167

Philippine Movies in 2001:

The Film Industry Is Dead!
Long Live Philippine Cinema!
Clodualdo del Mundo, Jr.

The Philippine movie industry has been reported dying for several
decades now. It was reported dead in the 1960s with the advent of fly-by-night
companies and the proliferation of sex movies called bomba in 1970. It
died again, according to reports, in the 1990s with the reincarnation of bomba
into bold movies and the rising competition of humongous Hollywood high-concept
movies. Today, it is dying still. The signal that the death pangs are
serious is that the production output of the industry has dwindled somewhat
from 129 in 1995 to 89 in 2001. By Asian standards, that number is still big; but,
by local standards, it is reason for concern. What does the death of the
industry have to do with our national cinema? If the industry dies, is it not
merely a failure of the commercial system? Is there a connection between the
commercial system and the development of our national cinema? How do
developments in the film scene in 2001 shed light to these questions?

The Issue of Freedom of Expression

History repeats itself. In the first quarter of 2001, the censorship row
which raged in 2000 with the film Sutla (Silk) reared its ugly head again with
the case of Live Show, a film by Jose Javier Reyes that deals with the lives of
toreros or sex performers. The new administration of President Gloria
Macapagal, pressured by Cardinal Sin and other religious leaders, wanted the
MTRCB (Movie and Television Review and Classification Board) to recall the
film from further exhibition. Nicanor Tiongson, the new appointee who had
not even warmed his seat as chair of the MTRCB, refused to rescind the
permit as it was supposed to be effective for five years (Live Show received a
Restricted rating the previous year after the second review of the MTRCB
panel during Armida Siguion-Reyna's tenure). The controversy divided the
film industry. The DGPI (Directors Guild of the Philippines), composed of
leading directors in the field, resigned as a group from the Film Academy,
citing that it could not be part of a quasi-government institution. Later, a
group of DGPI members (Marilou Diaz-Abaya, Laurice Guillen, et al.) bolted
from the group itself. Marilou Diaz-Abaya, who released a position paper
titled "Sex Every Ten Minutes," decried the lack of debate on the issue of
responsibility that should go hand in hand with such freedom of expression
and exposed the seedy underside of the bold movie industry. Laurice Guillen,

Asian Cinema, Spring/Summer 2003

 168

on the other hand, decided to disassociate herself from a group whose action
for freedom of expression, she believed, was a veiled affront against the Church.
She further argued for films that would not only expose the realities of life but
uplift the human spirit as well. Meanwhile, anti-censorship groups used the
case of Live Show as another instance of the repression of the filmmakers'
freedom of expression.
In all this controversy, one culprit had remained scot free -- the commercial
system itself. The anti-censorship groups, in my view, were barking at the
wrong tree. The DGPI should have exposed the commercialism of the industry
as the primary obstacle to freedom of expression. We have a fairly good idea
how this commercial system works. The producer/financier embarks on a film
project primarily to make money. A bold, cheap starlet is groomed to be a star.
A screenplay is made to order to exploit the body of the starlet and to make it
possible to manufacture the film within a low budget. The filmmakers who
have the talent to deliver the film in the can within the allowable schedule and
budget are hired. Filmmaking is done in the service of the commercial system.
The filmmakers compromise their talent and their art. Where is freedom of
expression there?

Three Areas of Filmmaking

It is instructive to distinguish different areas of filmmaking in the country.

From the center of the mainstream to the outside world of independent films,
there are various spaces of filmmaking. But let me just cite three general areas:
(a) the center of mainstream, (b) the outskirts or periphery of the mainstream,
and (c) the area farther away from the mainstream, the space for independent
filmmaking. The commercial industry congregates at the center of the
mainstream. In this area, film is a commodity. Film companies make movies to
make money. Filmmakers are artisans-for-hire. Because film is a commodity, it
is produced to follow certain conventions that have been tested in the market,
e.g. standardized film language; conventional patterns of storytelling; primacy
of genre or box-office trends; and, primacy of star appeal. Many of the films in
2001 were produced at the center-- bold movies, like Kangkong, Balahibong
Pusa, Malikot, Virgin Wife, Sa Iyong Haplos, Ika-7 Glorya, Live Show, Uhaw
sa Init, Di Mapigil ang Init, Red Diaries, Pukyutan, Naked Nights, Tikim,
Hayop sa Sex Appeal, Rosario 18; sex comedies, like Booba, Tusong Twosome,
Torotot, Banyo Queen', action movies, like Hindi Sisiw ang Kalaban Mo,
Duwag Lang ang Sumusuko, Bala Ko Bahala sa 'Yo, Total Aikido, Panabla,
Kaaway Hanggang Hukay, Maderazo, Uubusin Ko ang Bala, Oras na para
Lumaban, Buhay Kamao, Parehas ang Laban, Dudurugin Ko Pati Buto Mo,
Aagos ang Dugo; teen movies, like Narinig Mo na Ba ang L8test?, Luv Text,
Cool Dudes, Ano Bang Meron Ka? One thing that can be said about these

Asian Cinema, Spring/Summer 2003

 169

movies from the center is that they are utterly predictable. They are products
of trends and genres that seem to appeal to the industry's intended audience.
At the outskirt of the mainstream, along the periphery, are certain
productions that have ambitions of creating something greater than making
movies that would make money. These movies with ambition are produced
either by the major mainstream companies or some ambitious independent
groups. For the year 2001, the films on the edge of the mainstream were
produced by the established major companies, e.g. Viva Films' Abakada...
Ina, Radyo, Dos Eki, and Tatarin; Star Cinema's Mila, La Vida Rosa, and
Bagong Buwan; and Regal's Minsan May Isang Puso, and Yamashita: The
Tiger s Treasure. In this area of filmmaking, the producing companies use the
structures of the mainstream, e.g. the actors (the stars, even), the production
facilities, and the marketing network; but, the filmmakers are given more leeway
in their choice of subject. In Abakada... Ina (ABC... Mom), Eddie Garcia gets
to deal with the issue of illiteracy; in Mila, Joel Lamangan dramatizes the sorry
plight of teachers; in Bagong Buwan (New Moon), Marilou Diaz-Abaya
confronts the life-long Mindanao issue and focuses on the mothers and
children and other civilians who are caught in the crossfire. In most cases, the
filmmaker is also given some leeway as far as budget is concerned -- for
example, Yamashita: The Tiger s Treasure is not the usual cheap Regal movie.
The films along the periphery still aim to make good in the box-office; thus,
Tatarin, based on Nick Joaquin's short story turned into a play, Summer
Solstice, positions itself under the bold genre; Dos Ekis (Two X's) explodes
with violence that can rival any action movie; La Vida Rosa is a cross between
the bold and action genres; Minsan May Isang Puso (Once There Was a
Heart) plays out a controlled melodrama; Radyo (Radio) is basically a thriller.
The films along the periphery radiate the aura of art or, at least, of serious
work, but they do not necessarily negate the attraction of commerce.
Totally outside the mainstream are independent works that consider film
not as a commodity, but as art. Making money is not the aim of film production
in this not quite deserted area. Filmmakers consider film as their medium of art
or communication that can relate their ideas, stories, and emotions. The
filmmaker is mainly concerned with creating his/her film. The film may not be
made for a particular audience, but it is expected to find its audience. Examples
of films that were nurtured in this area are Raymond Red's Anino (Shadows,
1999), Mike de Leon's Bayaning 3rd World (Third World Hero, 2000), and
Kidlat Tahimik's various films and videos. In 2001, Mes de Guzman, a graphics
designer who received a grant from the NCCA (National Commission for
Culture and the Arts) to do a short film, made Batang Trapo, a view of street
kids making a livelihood selling trapo (rags) and wiping windshields of vehicles
caught in traffic. The documentary quality of the film adds to its emotional
impact. Rica Arevalo, an independent filmmaker and screenwriter, also received

Asian Cinema, Spring/Summer 2003

 170
a grant from the NCCA to do her film about streetkids, Batang Maynila (Manila
Kid). The short film stars actual street kids and explores a world of exploitation
and crime. A longer film that became an event during the 2001 Cinemanila
International Film Festival is Lav Diaz's five-hour opus, Batang West Side
(West Side Kid). The sheer idea of making a five-hour movie is unthinkable at
the center or even along the periphery of the mainstream. Batang West Side
could only have been possible outside the mainstream, in the freer space of
independent films. Produced by Tony Veloria, Batang West Side moves from
an investigation into the death of a young Filipino on West Side, New Jersey,
to an investigation of a Pinoy subculture addicted to drugs, particularly shabu,
to a closer look into the angst of the Filipino as dramatized in the story of the
investigator.

Developing Our National Cinema

In my view, the development of a truly Philippine national cinema has a

greater probability of happening outside the mainstream. Indeed, contributions
toward this development can also come from the periphery of the mainstream.
The center of the mainstream as a source of sustenance, however, is utterly
dry as far as our national cinema is concerned. I think the industry should be
left alone if it wants to wallow in cheap bold films, in disgraceful sex comedies,
in intellectually-challenged adventure movies, and in irrational melodramas.
The industry can die by its choices. Most probably, it will not die because the
industry will always have its kind of audience. But, when we talk of a Philippine
national cinema that we Filipinos can be proud of, a cinema that will give us
opportunities to hear the voices and see images of the Filipino, then we can
only depend on films along the periphery of the mainstream and, definitely,
outside the mainstream.
In 2001, for example, the more rewarding films were done on the periphery
(e.g. Abakada...Ina, Minsan May Isang Puso, Mila, Radyo, La Vida Rosa,
Dos Ekis, Yamashita: The Tigers Treasure, Tatarin, Hubog (Shape), and
BagongBuwan), and the promise of an exciting cinema comes from the outside
(e.g. Batang West Side). I should add that the more exciting films come from
the younger filmmakers, like Yam Laranas of Radyo, Erik Matti of Dos Ekis,
and Lav Diaz of Batang West Side. Jeffrey Jeturian belongs to this group, but
his latest film Tuhog (Larger than Life) was premiered in 2000. The "older"
filmmakers are quite predictable, at least the "older" filmmakers who made
films in 2001. Their steps are exactly measured to create an effect, to produce
images with artistic flourish, to communicate a specific message with impact.
Marilou Diaz Abaya in Bagong Buwan, Joel Lamangan in Mila and Hubog,
Chito Rono in La Vida Rosa and Yamashita -- these are works of measured
creativity. The films are polished, as can be expected from filmmakers of their

Asian Cinema, Spring/Summer 2003

 171

stature; the results are well calculated that there is no longer any space for
surprise. The works of the younger directors are rougher -- not necessarily in
a technical sense -- but, in the sense of daring. Yam Laranas makes Radyo
exciting with his frenetic visualization. Erik Matti makes Dos Ekis gripping
with his jolting images, sounds, and editing. Among this younger group, Lav
Diaz seems to be the most ambitious, situating his dramas within the vast
panorama of the country's story. The connection of the story of the Fil-Am
kids on the block and their subculture that lives and dies on shabu to the
personal angst of the investigator may be quite tenuous, but the telling of the
stories is quite gripping. The film may be flawed in terms of technique. The
narrative can certainly be more economical and some lines of dialogue, less
pedantic; but, the breadth and honesty of the story are staggering. Lav Diaz
is certainly arrogant (how else could a young filmmaker like him do a five-hour
film?); however, the arrogance has produced a rough gem -- but a gem,
nonetheless. These productions of the "younger" filmmakers are possible
only on the periphery of the mainstream and definitely outside the mainstream.
The farther the filmmaker situates himself from the center of the mainstream,
the freer he/she becomes from the constraints of the commercial system.
The exciting news about all this is that there are more and more
independent films (and videos) in the open space outside the mainstream.
More independent films are being done than may be apparent. The Pelikula at
Lipunan Festival (Film and Society Festival) in 2001 featured some regional
videos, particularly from the Visayas, the Ilonggo films and videos. The CCP
has sponsored filmless films, Digital Sunsets by the Bay, on the grounds of
the Manila Film Center. Short films and videos -- short stories, animation, and
experimental works -- continue to be made in various places. Independent
filmmakers in Metro Manila may be more noticeable, but filmmakers can be
found from the far north of the country to the south. Kidlat Tahimik himself
aims to propagate video making by teaching the villagers of Hapao in
Hungduan, Ifugao, Mountain Province, how to use the video camera. Peque
Gallaga has virtually retired from filmmaking and teaches at La Salle Bacolod,
in the Visayas.
We can also look at Filipino independent filmmaking outside the country,
particularly in the United States. Francisco Aliwalas, a Filipino-American
independent filmmaker, made a full-length coming-of-age film that faces the
issue of identity squarely and destroys some common stereotypes. Vicente
Nebrida, based in New York, wrote the screenplay Magic Adobo which was
picked up by Tony Gloria of Unitel and Charo Santos of Star Cinema and ABS-CBN
International, and was eventually produced and released as American
Adobo (2001-2002). The film, starring major Filipino actors (Christopher de
Leon, Dina Bonnevie, Cherry Pie Picache, and Ricky Davao) and Fil-Am actors
(led by Paolo Montalban), focuses on the disparate lives of a group of friends

Asian Cinema, Spring/Summer 2003

 172

who are united by adobo, love, and respect. Other feature films have been
made by Fil-Ams--RodPulido's The Flip Side, Cyril Lorenzana's Kamo, and
Gene Cajayon's Famil0y Debut, which stars Eddie Garcia, Tirso Cruz III, and
Gina Alajar. More films and videos have been done by Fil-Am groups like the
63 Collective and the eksperim[E]nto Film and Video Festival. While most of
their works are short films and videos, these filmmakers are starting to do full-
length movies. In 2001, Maria Teresa Jamias and Paul Yap Morales directed
Karga Mano (Full Stop), with screenplay by Nicholas Pichay.
If not story films, independent filmmakers are doing documentaries.
Michael Gil Magnaye, a Fil-Am based in San Francisco, has finished a cut of
Good Morning, Mrs. Kelly!, a documentary film about the Thomasites, the
first American teachers who came to the Philippines. Sari Lluch Dalena, in
collaboration with Camilla Benolirao Griggers, made Memories of a Forgotten
War, a documentary on the Filipino-American War of 1899. Of course, the
documentary is very much alive in the country. Ditsi Carolino, who is finishing
her one-year study grant at the National Film and Television School in London,
finished Salome in 2001. Another collaboration with Nana Buxani, Salome
delves into the issue of spousal abuse. The telling of the battered wife's story
brings Carolino closer to the strategies of the fictional narrative. Kidlat de
Guia, the eldest son of Kidlat Tahimik, made a documentary for the Discovery
Channel as a grantee of First Time Filmmakers in Asia. More documentaries
have been made and are being made in various colleges and universities, in
the open spaces outside the mainstream.

Developing Our Audiences

Along with nurturing filmmaking outside the mainstream, we have to

look at developing the Filipino movie audiences. The film industry caters to a
specific audience. Judging from the movies that it consistently produces, it
seems that the industry serves the male crowd that patronizes action-adventure
movies and/or bold movies, and the young fans that enjoy the teen films. But
there are other audiences that are neglected by the industry, namely children,
professionals, and cinephiles. It is very seldom that a legitimate children's film
is done by the industry. The comedy films that come from the industry are
mostly sex comedies or comedies with a dose of violence and sex. To address
this problem, the 2000-2001 scriptwriting contest of the Film Development
Foundation of the Philippines focused on screenplays for children's films.
The question, of course, is whether there are producers who would pick up
the winning screenplays.
The professionals or the more educated members of the community are
not addressed by the industry either. These are the audiences that the industry
loses to the foreign movies. Perhaps, in the industry's estimation, these

Asian Cinema, Spring/Summer 2003

 173

audiences are either not large enough to warrant any film production or their
tastes are not satisfied by the industry's products.
One group that is growing fast is the film enthusiasts, the cinephiles or
the film buffs. These cinephiles are the ones that flock to the Shangri-la Plaza
or the various venues of film festivals sponsored by foreign embassies and
agencies. There are enough of these festivals to keep the diehard cinephile
busy -- the annual Cine Europa, in which various European countries
participate, the regular screenings at the Instituto Cervantes, the annual French
Film Festival, the German Film Week, the Japanese Eiga Sai. In addition, last
year there were public screenings of the Animated Films from the Netherlands,
the silhouette films by Lotte Reiniger sponsored by the Goethe Institut, the
Contemporary Films from the United Kingdom, selected films from the New
York University International Student Film Festival, and the China Film Week.
The Titus Brandsma Center in Quezon City screens classic and contemporary
foreign films weekly.
Aside from foreign film festivals, the NCCA and the CCP sponsor various
events, e.g. the First Seattle Filipino International Film and Video Festival;
Filmless Films, a showcase of digital movies; Sinehan sa Baluarte where the
classics of Philippine cinema were shown at the Baluarte de Sta. Barbara in
Fort Santiago. The UP Film Center adds to its regular screenings the annual
International Women's Film Festival and other events.
Alternatives to the commercial Metro-Manila Film Festival are the annual
Pelikula at Lipunan which showcases noteworthy feature films and independent
works, and the Cinemanila International Film Festival, an annual event that
promises to be a showcase of international films in general, and of Asian films
in particular. Independent films are the focus of the annual Gawad CCP para sa
Alternatibong Pelikula at Video (Cultural Center of the Philippines Awards for
Alternative Film and Video) which is now in its fifteenth year. An alternative
venue for independent films and videos has opened in Malate. Named the
Cinema Matina, it screens full-length independent works at least once a week.
The growing audiences of these foreign film festivals and alternative film
events signal that the Filipino movie-going public is not a monolithic entity.
Time will tell when these audiences can grow to dominate the movie-going
scene and influence the production of mainstream Philippine cinema.

Conclusion

The issue of censorship is not going to go away. Although the review

and classification board classifies (and does not censor) according to what
the members deem as the appropriate audience for each film, there is a category
X that is tantamount to censorship. Moreover, censorship happens indirectly.
The board may not do the actual cutting, but a production company that

Asian Cinema, Spring/Summer 2003

 174

wants a film approved for General Patronage, rather than Restricted, may
voluntarily cut out the questionable parts.
Moreover, it should be noted that censorship (or no censorship) has
nothing to do with the quality of films the industry produces. The industry
will always follow the dictates of commerce. If it fails, then it fails by its
choices.
National cinema will develop despite the movie industry. This
development will never happen at the center of the mainstream. We have to
move farther away from the center towards the periphery and, yes, outside the
mainstream where filmmakers can be freer. Furthermore, we should attract
audiences to this space where our national cinema can truly prosper.

Clodualdo del Mundo, Jr. has been a longtime faculty member at De La Salle
University, a scriptwriter for a number of important Filipino directors, and au­
thor of books on Philippine cinema.

Asian Cinema, Spring/Summer 2003