Z for Zloppy

Fabulouzzz

I too could emphasize my dizappointment with how Joel Lamangan could actually make a film that is roughly run-of-the-mill. It amazes me how his mediocrity can still surprise people. I Love Dreamguyz has queasy visualz to begin with, followed through with a grubby story progression. The film is like choking during orgazm ‘in reverse’ while in a coma. Someone should wake them up az they are likely having a dizorder called sleep apnea. They might drown in their own saliva. If this is what the audience might have dreamed for, then so be it. And if you snooze midway, there is still the Z factor offered as a bargain.

I Love Dreamguyz is about a group of young guys who aspires to be dancers in Japan. The group is composed of five cheeky gym buff guys, having different life stories to tell - in snippets. The group leader is Rico (Marco Morales) which I could remember has no character backbone. His presence only intensifies when Jake (Jay-L Dizon) becomes close to him. Jake has a live-in partner Jenny (Niña Jose). Alvin (Sherwin Ordonez) is the beloved of the flamboyant gay talent manager Didi (Jao Mapa). Even if the story segues to Didi’s intolerable gayness and networking scam sub-conflicts, Jake is the heart of the story. He is likened by Rico who has no story to tell but has a wang to show. The other two guys are like opposing magnets. Benjo (Miggy Valdez) is the battered son while Michael (Mhyco Aquino) is the hotheaded gigolo.

I could not question the lust factor between Rico and Jake after the premise has been laid (no pun intended). Just like the concept in the product life cycle, Lamangan is quite deliberate in hauling out all possible carnality without further notice. It has been a franchise all along and the two young guys having sex with each other, not once but a couple times do matter for his vision. The sequence is not anymore relevant and substantial. The insistence might be somewhere in the decline point and so Lamangan might be avoiding any possible risk. Its shoddy production is the unyielding proof that it is near to extinction and for now, he could only milk the cow.

If this could be a trend, then what could have I Love Dreamguyz instilled in the present state of Philippine Cinema? The truth is that, a prolific director like Joel Lamangan will always embark on catering the sweet hot-dogged spaghetti the majority would delightfully consume. Would anyone have a problem with that? There will be hecklers for that matter and I assume it is no two-way channel. Lamangan has static visions and it appears in the film. But at least the film has someone who could still be honed in the dramatic genre. She could fake decency and might as well get well-rounded roles if the franchise turns obsolete. She is none other than Niña Jose.

I Love Dreamguyz could be the expected downfall of a mainstream veteran director. The film appears to be an extremely poor mise-en-scene home-made video like production. Despite the negativity, Joel Lamangan still makes films and makes even more. He might have an easy rapport with the majority perceived in the commercial success of Walang Kawala and Heavenly Touch. But for people having exotic tastes and bigotry, he will always be a failure. But he has strengths which I could affirm; he is an actor’s director. But I have issues with the tawdriness and smudgy qualities he has for now. He is expected to come up with a better output. I hope a good sleep could do the fixing – no nightmares, hopefully.

.

.
Charlie Koon's Rating:

Wet Dreams May Come

Sweety Tweety

Come being the veiled operative, the arrival of mainstream movie veteran Joel Lamangan into the indie arena with his seminal (pun unintended) work Walang Kawala has left many a moviegoer tightened to the coil and ready to be cloyed by the subsequent votive designs of a master of populist directing. His pseudo-sophomore work Heavenly Touch (Fuschia not included) has all the makings of a crowd pleaser, with the crowd being mostly homosexual men, and the pleasure being solidified and assembled on a conveyer belt of contemporary gay-themed flicks whose production rate can be likened to China-bred teddy bears. If the demand is indeed related to the implacable concupiscence of a predominantly male audience, then the supply has little reason of abating.

The movie centers on the lives of robust young men working as masseurs in the seedy but ostensibly clean “Heavenly Touch” spa run by the perpetually fan-wielding and diminutive Mama Orange (Jim Pebanco) and his tyrannical not-so-campy masculine counterpart Sir Tong (Jeffrey Santos). Their able-bodied employees are displayed like vacuous dolls behind a glass pane, and like the industry that prides itself on the dispensability of its human resource, Sir Tong does not hesitate to discipline his nubile wards with casual fatality. Though a more sensitive dimension is conveyed through a romantic dynamic between the two, the portrayal of Sir Tong and Mama Orange in the movie is a fascinating reflection of the sexual politics that predominates among gay Filipinos. To summarize, effeminates are seen as weaklings, with predictable desires and informidable but amusing personalities, while bisexual mustache-clad men are imposing, albeit malicious, assholes, but ultimately more desirable. Of course the crucifix of seduction is planted on the masseurs themselves, hard-up and fresh-cheeked detachables that cater to a more primal logic conveniently stored in every ticket-payer this side of the pink district. This is the very essence of Lamangan’s cinematic language, he practically wrote it, the sweet and universal poetry of the shirtless male constitution. Though true poetry is of a more rarefied ilk, Lamangan makes no apologies in giving the public exactly what they asked for, and that is something you can bring straight to the bank. He employed them all, along with some of his favorites, the scandal king Paolo Serrano, the frontal nudity king Marco Morales, the monotonic and awkward king of the moment, Mr. Lakan male pageant winner Joash Balejado. Throw in a pair of clichéd queens predictably acted by Paolo Rivero and that other gay guy giving away expensive merchandise and you have a full house. And that is exactly what Lamangan intends to achieve. It may be an iffy gamble but his delving into a more concentrated target market may reveal more than his artistic experimental proclivities. The fact that he is able to make such movies, release them with no perceived trammeling from the ratings board, and have them run for more than a week is sheer evidence of his considerable hold on the industry. The power is there, and perhaps the patronage, but does Lamangan have what it takes to elevate his work to a higher tier, more than Mano Po 3000 uberload or Manay Po 10? Does he care? The fact that he endeavored to tread on this side of the river implies that he does. And he knows well enough how tricky the river bends.

Inevitably Lamangan’s Heavenly Touch will be compared to others of its flock, to the Chionglo and perhaps even the Brocka films that virtually created the genre. The subject matter itself is almost identical to Brillante Mendoza’s Masahista though that is where the similarity ends. The two films represent two different schools of thought, Lamangan’s plot-driven traditional film-making (though not without its surprises carefully calibrated to shock the jaded moviegoer) and Mendoza’s stylistic exhibitionism rank with fancy angles and sprawling particularities. The latter being buffeted with shiny trophies and pretty plaques, mostly international, while the former being more accessible to the masses, the divergence hints a wobbling diversity within contemporary Philippine cinema. Hopefully it will not be inimical to the industry as a whole. While some things are changing, Lamangan’s socio-political expressionism that teeters on the edge of redundant melodrama underscores his reliance on recurrent themes and cookie-cutter archetypes that are not always redeemed by his talent for characterization. He mixes it up a bit and breaks some of the rules, but in the end his intrinsic almost perfunctory desire to placate the audience is indomitable. He even made two hot guys fall in love, placing them on a bus bound for a golden world of reciprocal passion and resolved conflicts, a certified wet dream both timeless and meretricious. It is a mollified version of his previous indie adventure, cherry-topped with a happy ending that eluded a disappointed swarm of romantics. Even the weak female archetype in the person of Irma Adlawan, the powerless mother-spectator, was content in the end, despite watching her only son evanesce indefinitely with a man-whore. It’s ingratiating to be sure, but if I were asked who among the current Filipino directors society should cryogenically freeze for the sake of our culture’s posterity, I would personally elect Joel Lamangan as one of my top choices. Embedded in his DNA are the desires and weaknesses of an entire nation, an organic admonition to the future Philippine stock. If that’s not worth preserving, I don’t know what is.

Written by: Alex Milla (Guest Critic)

Wiggle your Hips, Bitches

Torn between two lovers...

Fuschia is an enjoyable film. Its absurd and outrageous scenarios could be the reason why the film works for me. It is definitely an assortment of different comedic elements ranging from observational to farce comedy interspersed with socio-political satire. Ricky Lee and Joel Lamangan made the script and Lamangan directs Fuschia with a possible inclination of camp style.

Mameng (Gloria Romero) lives with his second husband Gener (Robert Arevalo) in a provincial town. One day, she receives a letter from her first husband Mars (Eddie Garcia) that he will come back after four decades of living in Hawaii. To make amends with Mameng, Mars gives his newly acquired house to Mameng. Mars also confesses that he has a terminal illness. Mameng decides that Mars will live together with her recent husband Gener, who is also Mar’s best pal.

It is a type of comedy and the situations that are building up are well-executed by our country’s film legends. Mameng takes care of his previous husband with a shocking decision of a ménage à trois setup. The people within the community have expressed aversion to the arrangement. Mameng’s older sister Juana (Armida Siguion-Reyna) made it known to her in a condescending mode. This starts a conflict between the two sisters with primordial rivalry from the past now being brought up.

Of course Lamangan made it sure that the film will be fun amidst the seniority of the casts poking fun at how we think of life too seriously. Despite the film tackling death, corruption and even decadent behavior, the film’s output just made fun out of the serious topics. Even when it is fused with melodrama, it does not precipitate a disarray of the comedy that has been installed. It is a rare treat to see film legends in one film and despite the campy portrayal or the absurdity of the film, the execution is commendable. After all, Lamangan is not after the marginal merits but rather he's presenting himself as a filmmaker who is after the bizarre and outrageous bearing of a story that could possibly work in films. He could have taken inspiration from the early works of Almodovar and even our very own Gosiengfiao. Of course he could not take away his political remarks and it was layered within the story from land grabbing, rural urbanization, political killings and oppression. It is an indication that a comedy does not equate to escapism.

Fuschia has a good story backbone and the genre it tries to combine within the story is well manipulated to make it enjoyable. Liberation is not so easy in a democratic country that has already achieved liberation for more than a century. True recognition of liberation and truth is within us. There will always be laughter for hypocrisy and this film is a result. I would like to commend Romero’s performance. Despite her reputation, she deliberately played a character that is disgraceful, mannish in her principles but full of charm. For that, my respect for her is higher.


Charlie Koon's Rating:

Love Gone Wrong

Zombie... Be scared

When I Met U is a Valentine movie offering of two of this generation’s hottest celebrities. It is also a follow-up from the success of the film For the First Time. Despite the predicaments our nation is facing, romcom flicks are very much marketable. The jam-packed theatres are the gauge to say that a film is a sensation. And yes, it is and this film has a very good advertising strategy to achieve financial success. But I beg to disagree - the insight of love the film story has set is a sure letdown on my part. Well, who cares anyway? This particular film is what the audience wanted – guilty pleasure I suppose. The kilig aspect is tolerable. But we have to explicate the rationale why this real love they are trying to advertise is just a mere artificial love.

Am I on the same boat with the audience? Oh yes, definitely. I have been championing these kinds of films for such a time. But for this film, it is shameful to succumb only to what the audience only wanted. Our local audience has been susceptible to a film’s promise of true love; even mistaking the kilig facet as the love. Escapism is indeed the bread and butter of the Filipino movie industry. I watched this during Valentine’s Day and I was not surprised with how the film faired with the audience. They got pleasure from the film for different reasons I suppose. It’s inevitable that the two lead stars look good as a love pair. Also, the film has ample amount of crappy mushy moments the audience will surely crave. I have to negate every single asset the film has because it reflects a different connotation to what kilig and love is all about.

To be honest, the film story is a representation of our generation. It is a story of two people who are trapped in unhappy relationships. Jenny (KC Concepcion) is a promodizer who is in a relationship with a serious veterinarian Albert (Alfred Vargas). Benjie (Richard Gutierrez) on the other hand is a struggling pilot. His girlfriend Tracy (Iya Villania) is a chic pastry chef. With these simple descriptions, I might assume that they come from the middle-class. It is also apparent that their respective partners look pleasing. Of course a few traces of negative traits are inevitable. Who is perfect by the way? But as the film progresses, it seems that Jenny and Benjie are just pissed-off with their partners. I think it has something to do with how the movie must achieve its purpose. But it could have presented it in a manner wherein the story goes just as it is without trying too much. I definitely believe that unhappy states in relationship are not entirely bad. These characters simply lack contentment.

To continue the story, the two lead characters meet in an uncanny situation. Both of them need to attend a wedding party in the island of Palawan. Since Albert and Tracy have common friends, it was requested that Jenny could hitch a ride in Benjie’s cargo plane. Soon enough, the plane had some engine troubles and landed on a remote island near Palawan. As the night sets in, the two started to exchange their ideas on love and Benjie initiated the fatal kiss.

Actually that moment is part of the film’s premise. I don’t want to mislead the audience for what the film has in store. It is a wise decision for the film to show this scenario as a reminder that these two characters are meant for each other no matter what. But if we review their background, which I first mentioned, I bet their acts could have been distasteful to a wider extent. After that kissing incident, they get back to Manila and started to see each other in secret. They did not even bother to break-up with their current partners. And most of the foolish audience gets to scream their hearts out in every love gesture of these two cheaters. And mind you, Jenny is playing it dumb to excuse herself from being guilty of her philandering act. It is a double standard I guess.

I don’t think this relationship would last. Poor audience, they simply get to see themselves in those situations. I mean, come to think of it, I cannot entirely blame the creative team for the tormenting film they have actually made. It is what the audience has wanted in the first place. And the story appears to be just a skeletal framework for all the kilig scenes to push through. But despite the story’s brittleness, it is still the audience I surely blame. Do we seek love simply for our self fulfillment – I think so. I simply see the characters to be selfish in their motives. Love is innocent but definitely not ignorant. Romcom flicks have an established pattern. But this one is such a mess.

When I Met U edifies a selfish pursuit for love. Albert and Tracy might have my sympathy than the other two. Despite their manipulative actions, I think it is just a product of the irrevocable contrivance of the story. But in real life, I think they must qualify to have loved more when they fight for a relationship that is not miserable, but could be realistically defined as plain contentment. I speak only in terms of their stand in the relationship but not on their actual characters. Anyway, audiences are free to feel the magic spark of love. This film has it. But I assure you that magic isn’t real.

Charlie Koon's Rating:

.

Critic's Note:

I also noticed that the film looks rushed. It is like the pito-pito kind of film. I pity the film stock used in this film for some reason. The material is expensive and yet it has been used just for a fancy display of love and affection by these two skanky characters. Poor film stock! And the silly dubbing is predominant all throughout the film – I have been particular with this ever since. This supposedly romantic film ruined my special day. The other chick flick Confessions of a Shopaholic did cleanse my system afterwards. Even though it is a Hollywood film (I don’t review foreign films) its pattern of a romcom is much pleasurable.

Desperate for Laughter

Go Girl! Girl Power!

Desperadas 2 is a not ingeniously made comedy film. The film tries to jest any possible in-joke or even tries to blend the vernacular with a twang of absurdity but it could not save the film from shame. Probably that’s the entire point of it. It has a ridiculous plot, executed in a tremendously sluggish manner. I could have laughed because of the misery of the shambled production, not due to the film’s hilarity.

The story is easy to follow through. There are four half-sisters, and all of them have chock-full of attitude problems. Courtney is played by the masa pleaser Marian Rivera. Her full-time problem is she dislikes having a baby despite being married to a not-so-hunky hunk husband Patrick (Will Devaughn). Isabella (Ruffa Gutierrez) is a matron who tries to control the career of her younger lover Vito (Jay-R). The suicidal Stephanie (Iza Calzado) is having a post-partum syndrome and picks a fight with everyone especially her husband Richard (TJ Trinidad). Patricia played by the wacky Rufa Mae Quinto gets troubled with her relationship with Congressman Fely played by Christian Vasquez.

Comparing all the characters, I personally think that Quinto’s character is adequately conveyed through the screen. Her trademark of dense humor will always be well-liked. But there is an extreme twist to the storyline. They have another half-sister who is played by Ogie Alcasid. She is Luga Luda, a tranny looking princess from the island of Kehwali in South Africa. She speaks gibberish but most of the time in an SMS way of conversing, I get the entire idea of it. Well, she is also desperate. She craves for twinks with an oblique carnivorous gusto.

Aside from their attitude which is compulsory in a way because of the film’s title, you can also see how women have discovered shopping for clothes and makeup makes them at ease. They smile throughout while sashaying in Bonifacio High Street. Not to mention that we are in a tropical country. They all looked glamorized under the unswerving heat of the sun. Despite their pathetic lives, they maintain a pretentious demeanor while they are strutting their stuff in public.

The technicalities for Desperadas 2 are nearing mediocrity. It looks rushed in most parts. Even dubbing is again evident with all the unsynchronized mouthing of words. Weaving the story of the dilemmas of these sisters looks nondescript. It appears to be sloppily written and the leverage for this kind of comedy is like the audience from the primordial times. It is not progressive at all. The comedy element in this film could not be defined even in various forms. It is opprobrious to the terms slapstick or burlesque for the dry humor it has given away.

I am sure that the lad paired with Luga Luda was ensorcelled. She has no redeeming loveliness in her. Despite the contrived goodness she has shown to her other sisters, we have to be reminded that she has carnivorous tendencies (literal sense) for crying out loud. And with the other women in this film, there is nothing that could be admired for their plight for being a free woman. It gives a negative light on womanhood and a shameful light on Filipino comedies especially to a jaundiced eye. There are other better comedy films than this. A film does not need any feministic concepts to make the film look pragmatic in context and superior in substance. Sometimes, it just causes a film to be very messy and hypocritical.


Charlie Koon's Rating:

Loosen up a bit

Are you sick?

I try to be as democratic as possible by reviewing all Filipino films, even the ones that I am anxious to see. Walang Kawala (No Way Out) is a bit of a surprise. It is like a balloon that is rapidly inflated. One instance, it suddenly bursts in your face. Walang Kawala is a story made by Joel Lamangan in collaboration with Manny Valera and his screenwriter Enrique Ramos. It is Lamangan’s first venture in independent filmmaking. Hopefully it is the start for mainstream directors to be roused from their periods of complacency.

With the return of Joaquin’s (Polo Ravales) wife Cynthia (Althea Vega), Waldo (Joseph Bitangcol) suddenly feels jealous with the lack of attention he expects from Joaquin. To his dismay, he escapes the province in search for a better life in the city. Joaquin is saddened by the incident and he left his wife in search of Waldo. In the city, Joaquin was clued-up that a police officer named Rufo (Emilio Garcia) is spotted last with Waldo. An awful twist of events happens when Rufo abducts Joaquin and makes him his human sex slave to take pleasure from his craving of younger men.

Walang Kawala does not qualify to be criticized in terms of moral values. So critics must be flexible enough with the use of different tools and criteria for every film. Walang Kawala has qualities that are perfect for such objective evaluation. It is so evident that Lamangan has been in the industry for decades. He has done quite a number of mainstream films and has been a hundred percent behind some of the important films that the Philippines has. He is part of Ishmael Bernal’s Himala and Lav Diaz’ Hesus Rebolusyonaryo. Walang Kawala is no different from his other works’ endeavor to be accessible to audiences. He imparts his skills in mainstream to independent filmmaking. It is quite easy to notice that Walang Kawala has ideas that might be very useful to sustain independent film works.

Non-linearity has been in the works for most filmmakers. Its usage consists of flashbacks within the story and yet it is still cohesive if and only if it is executed adroitly. It is quite good to see that the flashbacks in Walang Kawala are woven within the story with great skill. The progression of the story is quite overloaded with tension and melodrama which has been a guilty pleasure of most Filipino audiences. Spectators are like diners. They are drawn into more scrumptious dishes. Sadism has been an active element within the film. The sight of the brutality is quite gripping. Walang Kawala is effective with its aim of a definite sense of apprehension.

I was not surprised that the film got a tamer rating from the MTRCB than other films that recently got an X rating (Next Attraction, Imburnal, and Melancholia). I think it only needs common sense to persuade the board of their works. Evidently, our ‘indie’ artists today lack persuasiveness. They merely hate the entire system. As a result, their ego is inflated to such an extent that they consider their works as victims of uneven judgment. But how do we apply simple common sense in the defense of a film’s unashamed nakedness. In gay bars, obviously you get to see naked male bodies with their schlongs out in the open. Lamangan has confidently made a film with much blatancy, he will never go wrong. He might have been just honest about it. Plus the fact that Lamangan is very good in dealing with the bureaucrats which other artists try to avoid.

Nothing is pretentious in Walang Kawala that is why it is surely well-regarded all on its own. It has incorporated a love story between two men. You might revolt on how they dealt with this kind of relationship but their characters have human dignity and respect for love. The crude depiction of life within the film’s story is maneuvered confidently. It is evocative to a society that has tumbled down and its harshness will always be malodorous despite its good outer surface. Walang Kawala might not be the best film made in recent years. But how would we know in this period in time where we don’t even know what is best? If the film doesn’t stick to a certain narrative it is doomed to failure. If it tries to sugarcoat a simple story to attract more audiences, it will be quite repulsive to some. If a certain artist tries to be unpretentious, direct and integrates conventional filmmaking, will he be cast out? Lamangan certainly knows what he wants. He knows a lot about the process of filmmaking. Walang Kawala has a lot of good ideas that could be of better use in improving independent films. Independent films must strive for aiming a wider audience in order to survive (unless they’re damned to self-indulgence). Lamangan might have done a few silly mainstream films, but I think he does not even care. He will certainly know better than any of us and I believe that Walang Kawala is better than any Mano Po Series he has done.

Charlie Koon's Rating: