partner somewhere in Pampanga. Their relationship has taken an acrimonious turn, as Ramil was caught "cooking some dishes" (if you'll forgive the lame and out of place metaphor) with his lover's maid, Doray. Shortly after that, he is accused of food poisoning, as a party held by his lover's daughter turns deadly as they consume food apparently prepared by him. Meanwhile, his son Tristan has been seeing an apparition of a man who looks exactly like Ramil, but this version of Ramil can apparently see. Did Ramil really kill all those guests? If not him, then who?

Now you all may be wondering, is this film really going to do what we think it's going to do? Does it have the balls to say that Ramil 2, Tristan's IMAGINARY FRIEND, was the actual perpetrator of the crime?

The subsequent courtroom drama takes us into Ramil's past: how he met his lover and what could've led him to commit the crime, even though there seems to be no indication that he did it. Even though Ramil checks every box of the "strange quirky character" checklist, he just doesn't come off as a compelling character. Allen Dizon does his best, but his character is simply written as too unsympathetic and bland for us to root for his legal victory. There are also some weird clues along the way. Before his alleged poisoning spree, Ramil somehow solves a Rubik's cube, even though HE'S BLIND. Did he just channel Spider Noir or could he really see?

In all honesty, I would've loved it had the film had the balls to pinpoint the imaginary friend as the one who did it. It would have made absolutely no sense. It would, in retrospect, probably be a bad idea, but I would have championed this film. But alas, we are to judge films as they are, and not as what we want them to be. The culprit turns out to be Tristan all along. Why he did it, I don't really know, since the film doesn't tell us. Was it really because he resented Ramil for cheating on [not his mom] for [also not his mom]? Once his testimony exonerates Ramil, the film ends...

...which brings me back to Aquiel. Aquiel was a boring mystery with an interesting resolution. Even then, it ended up being a forgettable episode. This film was a boring mystery with a mundane resolution, and (at least for me,) it ended up being an equally forgettable film.

Sinag Maynila 2019: Pailalim, Akin ang Korona, Shorts B, Documentaries

Bangis (Joem Bascon) and his family live in a cemetery. He hustles a lot of side jobs but his major source of income comes from grave robbing. When his only child gets sick, Bangis considers desperate measures to save his child.

Pailalim is a movie that draws from a lot of previous social realist films: its milieu has been explored before with films like Ralston Jover's Da Dog Show (2015), and the juxtaposition of the living among the dead draw some comparisons to Magkakabaung (2014), Oros (2012), and Purgatoryo (2016). In this case, the people living among the dead feel like walking dead themselves, shunned and rendered invisible by society at large.

The film delves into some interesting topics such as the behaviors that drive people into drugs, the economies of corruption in small and large scales that perpetuates these communities and even heath seeking behavior influenced by poverty, lack of knowledge and other societal conditions. Ultimately, however, the tale that Pailalim tells is very simple and doesn't quite coalesce into something more profound. We are made to experience their suffering, and that's it.

The work is elevated by a committed performance by Joem Bascon and some decent camerawork. While Pailalim is stuff we've mostly seen before, fans of the social realist genre will have something to chew on.

Zig Dulay's Akin ang Korona opens with a sequence much like the local reality TV show Face to Face, where two groups of people have at each other after revealing some scandalous secret. Face to Face itself was patterned after US shows like Jerry Springer, whose "reality" is itself suspect. As it turns out, this fuzzy line between real life and reality is the beating heart of this film, reminiscent of the works of the late Francis Pasion, especially his 2008 film Jay.

When Nanong's Akin ang Korona confrontation catches the eye of the producer of the show, he is offered a chance to reconnect with his father. Nanong isn't exactly warm to the idea, but the promise of seeing a long-lost parent soon becomes tantalizing. But cinema verite this ain't: Nanong is made to act and reenact his journey, which leads him to some truths about the "reality" we consume.

That in itself can be interpreted as commentary on how television content is produced in human interest programs (such as... well, name your pick), but it can also be interpreted as a subtle jab towards works of social realism, the kind of artistic work that wouldn't feel unwelcome in a festival like Sinag Maynila. Throughout the film Nanong is instructed to stop smiling, as if he is not allowed to feel anything other than misery. He is subtly pushed towards a narrative controlled by the filmmakers. And when reality strays from that narrative,Nanong is forced back to the path... sometimes by force.

This blatant manhandling of narrative is not only counterproductive, as this film shows, it's also dehumanizing towards its subjects, a sort of objectification where flesh and blood human beings are reduced to objects to be pitied and occasionally rewarded with a nice token (only within the show's budget, of course.) But the people behind the program do so only as a consequence of economic realities (you gotta put on a good show, after all) and on Nanong's part, it partially addresses a conversation earlier in the film when he is asked, in a particularly hilarious way, if he would eat a bowl of shit for a million pesos.

The film builds on its awkwardness, as it starts from hilarity and descends into legitimate discomfort. Akin ang Korona highlights the tightrope artists must walk when depicting their fellow human beings in their art - and it shows us, in very adroit fashion, that sometimes, they fall off that rope.

We now take a look at some shorts (not hanging from some clothesline, mind you.)

We Want Short Shorts Short Shorts Reviews Sinag Maynila Edition

Shorts B

While on an objective level Dana Jung comes off as a little rough, it's full of quirkiness and heart as it tells the story of a dad who isn't ready to be a dad and his little girl who just wants to fly (metaphorically this time.)

Panaghoy starts off really weird as we follow what seems to be the Most Oblivious Woman In The World, as she takes what seems to be the Most Obvious Spawn of Satan on a little trip around town. But then the story takes us on a little ride and shows us that things aren't what they seem. I'm not 100% sure it's effective, but points for trying.

The best film (short or full length) I've seen today has to be Dude Pare Bro, a stoner comedy about a struggling architecture student who tries to recruit the services of his stoner (but apparently high-achieving) friend so that he could pass his course. It escalates quickly, and even that feels like an understatement. It's cleverly built on this level of awkwardness that builds up as it goes, making hapless viewers (like myself) laugh out loud and cringe at the same time. It's a glorious feeling.

Nagmamahal, Sal is also rough and scattershot at an objective level, but it does at least come off as heartfelt. Its depiction of a romance that matures over time gives us the highlights, but its disparate parts fail to cohere into a meaningful whole.

Ngiti ni Nazareno checks all the boxes for a grand old miserable time at the cinema: a poor child with a quirky backstory just wants his eccentric, drug-using, criminal mom to smile, so he smiles. Of course, that doesn't happen, because reality is a thing. If you're a fan of this kind of film, kudos to you, but at this point, I was out of it.

Sinag Maynila 2019 Short Documentaries Short Reviews

At Home tells the story of Christian Apolinario, who won an award abroad for his short film. Apolinario contracted polio at an early age, which left him disabled. He recounts his experiences as a PWD in Australia (and how the country accommodates people like him) and his experiences in the Philippines (and how we really have a long way to go in terms of accommodating PWDs.) It's great stuff, even though it goes a little bit too long.

Entablado functions more as reminiscence than documentation, as it looks back at the grand old Manila Metropolitan Theater, currently undergoing a multi-million peso restoration. The footage and interviews are enlightening, and we get a look at the theater as it is being restored, a glimpse at a place we haven't been allowed access to for some time.

Last year I saw a film about professional wrestling in the Philippines, The Good, The Bad, and the Fabulous, about three PWR women wrestlers. Hope Spots tackles the same subject, though it views its subjects through a broader perspective and doesn't delve into the personal lives of the people involved like the former film does.

Andap is about a woman living with Alzheimers, and it is full of really powerful, poignant moments especially near the end. However, it feels overproduced and doesn't quite know when to end (I counted two credits sequences!) I think it's still worth a watch.

Tata Pilo tells the story of its titular character, a craftsman who makes a special type of hat called a Kattukong, most prominently worn by famous figures such as Diego Silang. While it does raise a number of important questions regarding the preservation of cultural traditions and identities, it's full of problems: the staged parts feel silly at times, the film meanders and feels unfocused, and it ultimately feels repetitive.

Hyatt: Mga Kuwento, Lihim at Katotohanan tells the story of the ill-fated Hyatt hotel in Baguio, which collapsed after the 1990 earthquake that shook most of Luzon. Filled with interviews of people present during the tragedy, it's tantalizing stuff, though I wish that the material could be expanded into a feature length film.

Sinag Maynila 2019: Lakbayan (Opening Film)

Sinag Maynila begins its two week run in various cinemas, and Present Confusion will be covering the fest in its entirety.

The title of Sinag Maynila's opening film, Lakbayan, has three of the country's most well known filmmakers go on their own unique journeys into the Philippines' psyche. Lav Diaz, Brillante Mendoza and Kidlat Tahimik's takes are wildly divergent and heavily informed by their personal styles.

In the first segment, Hugaw (Dirt), the focus turns to a group of miners working in the rural part of the Philippines. Even within the working class, there are hierarchies; oppression compounding oppression. A trio of miners, their work completed, head back home on a perilous (and appropriate for Diaz, languid) journey. As their journey goes on, things become a whole lot more spiritual and surreal, as Diaz mixes in the supernatural with the mundane. A sudden turn complicates the end of their journey: what really happened in that final leg? Whose intentions are true and/or sincere? Are we supposed to take everything said at face value? 

Hugaw can be interpreted as a take on today's post-truth world, a sinister Rashomon-like universe where nothing is certain and everything is in doubt. It also gains added layers when one considers Clarence Tsui's take on this part of the film, comparing the youngest miner's plight to that of Andres Bonifacio, a hero whose death is also mired in false truths and disinformation. Hugaw thus not only is about the rights of miners, but also includes commentary on the subjective manipulation of history (and art) in the service of a political agenda.

Brillante Mendoza's part, Desfocado, is based on a series of true events. It is about a group of farmers from Sumilao, Bukidnon, who, in righteous indignation, walked all the way from Mindanao to Metro Manila to protest the seizure and conversion of their farmland. Their land was taken by the San Miguel corporation (though any reference to the company is absent in this film) and parts of it were eventually given back thanks in part to government intervention. The story is told through the eyes and camera of Jose (Joem Bascon), who marched along with the farmers to document their struggle.

This segment seems a lot more straightforward compared to the film that came before it, but it is also Mendoza at his most introspective. It depicts the filmmaker as documentarian, an "eye for the truth," though there seems to be a feeling of regret at not doing more. The film could be interpreted as a question that asks: is the responsibility of filmmakers merely to capture struggle as an impassive observer? Or should they be more involved in the struggle of the oppressed classes? The answer to that question, seeing how political cinema can be used for dishonest ends, is a double edged sword.

Kidlat Tahimik takes us on a literal ride with his no-so-dreary-and-quite-quirky segment, which follows his son Kabunyan as he empties the nest and travels from Baguio to Davao. Along the way, Kabu talks with fellow artists and even former actors from his father's films. Of the three films, this perhaps embodies the concept of the title "Lakbayan" the best. Kidlat Tahimik himself is no stranger to journeys in his films; his most well-known works are themselves roadtrips.

The film is Kidlat looking at a long and storied career and body of work, but also an exploration of the Philippines' painful colonial past through its artists. It touches on the various things that make us as an amalgamation of cultures so unique: our ties to nature (and in one case, nature creating art), the melding of masculine and feminine, a concept erased by the patriarchies of the West, and even the 'appropriation' and reuse of art. At the start of the film, tiles are broken up and re-purposed into something new, perhaps a reflection of how we, informed by our own unique cultural footprint, use those little bits and pieces to create something wonderful.

A tale of two genre films: reviews of Eerie and Maria

Here's an interesting situation: two local films, two directors - one who started out making varied, high concept films, the other born and raised in genre cinema. We'll be talking about both their movies today.

Eerie takes place in a all girls' Catholic school, no stranger to horror films from all around the world (looking at you, Whispering Corridors.) A mysterious spate of deaths has the administration and students reeling; the local handyman and janitor is arrested for the crimes. But did he really do it? Pat Consolacion (Bea Alonzo) thinks there is more to the crime than meets the eye. As it turns out, she can see dead people - and the dead people are telling a different story.

Gorgeously shot and well-acted, Eerie feels at first like a conceptual slam dunk. Similar to films like Aparisyon (2012), it uses the sheltered and restrictive milieu of a convent/religious school to depict institutions that are willingly blind to and are built on abuse. This is the true monster of Eerie, and this monster nurtures and spawns destructive, murderous children. Abuse leads to fear; the normalization of violence leads to people internalizing that violence. The body and mind become wounded in the process, and these wounds spread to everyone, like a malignant cancer that does not stop.

But of course, a message does not a movie make (at least, not by itself.) Eerie checks all the boxes of a standard Asian horror film, but nothing else. It's framed in darkness, but does little to take advantage of that darkness, as its atmosphere never really builds up to anything substantial or engaging. Its scares mostly depend on a number of jump scares, whose frequency and sameness lead  me to boredom and annoyance. This will likely be dependent on the viewer, as I am the kind of person that tries to find something new in horror films. After all, haunted houses aren't as scary if you know what's coming next. Genre film is no joke, and relying on safety isn't always the best course of action. Eerie is a middling horror film at best; a well-shot, well-acted film that falls victim to relying on safe and bland horror storytelling tropes.

In terms of expectations, action is a wholly different creature compared to horror. While a horror film is rendered impotent by a feeling of sameness, all an action flick needs to do is to be well staged and to look cool and it will be better than most action films out there. In this particular case, Pedring Lopez's Maria meets the criteria.

Maria (Christine Reyes) is a loving mother and wife. Her husband works for a well-liked politician who legitimately looks like he serves the people. However, that job puts him and his family in jeopardy: the Black Rose drug cartel wants the politician dead, and they'll kill everyone up the ladder to the top. This puts Maria's husband directly in their sights, which leads to tragic results. Soon Maria will have no choice but to return to her dark past and confront her demons once and for all.

Following off the heels of genre exercises like 2017's Darkroom and 2015's cheesy but entertaining Nilalang, Maria is Pedring Lopez's take on the female led action revenge thriller. Storywise, everyone's pretty busy: while Maria is on her roaring rampage of revenge, there are internal squabbles within the Black Rose cartel. There's a early 2000s cheesiness and/or hamminess to the whole enterprise that I find immensely enjoyable. It's not as in depth or as loaded as, say, The Raid 2, but like I said before, in action films, action is king.

And action is where Maria shines. Christine Reyes put in the work for this movie, and it shows. Lopez knows the ebb and flow of action scenes and shoots them well, mixing hand to hand combat, melee weapons and gunplay in his numerous action scenes. Extra points go to the fact that Lopez doesn't rely on fast cuts or edits to convey ferocity - he has the actor (in most cases, Christine Reyes) do it for him. That simple fact elevates this above most other local action films I've seen since last year. His staging of long takes is really impressive as well, drawing from a wide array of equally fun action sequences from other movies.

The film does have its share of faults - it's quite dark in some places (though that's probably more the fault of the cinema projection rather than the movie itself) and the movie ends with one hell of a cliffhanger. It also would've been a bit better if the film had tied up some more loose ends, or, at the very least, addressed some nagging plot questions. What happened to that politician? Is he really as good as Maria's husband says he is? What's going to happen to Black Rose now? What's Maria and co. going to do after all this? Despite all this, Maria is a really fun ride, as it knows exactly what it is, and it stays in its element from start to finish.