Lola (Brillante Mendoza)

Anita Linda as Lola Sepa.

Just when I thought that Brillante Mendoza will not get out of his trend of sexual and disturbingly putrid depictions of the modern downsides of Philippine society, here he comes bringing "Lola", a painful, yet at times comic, observation of two striving grandmothers on opposite sides of a situation (one whose grandson is the victim and the other, the suspect) trying to cope up with the tragic trails, including financial shortcomings, brought forth by an uneasy crime. Anita Linda and Rustica Carpio, both past their physical primes, may have just given their more-than-impressive swan songs. Director Mendoza, who is not that much known on squeezing out pure performances from his actors/actresses (as his characters usually just blend in into the realistic palette of the surroundings), handled may be the two most astounding ones from aged performers.

In some ways, it's almost a miraculous feat on his part (and cinematographer Odyssey Flores) in terms of enhancing Anita Linda and Rustica Carpio's natural and honest evocation of suppressed sufferings and prolonged sacrifices as impoverished grandparents through a panoramic view of the present social state of those inflicted with destitution. But the real highlight is of course from the two brave, nagging, and at times, swindling heroines who will do just about anything not just to resolve their numerous woes, mostly involving money, but also to unconsciously prove their 'worth'. Throughout the film, as the camera follows them both, we see them express stern authority to younger people, ask for directions and assistance like one, and show extreme determination like middle-aged fellows.

They embody the three stages of life based on the entirety of their characteristics. Their bodies show the tweaks of aging, but when, as they say, push comes to shove, their minds does not.

But in one specific sequence that is arguably the most resonant in the film, our protagonists engage in a very subtle, open and realistic conversation about the simple realities of old age. Many times, I have overheard old people talking. No, they do not talk about transcendent and elegiac things such as existence and life affirmations. Instead, they talk about the most trivial of things such as aching bodies, rheumatism and efficascent oils.

Brillante Mendoza captured the sequence with lightness and sheer minimalism. Amid the laborious small journeys here and there, this scene is their break. They do not reflect upon paradoxical things about their hardships but merely talk with a sense of common likeness. Although being the opposites in a tragedy, they share the beauty of human 'connection'.

At times visually and thematically similar with Nagisa Oshima (based especially on his explicitly unrelenting "Serbis" and "Kinatay"), Brillante Mendoza departed from the comparison to simply tell a poignant story. And what makes "Lola" even more fascinating albeit at times being emotionally painful is its underlying tenderness that treats these aged heroines of life not as urban sufferers but as rare triumphants.

Mendoza has already channeled the polarizing alternatives of cinema, but with "Lola", he may have glanced on some of De Sica and Ozu's brushstrokes and created an absorbing and empathetic film about human struggles and tribulations. Anita Linda and Rustica Carpio's performances made it all the more affecting.

FINAL RATING

Serbis (Brillante Mendoza)

Familial reality amidst immorality.

Film Review Archive (date seen: December 12, 2010)

I have to say that Brillante Mendoza’s “Serbis” is slightly better than his more renowned (and at the same time, denounced) “Kinatay”. In some ways, “Serbis’” cinematography, acting, and subplots were the collective product of what could be Brillante’s personal vision of Philippine society and familial relations that has been distributed rationally to his other earlier films: “Tirador’s” biting humor, “Kaleldo’s” character interactions and mild sepia cinematography, the escalating darkness that his later film “Kinatay” has embarked on, and even “Masahista’s” literal sexuality.

The ensemble cast was also very impressive in their uncanny degree of suppressing any screen inhibitions, be it about showing their skin, or acting as a credible, functioning family while immersing themselves into the decaying backdrop of a filthy ‘bold’ theater. It was almost unbelievable for the whole cast to pull off such a film without going as far as the extremities Nagisa Oshima has reached and the cost of what cinematic taboo he had broken to show a sociopolitical allegory. Brillante Mendoza has also able to incorporate his usual fascination of religious traditions; imageries that might have been inserted just for the sake of it, or can also be visual antidotes to the sinful displays on his films.

Notable performances were by Gina Pareno as the theater-inhabiting family’s matriarch, and Julio Diaz as the awkwardly unknowing husband of Nayda (played by Jaclyn Jose). It’s just refreshing to see a film that has brought a pitiful place such as a decaying ‘bomba’ moviehouse into cinematic life (a place whose only common attribution is to “Imbestigador”), put it in the center of a neorealist drama, and let its pathetic and dissident inhabitants dwell on the establishment’s sleazy imperfections; an uncanny likeness to their own lives indeed.

FINAL RATING

Rosario (2010, Alberto P. Martinez)

Jennyln Mercado as the titular character.

I must admit that prior to seeing "Rosario", the last MMFF entry I've watched was "Lastikman" way back in 2002. Even though there wasn't much to catch up with this film festival (an annual Shake Rattle and Roll? Vic Sotto making those fantasy films with virtually the same tired jokes? Come on), "Rosario", by all means, must be seen by every Filipino moviegoers, critical or just plain escapists alike. The masterful cinematography was very crisp, capturing all the necessary colors and heightening them to create an almost "Amelie-esque" transformation (remember those Parisian streets oozing with vibrant hues?) of the 20's.

I do not know what's the basis of the said film festival for picking nominees, or maybe they were just too engrossed by the family-oriented Ai-Ai de las Alas starrer that they considered the immoral undertones of "Rosario" an immediate condemnation that may have led to its snobbery. And do not even get me started about Jennyln Mercado's performance that suffered the same fate. Really? Marian Rivera preferably nominated in a gay lingo-infested remake of a cheesy 80's comedy over Jennylyn's? Laughable. "Rosario" had its share of flaws, of course, such as Philip Salvador's pointed, obviously glued mustache, that jumping forearm attack (!) by Sid Lucero (great performance, nonetheless), and the unemotional, almost hollow appearance of the film's producer (and the man behind the story that eventually evolved into this feature film), businessman and Studio 5 head honcho Manny Pangilinan. They really should have gotten an actor instead.

I always remember how Bong Revilla's films (such as his CGI-driven reboot of "Panday") always boasts of its special effects being world class and all as if desperately playing a one-sided 'catch-up' game with Hollywood (yes, that's the mainstream Filipino film industry's constant, unabashed goal). "Rosario" need not any of those, and though it had its share of CGI, does not need any verbal proof of its technical sophistication. Because after all, "Rosario" is indeed a great film all on its own. No wonder why director Albert Martinez is quite calm and silent. Through the artifice of awards nights, the subsequent craze for the winners and beyond the snobbery, he is fully aware of his film's quality, and he is quite secure.

(Note: Many said that Dolphy's award-winning performance in this film was more of a pitiful final honor to his legacy than a genuinely deserved award. Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I really do think it's the latter.)

FINAL RATING