This previously unpublished entry, a portion
written in 2006, is filmmaker Erik Matti’s current opinion of the Cinemalaya
Independent Film Festival. The Cinemalaya is now at the center of controversy,
after its board disqualified filmmaker Emerson Reyes during the production of
his film “MNL 143.” Reyes claims the disqualification was due to his refusal to
put name stars in his roster of actors. –Rappler
***
I
am bothered by the grumblings I hear around the indie film scene about the
forthcoming Cinemalaya.
To
some, these grumblings may seem very petty.
But when you put all these petty little grunts, sighs and whimpers
together it amounts to a really gaseous, guttural and booming burp.
It
does not paint a good picture of the festival, at all.
Uggh…Festival
committee meets with the 15 finalists and gives them suggestions on how to improve
the script for it to be considered in the top 10.
Aahrggh…Festival
committee asks participants to try and avoid using indie favorites Ronnie
Lazaro and Pen Medina.
Uumph…Festival
committee wants the filmmakers to use named, established stars in their films
as much as possible.
Ihnakhuup…Do
a full-length film script but within 50 sequences and not more than 60 pages.
Waaah…Change
Jet Pangan as the lead actor because he does not know how to act.
Cinemalaya
can run their festival however they want to.
Who am I to complain about it?
After all, it’s them who’s giving out five million pesos and risking it
to independent filmmakers.
Cinemalaya
even made 2005 an interesting year for movies with such noteworthy films like
“Maximo”, “Bigtime”, “Sarong Banggi”, “Baryoke” and “Pepot Artista”.
When
mainstream producers weren’t doing anything to bring fresh and exciting works
in the theaters, Cinemalaya gambled on these “indie filmmakers to bring new
cinema” to the ailing Philippine film industry.
So
why should I complain? Why shoot down a
worthy endeavor with petty misgivings?
For all we know, all these nitpickings may even be the festival
committee’s way of improving last year’s Cinemalaya.
***
Awards
in film festivals all over the world are based primarily on the finished film,
and not the written script. If it were a
literary contest like the Carlos Palanca Annual Writing Competition, then the
screenplay on paper can be considered, as it is a judgment of the literary
voice. But with regards to film
festivals, the judging should be the medium of film, how the filmmaker tells
the story, because in the end, it is the cinematic voice that is judged and not
the words written on paper.
I
don’t really know if the mechanics of Cinemalaya were based on the Metro Manila
Film Festival (MMFF) or the now defunct Experimental Cinema of the Philippines
(ECP). But using the screenplay as a deciding factor to a half a million seed
grant to produce a film leaves the festival open to a lot of problems once the
film on paper is interpreted for the big screen.
This
is where trouble begins.
Isn’t
there a lesson to be learned in the way the MMFF conducts its yearly
festivals? Let’s say, hypothetically,
that the scripts approved by the MMFF committee are of high standard. Why do we
keep seeing a multitude of mediocre films come showcase in December? MMFF could
not blame “Lapu Lapu” or “Terrorist Hunters” for being bad films, because the
mechanics of the MMFF itself gave room for these movies to be bad films.
ECP
also started with a competition based on the screenplay, and the festival
eventually produced the classic “Oro, Plata, Mata.” Lucky them that the film was a masterpiece,
because it could have been a really bad movie in the hands of an inept
filmmaker.
Filmmaking
is not about the written page. It never has been and never will be. The screenplay is the foundation, yes, but it
is not yet the film. It’s a big leap
from the script up to the finished film.
Now,
if the organizers want to hold the competition using only the scripts as basis
for the grant, then they should stand by their competition and be ready either
to get a classic like “Misteryo Sa Tuwa” or a bomber like “Ang Alamat Ng
Lawin.”
A
lot of films get grants using scripts or just storylines. That’s how Lav Diaz
got his funding for “Heremias.” But it
also comes with reputation. A pitch from Lav Diaz gives the grantor an idea
what kind of movie he’s going to get, because of the string of movies Lav has
under his belt.
MMFF
claims to use the system, but a script is not enough to get you into the
festival. To be noticed, the script has to have a well-known director, a big
star and a major studio, not to mention commercial viability. If it’s by Joel
Lamangan, then it must be good. More so
if it’s a Joel Lamangan movie starring Maricel Soriano and backed by Regal
Films. Or a Tony Y. Reyes flick starring
Vic Sotto and backed by M-Zet.
That
system is somewhat feasible, because beyond the script, there is the track
record of either the director, the star or the studio to back it up. But even that does not assure the MMFF
organizers or foreign producers a good film in the end.
This
is not the case for Cinemalaya. The competition is built on giving a break to a
budding filmmaker who has good material for a movie. The competition has only the script for a
basis, and maybe a short film or two by the applicant filmmaker. But there is no track record, or the promise
of a big star attached to the project, or a big studio’s financial
backing—except maybe the retirement savings of the filmmaker’s parents.
Cinemalaya
hinges its selection solely on the basis of the screenplay.
***
Cinemang
Malaya. The Philippine Independent Film Festival.
“In the
spirit of independent expression, the Cinemalaya
Awards
seeks to discover, encourage and honor the
cinematic
works of Filipino filmmakers that boldly
articulate
and freely interpret the Filipino experience
with
fresh insight and artistic integrity.”
Such
vision. Such noble intentions. Such bold labels. It takes a lot of conviction to stand by
those ideals. Independent expression. Freely
interpret. Artistic integrity.
It
is with that vision that brought me lining up to CCP last year to watch the
entries of Cinemalaya. It was an
invigorating feeling to see that the entries were highly anticipated. Clearly, there is a hunger for movies other
than what we usually have in the mainstream cinemas. And above all that, there is definitely an
honest and sincere support for the filmmakers trying their first hand at
moviemaking. There is no doubt a strong
feeling of a community coming together sharing their love for films.
It
is with that vision of Cinemalaya that colleagues in the industry flocked in
the theaters each night to witness the birth of a baby brother or a
sister. The aura in those festival
nights were different from movie premieres of major studios. The spirit of family was present. The participants and the filmmakers, even the
audience themselves, had a general feeling of ownership and of claim on the
movies unfolding before them.
The
event was so successful in achieving its vision that I even almost forgot the
real reason why the festival was put up in the first place.
Dream
TV/ABC 5 lacks content for movies. When
all is said and done, it still boils down to economics. What Regal Films and Viva Entertainment are
to ABS-CBN is what Cinemalaya is to Dream TV/ABC 5. Instead of Dream TV/ABC 5 buying movies for
their network at 2 million to 3 million (depending on the star of the movie)
from producers, they staged a film festival for ten movies amounting to just 5
million. Aside from saving 15 to 25
million pesos, they also get 10 movies instantly in just a year’s time.
Of
course, there is nothing wrong with their intentions. The business side of the festival has nothing
to do with its grand plan of giving opportunities to aspiring filmmakers. If one can marry lofty intentions with making
money, as long as they stand by the vision they started with, then good for
them.
------------------------------------
As
long as they stand by the vision they started with.
A
S L O N G A S
T H E Y S T A N D B Y
T H E V I
S I O N T H E Y S T A R T E D
W I T H.
But
the question is, what vision does Cinemalaya stand for? Do they know what vision they are really
trying to pursue? Is it “…to discover,
encourage and honor the cinematic works of Filipino filmmakers that boldly
articulate and freely interpret the Filipino experience with fresh insight and
artistic integrity” or to fill-up
movie programming for a TV/Cable network?
If the
vision of Cinemalaya is one of artistic pursuits as was initiated last year and
as stated in its mission vision, I don’t see any reason why there is a demand
for named stars, a suggestion of how to revise the script, a fixed number of
pages and sequences or having Ricky Davao in lieu of Jet Pangan.
That’s
why there are all these grumblings.
The
competition promised independent expression, artistic integrity and freedom in
interpretation. Certainly, people who
want to join would expect that. There
was a precedent. Last year was a
success. Why can’t it be like that now?
Maybe
Cinemalaya is thinking that, “Yes, last year was a success but…hmmm…the other
films were too rough…aah…they’re too long…I keep seeing Ronnie
Lazaro…uuhh…”. But that’s the risk you
have to take when the competition for filmmaking is judged from the script. Much as some gems will stand out of the pack,
there will also be some that will hide in the shadows.
I
once read Isagani Cruz discussing how he judges the writing submitted to
Palanca. He said that he starts reading
the first page. Any wrong grammar or
spelling gets thrown out immediately.
Now, after the first page, if the writing arouses his interest whether
by the subject or by a character, he continues.
We may not always agree with the choices of Palanca for its winners but
all these years they have managed to maintain their integrity as the most
prestigious award-giving private foundation.
Precisely because if the writing does not cut it, the judges throw them
out. It's as simple as good writing or
bad writing. No revisions, no
suggestions. "We like your premise
but there is a problem with the structure." Again, we go back to the vision. How sincere and honest the intentions
are. Is it really to help out budding
filmmakers or is it really a mini-studio disguised as a foundation?
My
dark, evil soul lurking within me keeps setting aside the idea that Cinemalaya
might actually be exploitative. That in
the guise of independent cinema, artistic freedom and a measly seed money, it
lures aspiring filmmakers to a shot at bringing their heart and soul to the big
screen when in all intents and purposes, the work is really a cost-efficient
way of filling up the late night movie slots on the boob tube.
Cinema
One Originals has a much honest structure to it. We give you a grant, do whatever you want
with our approval and we own your movie for ABS-CBN. No lofty ideas, no Oprah-esque slogans. We'll give you the money to do something for
us because we will use it for our channel.
Simple.
If,
in the first place, Cinemalaya announced that they'll be doing this independent
film festival for their network and that Laurice is the mini-Malou Santos or
Mother Lily and Robbie is their little Olive Lamasan or Roselle Monteverde,
then everyone who will want to join knows what they're really getting into.
And
the terrifying part of it is that Cinemalaya is partnered with the Cultural
Center of the Philippines, the same government agency that's supposed to look
after cultivating the arts and the artist.
And to be part of such an exploitation with no conscience or shame or
accountability is downright disgusting.
The arts have been corrupted just like road buildings and pork barrels.
***
Using
the clear and present weakness of a prey, the predator strikes.
The
lack of opportunity for these filmmakers provided the opportunity for
Cinemalaya to use these filmmakers to their advantage. It provided a way for these so-called patrons
of film to start acting like the big studio producers they all hated in the
first place.
Have
we shed all traces of integrity and principle in exchange for economic survival
and fame? Have we gotten used to eating
shit in this country that we don't really mind becoming shit-eaters? We have screening committee members that have
participated in allowing these things to happen, respected filmmakers who will
not allow to be forced themselves to make changes in their work but are being
used as instruments for Cinemalaya to achieve their tarnished and dubious
goals. It's sad.
The
mainstream game, no matter how much we sometimes want to change it, is what it
is. It's either you want to play with it
or get out. But to claim something like
Cinemalaya as a venue to allow artists to freely express their ideas and with
the government taking part of it, when it is actually not what it claims to be,
is rather alarming.
But
in a country of subservience, in a country where call centers are where our
children end up after college, who am I to rock the boat?
For
the hungry filmmakers, they may say, the measly crumbs these messiahs of the arts
extend to them is already a blessing.
That's bull!
***
I
wrote this in 2006 after I heard that Mike Sandejas was having difficulties
with the casting of his film. Mike had to defend casting of his lead actor Jet
Pangan in his movie "Tulad Ng Dati.” In order to prove that Jet was an
able actor, Sandejas had to bring Jet to CCP and present him in a workshop for the approval of
board member Laurice Guillen and Cinemalaya Monitoring Head Robbie Tan.
I
had to go back to all my other files to find this unfinished
article/ranting. I wanted to send this
to a broadsheet, but when I asked friends to read it, they told me it was too
angry and might just "Jerry Macguire" me from the industry.
In
short, sabi nila, "Suicide 'tong sulat na 'to, chong!"
I
found the unfinished article over the weekend and saw that what I wrote in 2006
exactly still has the same frustrated angst as the <one I posted in Facebook over a week ago.> I deleted the names
of some screening committee members out of respect for these people, thinking
they may have been blinded by some sort of loyalty during the time. Also, I was referring to Dream TV/ABC 5 here
when it was still owned by Tony Boy Cojuangco and does not refer to the ABC 5
with the present ownership.
And
to think that this was written only on the 2nd year of Cinemalaya. Who would think that a festival that since
has become recognized worldwide could still carry such a stench?
Since
then, after a couple of phone calls and a bit of journalistic research, I found
out that beyond the Jet Pangan issue, so many other irregularities happened
every year until the last edition.
“Endo”
directors like Jade Castro was "suggested" a co-director (Mario
Cornejo) because Laurice and Robbie thought he couldn’t direct yet. "Endo" later became one of the best
movies of that year's edition. Jade Castro is now one of this generation’s
budding mainstream filmmakers, churning out last year's sleeper hit
"Zombadings.”
Jon
Lazam and Edith Asuncion suffered the same fate, as well. Jon was maybe the
first Emerson Reyes of Cinemalaya. In a series of emails between himself and
Cinemalaya, it was apparent that his film’s delays were brought about not
because of his failures but because Cinemalaya kept demanding rewrites
extending beyond the deadline for submission.
Ralston
Jover was also asked to get a co-director for "Bakal Boys". He even went as far as giving them a list of
possible co-directors but not one from the list was approved. He eventually
found out that they were pushing for another director that was not on the list.
Arnel
Mardoquio, same story. Francis
Hechanova, same story. If Laurice
Guillen were in their place, would she have allowed a co-director for any of
the movies she has done?
And
then there is the subtitling issue.
Laurice Guillen corners the market for all the subtitling of the
Cinemalaya entries bringing it to her small post house called Pixel Grain. It's like city mayors bidding for road
construction projects and awarding it to their own construction companies. Shameful!
Not
to mention selecting her own movie as the opening film in last year's
Cinemalaya. I don't really know if the movie deserved it. For all I know, it could have been the best
thing since "Citizen Kane".
But to allow it to conflict with her interest as festival head just
shows a lack of principle and integrity.
And
then there's Robbie Tan trying so hard to make himself the savior of Philippine
cinema knowing full well that he’s trying to make up for all the crappy movies
his film company has produced. If Laurice has the subtitling business side of
Cinemalaya, then Robbie is the power broker for casting, pressuring filmmakers
into casting his preferred talents for each project.
Laurice
and Robbie view rushes, suggests re-shoots and comments on filmmaking style and
language pushing each filmmaker to make their movie the way they both think it
should be made. So much for independent expression and artistic integrity huh?!
The
list goes on and on. It's like looking
into a government agency and everywhere there is one irregularity after another
that seems to crop up and no one seems to care.
We may have become apathetic with the way government conducts itself
with all the red tape and the corruption but to see it happening inside the
Cultural Center of the Philippines makes you think that this epidemic of
ambiguousness and blatant lack of decency has really eroded the entire country.
I
am not trying to keep a moral high ground here.
We have our own share of little corruptions in life. But if a position
in the arts is assigned to you, the responsibility to live up to a certain
level of principle is a must to serve the position well. We all know that power corrupts even the most
honest people.
Frodo
knows that. I know that. That's why it
is essential to take care of the ring and be always on guard that it does not
possess you.
Cinemalaya,
as an idea is good. But it lies in the
people running it whether it achieves what it set out to do for the filmmakers
of this country.
