Wilted Passion

Whip Me Harder

We can’t argue that Room 213 is to some extent, a well photographed film. The visual structure is striking; the color milieu is gleaming and the backdrop of Old Manila is as well gorgeous. How I wish visual style and aesthetics is the only thing perceived in films to make it the leading light. On the other hand, the story structure is unremarkable. Although the film resorted to use some noir elements, justifying the nonlinearity and scene recurrences. But it’s more of concealment of a frail narrative.

The Architect (Allen Dizon) has grown cold and has been overtly suspicious of his wife, The Photographer (Gwen Garci). It is a result of an adulterous act the wife committed. On their first decade as a married couple, a recent project was assigned to The Architect in an abandoned building in Manila. The Architect is engrossed with the confinements of the building and has formed a plan. The recurring events made its way to acquaint us to two more characters: The Devotee (Maricar dela Fuente) a necrophiliac and The Accomplice (Tyron Perez) a seemingly ordinary guy.

The erotic part is on the film’s manipulation of the characters, pairing them off with each other. The Architect and The Photographer engaged themselves in sadomasochism. Despite being a couple, it still brings about some voyeuristic tinges and dream fantasies. Glamour Photography is one passion of The Photographer. The Devotee as her subject, the secret liaison at first leads to a lesbian intimacy. The Accomplice is also entangled in a simulated threesome act between the two women. The eroticism is primarily signified by the abandoned building. The old building heightened the palpable dormancy in passion.

The exploration of the theme is a flourishing subject matter. I do commend the film for not appearing comical with all those ropes tied around, hanging upside down and characters leaping into cross gender role-play. But does it mean that all couples are subjected to this kind of activity when passion is growing cold? Or is the film literal? The answer might be plausible in the context of eroticism and film. Eroticism in Room 213 has dissolved the rational world but it’s ephemeral; thus transcending of pain is subjective. On the contrary, a film has a logical amalgamation of eroticism and film writing. Or probably the film is adequate to show more of its artistic qualities visually. Obviously, Sicat love to astonish and bemuse the audience with obscure sexual adventurism, regardless of whether real people actually do it or not. It has become an aesthetic all its own.

The narrative, especially the use of dialogue might be indicted of mere rhetorical frippery. One good case is the voice-over narration. Aren’t The Photographer’s actions exactly those which she is narrating? Some scenes are stylish, but they lack urgency. At times, it looks like it just fills up the cracks. The repetitive schemes must have a purported purpose. But I have to say that its premise and closure have strong points. In the end it becomes a reflection of our repressed sensibilities. Freedom from sex is I think true liberation.

Room 213 has promising technical expertise to show off (except for the uneven film ratio). It is not surprising to know that the director Keith Sicat is also a painter and a photographer for profession. There are lots of details that I admire in the film. I have noticed that the actors wear bizarre outfits and it is alluring. The walls are painted with eye-catching illustrations and I bet it is the work of Sicat. The musical scoring purported to use kundiman, ethnic/tribal accompaniments, and the western style of music is exquisite. But I have doubts with its narrative. It seems that at one point, the story is lacking and needs more expansion. It must also level with how technically proficient the film is. But if you will ask me, is the film erotic? My answer is, not quite. Or let’s say is the depiction of eroticism thought provoking? Yes, given that the building was there.

Charlie Koon's Rating:

Mag-ingat ka sa...Kulam

Mag-ingat ka sa...Kulam is written and directed by Jun Lana. This is about a married woman played by Judy Ann Santos who starts behaving unpredictably as she recovers from a car accident. It also stars Dennis Trillo, TJ Trinidad, Mart Escudero, Kris Bernal, and Sharlene San Pedro.

Mag-ingat ka sa...Kulam opens October 1, 2008 in theaters nationwide.

Mag-ingat ka sa...Kulam's Official Website

The Common Denominator

Just for fun!!! :) Persona

Half-Romantic, Half-Derisive

Let Me Be Your Hero

If sincerity, ideation, and passion for writing are the basis of a film’s triumph, I will praise Eddie Romero and his tandem Rica Arevalo’s endeavor in retailing a story which is nearly conceived as a taboo even in our generation. Unfortunately, I was not even half-impressed with the film itself. Teach Me to Love makes me feel giddy when it comes to its storytelling. Its camera works is not even minimalist, rather it is dull. I am baffled if this really is directed by Eddie Romero – who is a National Artist for film by the way. Teach Me to Love is an utterly boring film.

The synopsis and the trailer of the film found in most sites tells roughly of the entire movie, (except for its last scene). I would fairly talk about the film’s incoherence and dialogues that lead to mockery. The film started with a flashback until the climax and another flashback from its remaining scenes. Anyway, the story structure is disjointed and is confusing. It did try to develop the characters until they get older, but it is still simply lame and awful to see.

There are too many elements in the film that look like frivolous distractions to what is supposed to be focused on. Mark (Nathan Lopez) has a huge crush on her Physics teacher Connie (Maui Taylor). It’s supposed to be sparkling romance between a teacher and a student, but it was not able to solidify to be able to back-up its climactic moment. Yes, its efforts to confound their personal backgrounds are admirable but it looks contrived. For more than a decade of Mark’s existence, is it only now that he would apprehend his mother’s affair with another woman? Surely at this point in time, they have patched major issues in the past. Connie is having an affair with a married man. The wife has doubts with her husband’s fidelity after seeing a jewelry receipt. She actually hired at some point in time (we don’t know when) a detective to grab hold of her husband’s adulterous acts through photos. Based on the story’s progression, the incident in the photos happened before the wife has doubts. Okay, if she has doubts before which is obvious, the confrontation scene might likely happen earlier. The point is all the scenarios happen at one fell swoop. This makes the story become truly muddled. We have to be reminded of the plot, not to be too occupied on the complexities of their characters. And it has a lot of loopholes. Even with the aid of the flashbacks, I can’t consider the film as nonlinear as those two flashbacks is conspicuously chronological - which is why it is a concern.

The dialogues in the film are leading to incomprehensibility. It is at times redundant and contradictory. The dialogues sometimes start with a doubt, as if the writer is at that time also asking what he is suppose to write down. Almost all the characters sound mediocre in their lines, except for Elsa (Sharmaine Buencamino), mother of Mark, whose lines are I think quite natural. Buencamino is the only one who gave a fine performance in her minor portrayal. The appearance of Lopez after seven years is idiotic. Taylor looks like she reincarnated her role in Torotot, with the same expressions and appearance. Alberto (Ricky Davao) is entirely out of place in his lines, his passions, and sounds unimpressive as a lawyer.

Teach Me to Love tries to capture the theme of love so most people could easily relate. But its obsession in character layering and complexity just adds confusion; loosing focus on it’s supposed plot. The dialogues have a messy reasoning and at times I can’t help myself cackle for the wrong reasons. Its execution is a complete mockery of its theme. Eddie Romero who attained the title as National Artist in Film will always be respected. His past works will forever have the impenetrable vitality and artistic clout. The efforts in making the film less pretentiously artistic and more accessible to the everyday human soul is adequate. But Teach Me to Love is just not groundbreaking. It is a direct indication of where we are heading. If a National Artist can’t make a superior film, then who will be enthused.


Charlie Koon's Rating:

Room 213

Room 213 follows the tenuous relationship between an architect and his photographer wife. Having lost any emotional connection with each other over 10 years of marriage, they start to take extreme measures in the hopes to rekindle their passion.

Room 213 is directed by Keith Sicat and will be screened at Robinsons Movieworld starting September 24, 2008.

.

*the above picture is not the official poster

Teach Me to Love

Teach Me to Love is National Artist for Film Eddie Romero's second digital film after last year's Faces of Love. Starring Maui Taylor and Nathan Lopez, the story explores the boundaries of love and sexual awakening between a high school student and his teacher.
Teach Me to Love will have its regular screening from September 24-30, 2008 at Robinson's Indiesine.

Goes with the Flow

Oh Prince Charming, where art thou? ü

Venice. Savona. Rome. Pisa. Barcelona. Tunisia. Genoa. Napoli. Palma de Mallorca. Florence. Marseilles. These foreign places are used as backdrops for the film’s setting. That’s a bit generous for around two hundred bucks price admission. I.T.A.L.Y. (I Trust and Love You) is a plushy film, sustained by its splendid technical execution, and has a story that approaches a lighter touch on real-life drama. The fact that I had a nice time watching this film, viewing it is not in any way insulting.

I was sure that from the moment the opening credits are revealed, this is a lavish film production. Its rich visuals are engaging; appealing to be a good film appetizer. I rarely see local films that make tremendous efforts for such opening credits. Actually, I am as well cautious not to be overwhelmed with its grandiose setting and supposed to be impressive technicalities without giving complete attention to the film story/script. I appreciate Senedy Que’s clever writing approach and prudence in handling tailor-fitted characters. The story goes on as it is suppose to with minor understandable flaws.

Eager to meet her destiny, Destiny (Jolina Magdangal) seeks advice from a dubious fortune-teller for possible signs about the man in her dream. The fortune-teller vehemently gives her three vague and ludicrous signs that her prince charming will manifest. She notifies everything in her slum book. Along came a job offering for a cruise ship as a housekeeper, which without hesitation, she grabs due to financial problems. On her voyage, she willfully searches for the ‘destiny guy’ amongst the ship crew and passengers. Then she meets Paolo, (Dennis Trillo) a handsome mysterious guy that manifests two of the supposed signs. The last one - she will have to glance first at Paolo’s butt!

Let’s not kid ourselves; this film is made to entertain. It is evident with the director’s strides in technical excellence. With our country’s current financial instability, some people go to movie houses not to think, but to be amused and relaxed. But personally and in principle, I prefer thinking. On the contrary, an entertainment film such as I.T.A.L.Y. is rather a good form of diversion, a sort of stabilizer. I.T.A.L.Y. in consideration is smartly handled and its technical proficiency is enough reason to admire it. But I am daunted with the film’s appeal though. Even if I liked it, (I think the film is cute) there is a lesser audience as compared to most recent romcom flicks. Has it lost the hypnotic charisma it should possess and has somewhat transformed into a piece shameful trash an inevitability in formula films, hence the caustic indignation from most film critics. We want films to evolve, not to produce a static mold that the viewers will never be tired of. It does not exist. A movie must cater to the changing demography? Not quite. But I have something to say, Jolina Magdangal is in the industry for more than fifteen years. She has not yet shed off her virginal, uncorrupted, undefiled image.

Trillo has most of the dramatic sequences in the film and his acting is quite pleasing. He still manifests the matinee idol appeal expected from him. There is an undertoned love angle in the film between Rhian Ramos and Mark Herras. Ramos as Phoebe is inherently beautiful – she somewhat resembles the French actress Roxanne Mesquida. Herras fits his character well. The farce comedy element in the film relies heavily on pop culture parody and to some extent used slapstick for humorous effect. Eugene Domingo as Lovely and Rufa Mae Quinto as Stella excelled in this department. Their good command in shambles and travestry is not insulting even if it is nonsensical (on Stella’s part). As long as you like comedy, and you laughed your hearts out, their performance must be equally lauded for their precision. And yeah, I caught myself laughing for silly matters – forgive me.

I personally commend films which know a lot about film development. I.T.A.L.Y. is technically superior. It is diverse in musical scoring. The sound design is splendid (hardly ever seen dubbed parts). The story is unique with its proud demeanor in adopting farce comedy alongside the romantic overtones. Objectively speaking, the director Mark Reyes nailed it. But their main star, Magdangal, has her appeal diminished and was overshadowed by her contemporaries. She must rationalize the true essence of being an actress which involves higher risks. I sense that it is not mainly the producers or Magdangal’s manager that prevents her from developing roles in more robust direction, rather Jolina Magdangal alone. So, better watch out.


Charlie Koon's Rating:

Time to Teach

In her despair

How can I be cruel with this film? Even I had a hard time finding this little twitty creature in cinemas. Most of the theatres have stopped running the film reel after the first screening – the poor thing. Ay Ayeng is a film directed by Eduardo Palmos which he also wrote the screenplay in collaboration with Liza Lazaro. It was adopted from the novel “Maestra Ester” by Abdon Noviza. The mere presence of the film’s star Heart Evangelista might have helped redeem its flop status locally. Honestly, the film is not entirely a disappointment despite the fact that there is a perceptible limp of flaws in it.

The film premiered in Hawaii and gained a good reception among fellow Filipinos. Now with its screening in Manila, I’m lock, stock and barrel bemused with its promotion. Where are Heart’s solid fanatics? I interviewed the sales lady in the cinema asking her why it was panned out that early. Translated in English, she said: “Sir, no one watched, although the film was good. What's more, Heart was raped in the film!” She admitted having a glimpse of the film and liked it.

Karen (Sheena Joy) returns from Hawaii to her hometown in Mountain Province in the northern part of Luzon. She traces back her roots and wishes to meet her childhood friend Ayeng (Heart Evangelista). Consequently, Ayeng is compelled to comeback to the mountain due to lack of resources for her studies in the city. The entire village supports her dreams to become a teacher but with the arrival of the soldiers headed by Gallo (John Arcilla), the villagers are prohibited to send money. Ayeng is determined to render her acquired skills by teaching the children and women. But the soldiers are bothered with her whereabouts, provoking her to leave the mountain.

The film Ay Ayeng was adopted from a novel, which I may say is powerful in written form. Surely, the novel wants to expose social problems in a certain demography such as lack of education, land grabbing, military abuses and violence against women and children. But, the film had trouble translating the novel within film perspectives and boundaries. I am certain that this literary piece might be provocative at the time it was made. Exposing it decades later will not induce an effect that it fervently wants to convey. Is it just the timing? Although their issues might still exist in present date, but they are mostly tackled in television documentaries, having a higher likelihood of exposure amongst the public.

I admire Evangelista’s courage to play an offbeat character. Although she is conscious most of the time, part of it was dedicated on fixing her hair; still she manages to convince me she is indeed Ayeng. Her exotic eyes and filipina looking appeal may really pass for a mountain lass. She is indeed the star of this film. Jao Mapa as Sadek has minor scenes. Nevertheless, he effectively delivers the true nature of his character. Maria Isabel Lopez as Umay is likewise in her finest form to show her range as a trained actress. Sheena Joy might look awkward in the entire film, but she is supposed to be an outsider. Her first acting foray as Karen might not be her best, but at least, she might have made Fil-Ams in Hawaii laud her for her engagement in the film. But the other non-actors are a real pain in the ass. Most of the villagers are not motivated to act well. Which actually shows the importance of extra’s in the success of the film.

Ay Ayeng is provocative in its own little way. The film is bound to expose something more relevant and contemporary, but it had difficulty doing so. Perhaps it is us who might also not comprehend. In reality, we are bound to live in a land of futility. We are aware of problems that we strongly take no notice of. Ay Ayeng tries to raise people’s consciousness on social problems and to take pride of our Filipino identity. The film agrees that the film itself could not address the predicaments we Filipinos are mostly aware of. But with Ayeng's plight, I certainly understand.

Charlie Koon's Rating:

I.T.A.L.Y.

I.T.A.L.Y. (I Trust And Love You) is a romantic comedy film starring Jolina Magdangal, Dennis Trillo and Rufa Mae Quinto, produced and will be distributed by GMA Films.Directed by Mark Reyes, I.T.A.L.Y. will open in cinemas nationwide starting September 17, 2008.

Ay Ayeng

Ay Ayeng is a film which tackles the indigenous life of the Ifugaos in the hinterlands of Mountain Province starring Heart Evangelista.
According to Eduardo Palmos, the director of the movie, the story of "Ay Ayeng" was inspired by the life of Macli-ing Dulag, a tribal leader during the Marcos dictatorship who fought against the destruction of Chico Dam.

Ay Ayeng is shown in theatres starting September 10, 2008.

ShowBiz Nest: Heart Evangelista's Movie "Ay, Ayeng"