You ever get that feeling where you used to love to do something, and technically you still do, but lately you just don't have the time? Yup, that's pretty much me for the past month or so. Not writing about film feels a bit weird after doing it regularly for the past five or so years, and semi-regularly for far longer than that. That, however, hasn't stopped me from watching lots of movies, and I guess this is my chance to catch up with the writing thing. Get ready for a long one.
A recent film that's been getting a rather cold response is Veronica Velasco's Nuuk. It was marketed as a psychological thriller, and fellow reviewers and/or critics held on to that notion, calling the film a bit too drab to be thrilling, too unremarkable to be engaging, and with a twist that only seems to exist for the sake of existing. That's fair, if one reads the film in a certain way. I approached this film with a blank slate, with little or no idea what it was all about. I found the film quite fascinating, actually.
Look at it like this: consider all the romantic films we've seen that take place in an exotic location. It's pretty much its own subgenre of local cinema at this point. In these kinds of films, two lovers find each other in a strange land, their own comfort being each other. In a world where a diaspora has caused Filipinos find comfort in their own countrymen, birds seeking fellow birds of the same feather. This film takes place in all kinds of places: metropolitan cities, scenic historical villages, beaches, mountains, and icy plains. Last year's Through Night and Day (which, perhaps coincidentally, was also directed by Velasco) is an icy example.
Nuuk is a deconstruction of these types of films: the exotic locale isn't exactly a place one aspires to live in. Nuuk feels more like an icy wasteland instead of a wintry paradise. Its main characters are unsympathetic as well: Alice Dixson's character is an alcoholic, a mother of dubious character, addicted to uppers, as messed up as one can be. Perhaps that's why Aga Muhlach's character is so enticing to her - she's been conditioned by the very films this film is deconstructing that he's a good guy.
It's as bleak as it can be, and I found its silence and desolation fascinating, akin to Eastern European and Russian cinema in terms of the tone it sets. The mystery, instead of being in the center, just gets in the way of the unraveling of Dixson's character. I liked this film a lot, but it's valid to think it's probably just me.
Do you have a friend you really don't know that much, the kind of friend you maybe met one or two times over some conference or through mutuals? You add each other, maybe like each other's posts once in a blue moon, then forget they were your friend in the first place, until one day, you scroll through social media and you find that there's a prenup video of that friend, or maybe an SDE, or whatever fancy thing they're doing these days. You watch the video out of morbid curiosity. You can't fucking help it, and then it happens. Something reaches deep inside you and you can feel your asshole pucker from the cringe. It's awkward from the time you hit play to the time the video ends, and you do watch all of it, albeit in spurts. The human body is not meant to consume cringe in bulk and in those amounts.
Conceptually, Cara x Jagger seems enticing and full of promise. Imagine the idea of a woman who can remember everything and wants to forget (ignoring the fact that in the real world, such conditions are infinitesimally rare) and a man who forgets but wants to remember. It sounds super interesting. Local filmmakers seem to be attracted to this idea of forgetting in the context of hugot (over the last year or so, there have been 2 other films with similar premises). And why not? The pain of a love lost is tied closely to memory, the act of moving on tied to forgetting.
But the execution doesn't really pan out that well. There's nothing creative, visually or otherwise, about Jagger's exploration of his past memories with Cara. The film feels restricted, boxed into the romantic genre it should be trying to escape, and it feels like that feeling I described in the first paragraph above. To be fair, the film manages to elicit a great performance from Jasmine Curtis Smith, but even she can't carry the film on her back.
Two of the films in this very long post hearken back to the trashiness of early 2000s local cinema, and one of them is Mac Alejandre's The Annulment. Though to be fair the trashiness does appeal to certain audiences (no doubt it earned quite a lot in its two week+ run), the movie itself is hilariously bad and perhaps inadvertently irresponsible as well.
Its central romance does little to endear us to the characters. The film's relationship problems seem to stem partly from class differences between characters but these characters fall into stereotypes. Joem Bascon's character feels inferior because of his lower socioeconomic status, but he's depicted as a hypersexual, selfish asshole with few redeeming qualities. Lovi Poe is portrayed as benevolent but clueless. These characterizations are not only lazy, but boring to watch.
As for the actual annulment itself, the film tries to extract drama from the situation by making it out like the annulment is some great tragedy. but getting these people as far away from each other as possible is obviously for the best. In addition, it portrays annulment as bloodless and conflict-free which is a gross oversimplification of the process, and potentially irresponsible as well.
My utter lack of regard for this film is also partly because of the fact that Marriage Story came out on Netflix, and that film makes this film look pathetic.
Two Love You is not as glossy as Benedict Mique's previous film ML. Far from it, in fact - the film is rather rough around the edges production wise. On the other hand, the film does address very interesting topics.
The film can be seen as an exploration of the ways gay men adapt to a heteronormative society, first, through the use of capital and their own resources, and second, by playing according to the rules the society has established.
It first addresses the idea of gay men acting as sugar daddies, where they sponsor a younger male financially, and reciprocation is not always found or required. The potential for exploitation is there, and in cases where the benefactor's motives aren't so pure, it certainly can be. But in a world where older gay men are marginalized and denied the chance to find love for themselves, it's understandable that some of them resort to things like this.
As the drama shifts in the second half, the film explores the phenomenon of mixed orientation marriages, where one or both parties are of differing sexual orientations. In fact, one of the producers of the film, Ogie Diaz, has such a marriage. This is, again, another way people adapt to such societies. This push for homeostasis instead of societal change may turn more than a few people off, but that's a whole different conversation entirely, and one I'm not fully equipped to address.
The message is there, but the filmmaking feels bland, often safe, and some parts don't do the film's message any favors. Still, it's worth trying out and I did appreciate it, if only at a conceptual level.
The Art of Ligaw is a pleasant film to watch, though I was a bit underwhelmed by the ligaw part, and I wish that it had made its setting (Davao) pop out a bit more, since it looks like an interesting place.
Epi Quizon is great in this film, and KZ Tandingan is at least decent for a rookie actress. I really don't have much to say about it other than that, but contemporary films set in Davao are hard to come by these days, so points for that.
Adan has the 2000's Filipino softcore formula down pat, it seems: it's set in an isolated village, where a virginal, pure woman discovers her sexuality and finds out that she likes girls. Sex ensues, of course. But I do have to ask, it's 2019. What use do I have for these kinds of films when I can always go to certain sites and get my fix there?
As far as lesbian films go, having seen this only a few days after Portrait of a Lady on Fire soured my experience of this film even more. It's obvious Adan was written and directed by men, as their gaze infiltrates this film down to the very molecule. It makes for some ridiculous scenes, such as one time where, because these two ladies are so horny, they diddle each other inside a tricycle. With those kinds of roads, I'm amazed they actually managed to do it, and the tricycle driver didn't even notice? Like at all?? The two protagonists aren't even that likeable, with both of them portrayed more as deviant sociopaths instead of characters people can relate to. If you go to this film looking for representation, sorry but you're barking up the wrong tree.
It makes you wonder, you know, what Adan really means. Perhaps an attempt to reference the Garden of Eden, paradise conflated with innocence? Or how such a garden would look if "Adan" did not exist - nothing good, if this movie's edgy ending even is to be believed? Thank you, next.
Damaso feels like a mishmash of many different things that Joven Tan has tried before in the past decade: like Echoserang Frog, it's self reflexive about movies and the genre it's trying to portray, like Petmalu, it's a musical, and like many of his other films, it's all done pretty lousily.
The film follows two narrative threads: the first follows a screenwriter named Damaso is trying to pitch a historical movie, while the second follows the film Damaso is writing, a musical adaptation of Noli Me Tangere. In the first narrative thread, much discussion is given to the idea of glorifying historical figures. For some reason, the movie tries to humanize the character of Padre Damaso, the book's antagonist. Making an obvious stand in for the systemic oppression of the Spanish into a flesh and blood character looks great on paper, but Tan does not have the faculties to pull it off. In making evil men human, their evil deeds are inextricably linked with the totality of who they are. Tan lazily dismisses Damaso's evil deeds by way of his lack of skill and storytelling finesse. He makes Damaso sympathetic, but in a way that his evil deeds are whitewashed. That's not only a gross idea, it is dangerous as well, considering the times we live in.
The disclaimer at the start of Ariel Villasanta's Kings of Reality Shows tells us to believe what we want from the film we are about to see; it is what it is. And that is perhaps the most fascinating thing about this movie: a lingering sense of doubt that seeps into the viewer while watching this film. For a "Reality Movie," questioning its reality or unreality is quite a big part of it.
The first half of the film shows Ariel (of the formerly popular duo Ariel and Maverick) begging for money from friends and local politicians. You see, way back when they were still popular, they made a movie about their attempt to get into American Idol. It was never finished, and exists in the GMA vaults. The begging is for the rights to the movie. This part of the film depicts Ariel as the "struggling artist," looking pathetic as he kowtows to several politicians in a series of exceedingly awkward interviews - the politics of this film are pretty bald-faced, but again, how much of this is genuine sentiment is up in the air.
The second half is where things get more interesting, as Ariel succeeds and shows us the film that never got shown in cinemas. The film within a film turns Kings of Reality Shows into a strange amalgamation of a feature-length Ariel and Maverick episode and a metafictional exploration of filmmaking and failure ala Lost in La Mancha (2002) or an exploration of reality and fiction ala F for Fake (1973). Granted, its humor is woefully dated, its production value crude at best. But there's something addicting in parsing the film's authenticity, possessing something that is key to most reality shows - presenting staged moments as illusory reality.
Mikhail Red's Dead Kids plays with the thriller genre in interesting ways, but its messages feel skin-deep, and if one is looking for a film that perfectly captures the trials and tribulations of youth in contemporary times, we already have films like Cleaners, Edward and John Denver Trending.
It is a fun watch, but to be honest there isn't much else to it other than that. This year, the best film made by a Red was Babae at Baril.
If there's anything shocking about The Heiress, its probably the almost-unrecognizable Maricel Soriano in a supporting role. What happened? It's like someone cloned Maricel and something went terribly wrong during the process.
The film could have explored an interesting dynamic - that of the biological mother versus the mother that actually raises a child. Incidentally, such concepts are not new to Maricel Soriano films; her 2006 film Inang Yaya being a particular example.
The third act of the film is relatively enjoyable, but the whole thing is spoiled by a horror ending that was made just for the purpose of shocking the audience even more. It's goofy, but it's quickly forgotten.
And finally, faith based films ala Pureflix are coming to the Philippines by way of Kaibigan, with a special guest appearance by Worst Baldwin (tm), Stephen. Don't worry, he's not in the movie that much, and he's eclipsed in terms of performance by all of the other people involved in this movie.
The film plays out rather predictably, like a Hallmark Channel movie or an after school special. Drugs are portrayed as a serious problem of the youth and kids are led astray because of other bad kids, but no one dies or anything because everything's squeaky clean. It's all wholesome and cute, and the conservatism is there, but it's not as in your face as other faith-based films. That balance elevates it a bit above those films as it tries to appeal to a wider audience. One wonders where this production company will go from here.
As for the actual annulment itself, the film tries to extract drama from the situation by making it out like the annulment is some great tragedy. but getting these people as far away from each other as possible is obviously for the best. In addition, it portrays annulment as bloodless and conflict-free which is a gross oversimplification of the process, and potentially irresponsible as well.
My utter lack of regard for this film is also partly because of the fact that Marriage Story came out on Netflix, and that film makes this film look pathetic.
The film can be seen as an exploration of the ways gay men adapt to a heteronormative society, first, through the use of capital and their own resources, and second, by playing according to the rules the society has established.
It first addresses the idea of gay men acting as sugar daddies, where they sponsor a younger male financially, and reciprocation is not always found or required. The potential for exploitation is there, and in cases where the benefactor's motives aren't so pure, it certainly can be. But in a world where older gay men are marginalized and denied the chance to find love for themselves, it's understandable that some of them resort to things like this.
As the drama shifts in the second half, the film explores the phenomenon of mixed orientation marriages, where one or both parties are of differing sexual orientations. In fact, one of the producers of the film, Ogie Diaz, has such a marriage. This is, again, another way people adapt to such societies. This push for homeostasis instead of societal change may turn more than a few people off, but that's a whole different conversation entirely, and one I'm not fully equipped to address.
The message is there, but the filmmaking feels bland, often safe, and some parts don't do the film's message any favors. Still, it's worth trying out and I did appreciate it, if only at a conceptual level.
Epi Quizon is great in this film, and KZ Tandingan is at least decent for a rookie actress. I really don't have much to say about it other than that, but contemporary films set in Davao are hard to come by these days, so points for that.
As far as lesbian films go, having seen this only a few days after Portrait of a Lady on Fire soured my experience of this film even more. It's obvious Adan was written and directed by men, as their gaze infiltrates this film down to the very molecule. It makes for some ridiculous scenes, such as one time where, because these two ladies are so horny, they diddle each other inside a tricycle. With those kinds of roads, I'm amazed they actually managed to do it, and the tricycle driver didn't even notice? Like at all?? The two protagonists aren't even that likeable, with both of them portrayed more as deviant sociopaths instead of characters people can relate to. If you go to this film looking for representation, sorry but you're barking up the wrong tree.
It makes you wonder, you know, what Adan really means. Perhaps an attempt to reference the Garden of Eden, paradise conflated with innocence? Or how such a garden would look if "Adan" did not exist - nothing good, if this movie's edgy ending even is to be believed? Thank you, next.
The film follows two narrative threads: the first follows a screenwriter named Damaso is trying to pitch a historical movie, while the second follows the film Damaso is writing, a musical adaptation of Noli Me Tangere. In the first narrative thread, much discussion is given to the idea of glorifying historical figures. For some reason, the movie tries to humanize the character of Padre Damaso, the book's antagonist. Making an obvious stand in for the systemic oppression of the Spanish into a flesh and blood character looks great on paper, but Tan does not have the faculties to pull it off. In making evil men human, their evil deeds are inextricably linked with the totality of who they are. Tan lazily dismisses Damaso's evil deeds by way of his lack of skill and storytelling finesse. He makes Damaso sympathetic, but in a way that his evil deeds are whitewashed. That's not only a gross idea, it is dangerous as well, considering the times we live in.
The first half of the film shows Ariel (of the formerly popular duo Ariel and Maverick) begging for money from friends and local politicians. You see, way back when they were still popular, they made a movie about their attempt to get into American Idol. It was never finished, and exists in the GMA vaults. The begging is for the rights to the movie. This part of the film depicts Ariel as the "struggling artist," looking pathetic as he kowtows to several politicians in a series of exceedingly awkward interviews - the politics of this film are pretty bald-faced, but again, how much of this is genuine sentiment is up in the air.
The second half is where things get more interesting, as Ariel succeeds and shows us the film that never got shown in cinemas. The film within a film turns Kings of Reality Shows into a strange amalgamation of a feature-length Ariel and Maverick episode and a metafictional exploration of filmmaking and failure ala Lost in La Mancha (2002) or an exploration of reality and fiction ala F for Fake (1973). Granted, its humor is woefully dated, its production value crude at best. But there's something addicting in parsing the film's authenticity, possessing something that is key to most reality shows - presenting staged moments as illusory reality.
It is a fun watch, but to be honest there isn't much else to it other than that. This year, the best film made by a Red was Babae at Baril.
The film could have explored an interesting dynamic - that of the biological mother versus the mother that actually raises a child. Incidentally, such concepts are not new to Maricel Soriano films; her 2006 film Inang Yaya being a particular example.
The third act of the film is relatively enjoyable, but the whole thing is spoiled by a horror ending that was made just for the purpose of shocking the audience even more. It's goofy, but it's quickly forgotten.
The film plays out rather predictably, like a Hallmark Channel movie or an after school special. Drugs are portrayed as a serious problem of the youth and kids are led astray because of other bad kids, but no one dies or anything because everything's squeaky clean. It's all wholesome and cute, and the conservatism is there, but it's not as in your face as other faith-based films. That balance elevates it a bit above those films as it tries to appeal to a wider audience. One wonders where this production company will go from here.
No comments:
Post a Comment