Cheap Labor of Love

Best way to start the day

Pasang Krus (Affliction) is a film that lives up to its title; to the one who will go to see it. It is nearly two hours and it is as if I am watching it with my knees on the ground while struggling my way up to Mount Eternity. Watching this film is synonymous to perpetual agony. I don’t care about the allegory of the film or even the payoff that could have been installed along the course of the story. Apparently the efforts of some of the actors are discernibly sufficient. But Pasang Krus as a whole is pretty much an addition to the indie film’s bandwagon of pretentiously self-proclaimed masterpieces.

Rosanna Roces plays the role of Herminia, a poor mother whose fate brings her to unfathomable misery. Her husband got killed fifteen years ago. Her eldest son and her only daughter got lost along the way when they try to escape from the murderers. Presently, two of her sons have become criminals; one is a murderer (Christian Burke) and the other a kidnapper (Ketchup Eusebio). The other one played by Beejay Morales is a teenager who is always with Herminia in times of despair. She hopes to see two of her lost children but is stacked-up with more gruesome events.

The intentions are there and yet I could not convince myself that it deserves the praise. I have seen the story unfold and I could not imagine some illlogical things that are happening in Herminia’s life. I could forgive that along the way two of her children got lost. But to have two criminal sons doesn't hold up to the film’s depiction of a mother who only wants the best of her children. How did she nurture them? The way she acts does not correspond to the outcome of her children’s outlook in life.

But don’t fret; Roces gave her best to the performance. There is the infamous crucifixion scene which she had done in actuality. I could only blame the direction on parts wherein Roces did not give the intended meaning to some scenes. She could be the sole reason that this film is watchable. Morales also gave a decent performance unlike the other actors in this film. Eusebio for example did not adequately portray the character with the correct tone. His facial muscles tweak every time he shells out discontent. The acting could have been guided more.

I have seen Tan’s body of work in the past and it suffers the same mistakes. It could have been the taste the filmmaker has in mind and it just underscores the indie films’ supposition that it has more artistic panache than any mainstream film could offer. Even the social commentaries and poverty issues layered therein do not even uplift the status of the film to film artistry. Its usage has no merits in terms of making the film more engaging. It just offers something that has been achieved decades ago by our most prolific filmmakers. But now, it is getting more boring and hollow.

Hopefully the films slated for this year will offer something that could gain interest to the audience whether works are intended for a more commercial market or for the more intelligible artistic works. As for Pasang Krus, it just made its way for the audience to feel the title of the film in an unappealing gesture. Bit by bit it has promise, but once it is knitted together, it looks an unlovely piece of work crafted without any hint of creative advantage.

Charlie Koon's Rating:

An Impregnable Dilemma

Angelic Abortionist

It doesn’t mean that if a film advocates the principle of righteous judgment, that it will mechanically be tagged as ‘a-must-see’ film. Many religious groups have already recommended Hilot. It is apparent because it advocates the stop of abortion. On a moral level, yes of course, something that is opposed to sin will perhaps get the endorsement from the scrupulous and conscientious sects of society. The bible says “Let who is without sin, cast the first stone.” and it must also be a lesson for all writers. Hilot is not a very good advocacy film. It gives an impression that if you’re a bad person, you will suffer ‘big time’.

Hilot is a film written and directed by Neal Tan. The story revolves around the mother and daughter relationship of Amparo and Carmen. Amparo (Melissa Mendez) is a midwife who practices the illegal procedure of abortion. While her diffident daughter Carmen (Empress Schuck) is the subject of animosity of her peers because of the mysteries revolving their family’s exclusiveness. One of Amparo’s daily chores is taking care of his bedridden husband. She really loathes him so much probably a take on the importance of sacrifice. Meanwhile, Amparo’s friend Claudia (Glenda Garcia) visits her and seeks another abortion. While she stays for her recovery, grisly events suddenly happen which make her decide to have a new life.

Hilot has good intentions with the film’s strive towards the eradication of abortion. But with the confines of film as a whole, it lacks polishing. The script makes too much effort in building up confrontations and moral arguments which is hypocritical in its manner. There is too much campaigning on how horrendous abortion is to the point wherein the characters have to suffer so much to the peak of being pointless. As a fellow writer, it is best to embrace the characters no matter how flawed they are. That is the best way to enlighten the viewers of their plight. I am not entirely saying that it is prohibited to make the characters suffer for their cruelty, but it has to be justly done without being too contrived. The problem is not that the film took a stand, but the way it presented its argument.

I am also concerned with Schuck’s performance. She looks distressed in all aspects but has managed to be a school achiever. It is a bit confusing especially with how she acts out the life of a daughter who lived in a house full of misery. She could have been used to it. I think she does not anymore require looking more sympathetic. She intrinsically has those qualities already. Mendez’ character could have been polished more. I like the angelic look on her face. It gives contrast to her character as the abortionist.

I am a religious person but I will not proffer my stance on this matter. Films are made to enlighten us. But I am sure that Hilot gives a confusing enlightenment for me to doubt its advocacy. Films do not need encouragement from the Church for it to be watched. We too are the Church. I love films. We critics love films. We love life. We are inclined to love characters even if they are iniquitous. We are pro-good films.


Charlie Koon's Rating: