Friday, August 24, 2012

Ike Jarlego, Jr. (May 3, 1944 - August 24, 2012)

Mario O'Hara once called Ike Jarlego, Jr. one of Philippine cinema's best editors, easily making him in my book one of the world's finest. He began his career cutting the most famous work of the most notable filmmaker of the '70s and '80s Golden Age of Philippine cinema: Lino Brocka's Maynila sa Mga Kuko Liwanag (Manila in the Claws of Neon, 1975). He went on from there: O'Hara's Mortal (1975) and Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos (Three Years Without God, 1976); Mike de Leon's Itim (Rites of May, 1975) and Kakabakaba Ka Ba? (Are You Worried?, 1980); Ishmael Bernal's Aliw (Pleasure, 1979), Himala (Miracle, 1982), Working Girls (1984) and Working Girls 2 (1987); Butch Perez's Haplos (Caress, 1982), and Balweg (1986); Maryo J. Delos Reyes' Bagets (1984). 

Jarlego was born into a moviemaking family--his father Enrique Jarlego, Sr. was an editor who worked for Vincente Salumbides (Ibong Adarna (Adarna Bird, 1941) and Lamberto Avellana (Huk sa Bagong Pamumuhay (Communists in a New Life, 1953); five of his brothers (he had thirteen siblings) also became editors, most notably his brother Efren (Mario O'Hara's other best Filipino editor, who also worked on Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos and then went on to do Kastilyong Buhangin (Castle of Sand, 1980), Condemned (1984), Bagong Hari (The New King, 1986); Laurice Guillen's Salome (1981) and Init sa Magdamag (Midnight Passion, 1983); Lino Brocka (Hot Property, 1983)). 

It was while Jarlego Sr. was working for Avellana that Jarlego Jr. got his big break--Ike was a little boy playing on the LVN Studios compound when Avellana asked him to appear in Pag-asa (Hope, 1951), running  towards a gate and yelling "shoeshine!" He had a small subsequent career as child actor before turning editor later in life. 

At his very best Jarlego managed to translate the editing styles of some of the greatest Filipino filmmakers to the big screen: the precise cutting of Itim, the stream-of-consciousness flow of Mortal, the witty brevity of Kakakbakaba Ka Ba?--none of these would have been possible without Jarlego's skill on the Moviola and Steenbeck machine.

He debuted as a director in 1992 with Andres Manambit; his direction of Lualhati Bautista's script for Nena (1995) was lean, intense, noirish--a no-nonsense, totally unpretentious means of realizing Bautista's allegory on female empowerment. The film along with Mario O'Hara's Bulaklak sa City Jail (Flowers of the City Jail, 1985) was easily one of the most effective interpretations of Bautista on the big screen--both succeeding, notably, without resorting to direct adaptation of some of her more famous literary works.

(Some information in this post taken from the CCP Encyclopedia)

Thursday, August 16, 2012

My Sight and Sound List of Ten Greatest Films Ever Made


I did say I think the individual lists are more fascinating and more valuable overall as opposed to the aggregate (which I think is about as interesting as watching paint dry).

Some observations:


Love it that Ms. Wurm listed Tatlo Dalawa Isa (Three Two One); that's not an obvious Brocka choice (but a good one, nevertheless).  Also love Mr. Bhaumik's inclusion of Mababangong Bangungot (Perfumed Nightmare)--that and Kidlat Tahimik are even less well known than Brocka.

Love it that Ms. Ingawanij lists not one but two Filipino films. She may not be Filipino, but she certainly loves our films...

Impressed that Lav Diaz's Ebolusyon ng Isang Pamilyang Pilipino (Evolution of a Filipino Family) earned three critics' nod. One can say that's partly because it traveled the film festival route not too long ago, but I don't think so; I do think it deserves the admiration.

Pity we don't see more of the Philippines' earlier masters--Gerardo de Leon, Manuel Conde, Manuel Silos, Lamberto Avellana. If I had to do it all over again, I might include more; maybe fill all ten slots with Filipino films. We certainly have the back catalog (with newer works meriting serious consideration)...

Finally--my list, as originally written (with links to available articles):

I look at how well the filmmaker translates his passion, at the intensity of said passion, and listen to the feeling in my gut that tells me “this is one.”

In alphabetical order:

Banshun (Late Spring, Yasujiro Ozu, 1949) - a minimalist masterwork, one of the most moving films ever made.

Campanadas a medianoche (Chimes at Midnight, Orson Welles, 1965) - arguably the finest adaptation of Shakespeare and greatest battle sequence ever filmed (yes, I'm enough of an incurable adolescent that I still judge the quality of an action sequence, and no Apocalypse Now's helicopter assault did not make my list).

Faust (FW Murnau, 1926) - a truly great special-effects film, Murnau's adaptation of Goethe's (and perhaps Germany's) greatest play is both fevered nightmare and harrowing drama.

Journal d’un curĂ© de campagne (Diary of a Country Priest, Robert Bresson, 1951) - a priest's interior journey towards transcendence, one of the most comprehensive and unrelenting depictions of human spirituality ever.

Kaagaz Ke Phool (Paper Flowers, Guru Dutt, 1959) - Guru Dutt's film maudit, a titanic box-office flop, and one of the best films ever about a filmmaker's passion for his work.

Kaze no tani no Naushika (Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind, Hayao Miyazaki, 1984) - one of the few science fiction film to deal with and understand ecological systems and the environment, arguably the greatest animated film ever made.

M (Fritz Lang, 1931) - the prototype noir film that towers over the genre.

Meghe Dhaka Tara (The Cloud-capped Star, Ritwik Ghatak, 1960) - a neorealist tour de force, one of the most heartrending depictions ever of female oppression.

Sherlock, Jr. (Buster Keaton, 1924) - one of the most imaginative uses of special effects, and perhaps the most beautiful comedy ever made.

Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos (Three Years Without God, Mario O'Hara, 1976) - the rare film from a victimized nation that strives to understand, perhaps even forgive, the invader.

8.16.12

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Tribute to Mario O'Hara (1946 - 2012)

-->

The Quiet Man passes

Mario Herrero O'Hara was known, if he was known at all, as legendary filmmaker Lino Brocka's collaborator; more malicious wags called him Brocka's lover (for the record--no, and there's a reason why). He acted in several of Brocka's early films, playing a vivid villain in Tubog sa Ginto (Dipped in Gold, 1971), and a neglected son in Stardoom (1971) opposite actress Lolita Rodriguez; three years later he played Rodriguez's leprous lover in Brocka's seminal film Tinimbang Ka Ngunit Kulang (You Were Weighed But Found Wanting), having also written the film's screenplay.

O'Hara wrote the teleplay that was the basis for what is arguably Brocka's best work, Insiang (1976); it went on to be the first-ever Filipino film to be screened in the Director's Fortnight, in Cannes. The film--about a slum girl raped by her mother's lover--is often called a masterpiece of realism, and no wonder; O'Hara claimed in an interview that the story happened to his backyard neighbors, in the city of Pasay.

 (It's also claimed--and here you see the state of Filipino film history, that many details are open to contention, or can rarely be definitively documented--that the teleplay was based on a radio script written by actress and scriptwriter Mely Tagasa. Quite possibly both stories are true; that is to say, O'Hara took the premise from Ms. Tagasa's radio script but based details of the characters on his neighbors...)

It was ever so in O'Hara's films and screenplays, his insistence that everything and anything in his works be true, no matter how fantastic. An outre character (a faded movie actress living in a cemetery crypt), an outrageous occurrence (a historical figure falling in love with his literary creation) can be allowed in his films only if they were, by some convoluted definition, true. 

O'Hara was notorious for not using a motorized vehicle--or rather he owned a vehicle, a van really, but drove it only on weekends and film shoots (he had a chauffeur who drove him around that he would also parsimoniously use in bit parts--I once spotted the old man playing Jose Rizal's father). Weekdays he took public utility jeeps and buses, and walked for hours from his house in Bangkal, Makati to Divisoria in Manila (a distance of some five miles),  these marathon walks often being the source of his stories, characters, bits of dialogue, incidents (a particularly torrid film scene involving lovers coupling in a tricycle was inspired, he once, claimed, by something he actually saw happen on Taft Avenue). The joke was that you had to watch yourself when talking to the man--he was liable to put you in a movie someday, sometimes without your permission.

O'Hara would make his directorial debut with Mortal (1975),  his fabulist re-telling of a real-life murder committed by a paranoid schizophrenic; the film was to be one of the first produced by the just-established Cine Manila, under which Brocka had hoped to produce films. The murder victim's family sued and won, unfortunately, and Cine Manila quickly folded.

O'Hara's second film was to be his first with popular singer-actress Nora Aunor. Aunor had been looking for a prestige project to produce and star in and asked for Brocka; Brocka didn't want to have “anything to do with that Superstar!” and passed the project to O'Hara. O'Hara dug up an old script and on a budget of about a million pesos--modest for a World War 2 drama of that scale and ambition--created Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos (Three Years Without God, 1976), about the three years of Japanese Occupation when, as the title suggests, God turned his face away from the Filipino people. The film is possibly the actress-producer's best performance, arguably the director's finest feature, and--possibly, arguably, strictly in my opinion--the finest Filipino film ever made. 
 




First Act

Mario O'Hara was born in Zamboanga City on April 20, 1946, the son of a half Irish-American, half Filipino lawyer named Jaime O'Hara from Antipolo, Rizal and Basilisa Herrero from Ozamis Oriental. Jaime O'Hara's father was a Thomasite teacher, one of the earliest sent to the Philippines, and this fact alone allowed the O'Haras including Mario the chance to immigrate to the United States (Mario turned the offer down).

It was a large family--eight brothers and three sisters--and according to O'Hara a happy one, with a childhood fueled by the imaginative power of night-time radio. His neighborhood--some time after his birth the family had moved to Pasay City--had an unusual layout, rich mansions on either side and a slum directly behind; O'Hara said many of his TV scripts came out of that backyard slum. One of his brother's friends owned a movie theater and they watched films for free--the titles included Michael Curtiz's The Adventures of Robin Hood, and the Flash Gordon serials.

O'Hara planned a practical career--a chemical engineering degree, to be earned at Adamson University--but the call of that childhood night-voice proved too strong. On his sophomore year he auditioned for a part in a Proctor and Gamble radio show at the Manila Broadcasting Corporation; by third year college he dropped out because he couldn't handle the load of both studying and performing on radio.

In 1968 O'Hara met Lino Brocka; Brocka in turn used him as an actor on the big screen and on the theater stage, doing productions for PETA (Philippine Experimental Theater Association). O'Hara came to helm his first feature by criticizing Brocka's style of film direction. “If you know so much, why don't you direct?” Brocka finally asked him. Brocka wanted to do an adaptation of Edgardo Reyes' serialized novel Sa Mga Kuko ng Liwanag (In the Claws of Light), to be produced by Mike de Leon, so he passed on to O'Hara the film Mortal, which he had been slated to direct.

After the career high of Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos followed the career low of Mga Bilanggong Birhen (The Captive Virgins, 1977), yet another period epic. O'Hara was fired after accomplishing ninety-five percent of principal photography (“I couldn't see eye-to-eye with the producer,” he said); the picture was finished by another director. 

We would see this tendency time and time again--a film where the producer started interfering, and O'Hara either abandoning the project or allowing himself to be fired. On set he's described as a diligent, determined worker, but the moment you interfere with control of the picture he was likely to drop matters and simply walk away.

One might try explain this tendency through O'Hara's attitude towards filmmaking, once articulated thusly: "first an actor, second a writer, and lastly a director." The self-confessed lack of commitment to cinema (think of Orson Welles spending four years of his life to finish Othello) can on one hand be considered a fatal flaw, in that O'Hara was often more opportunist than self-starter, his finished features far fewer than they could have been.

On the other hand this gave his work an independent quality, a fearlessness towards fellow filmmakers' (and movie audiences') possibly angry responses to his more eccentric films (in Mortal for example the film proceeds in a fragmentary, hallucinatory manner, only later becoming more coherent--the way the protagonist's schizophrenic mind becomes  clearer as his mind grows gradually saner) 

Mga Bilanggong Birhen helped established a pattern: when O'Hara couldn't direct a film, he directed for television; when he couldn't direct at all, he acted; when he wasn't acting, he wrote. He performed for theater, radio, television, and film; he wrote scripts for Brocka and, at one point, for filmmaker Laurice Guillen's debut feature (Kasal? 1980); he also directed the television soap Flordeluna for a period of one year. 

O'Hara wrote Ang Palayso ni Valentin (The Palace of Valentin), a zarzuela (a form of Filipino musical theater) about a decaying theater's decaying pianist, and his undying love for the theater's beautiful singing star. The play was O'Hara's valentine to the theatrical arts, and won the 1998 Centennial Literary Competition grand prize for drama. In 2002 he reworked his best-known collaboration with Brocka (Insiang) into a stage play, with the action relocated back in Pasay City where he had originally set it (Brocka's film was set in Tondo), adding a hip and funny narrator (much like The Common Man in Robert Bolt's A Man For All Seasons) to comment on and provide context to the drama.




Second Act

In the '80s, O'Hara would hit his stride on the big screen. His Kastilyong Buhangin (Castle of Sand, 1980) was a vehicle for both Aunor's singing talents and stuntman-turned-actor Lito Lapid physical prowess, like a bizarre yet spirited union between George Cukor's A Star is Born and Ringo Lam's Prison on Fire. His Bakit Bughaw ang Langit? (Why is the Sky Blue? 1981), about a shy young woman (Aunor again) who falls in love with a mentally challenged young man, is O'Hara directly challenging mentor and friend Brocka in his own social-realist territory. And then there was what might arguably be called O'Hara's Manila noir trilogy: Condemned (1984), about a brother and sister (Aunor, again) on the run in the streets of Malate from a dollar-smuggling gang; Bulaklak sa City Jail (Flowers of the City Jail, 1984), about a pregnant woman (Aunor yet again) incarcerated in the city's hellish prison system; and Bagong Hari (The New King, 1986), about a man hired to unwittingly assassinate his own father. The three films present a grim portrait of the city of Manila (the last film earning an “X” rating from the censors, for extreme violence), and might arguably be called the zenith of Filipino noir



Pygmalion

If a good proportion of O'Hara's films seemed to feature Aunor there was a reason for this. O'Hara was one of the first filmmakers to recognize her worth as an actress back when she was considered a 'mere' multimedia pop star; both were shy, private people who only when required to do so (in public speaking, or before a  camera) would switch on the thousand-watt bulb of their charisma. This seeming timidity concealing considerable talent is possibly the basis for the rapport between them, a spiritual resonance rarely found in other actress-director collaborations in Philippine cinema; you might even call Aunor the filmmaker's doppelganger, his onscreen expression of inner strength and hidden vulnerability, to be sorely tried and tested by the tortuous narratives of his films. For whatever reason, the titles (Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos, Bakit Bughaw ang Langit? among many others) speak for themselves: O'Hara's work with Aunor  represent some of the best that either artist, or Philippine cinema itself, has to offer.  






Pito-pito Films
 
In 1998 head of Regal Films “Mother” Lily Monteverde with the help of filmmaker/producer Joey Gosiengfiao established Good Harvest, a subdivision of Regal designed to churn out pito-pito pictures, the term (which translates literally into “seven-seven”) referring to the speed with which the films are to be made (seven days of shooting, seven of post-production). The basic premise goes something like this: Mother Lily gives the filmmakers a tiny amount of seed money (two and a half million pesos, or roughly $62,500) and an insanely tight schedule (fourteen days from start of shoot to finished film) with the only stipulation being that the films should have commercial appeal (some violence, some choice eroticism); otherwise, the filmmakers have carte blanche approval to do whatever they want.

The pito-pito system helped newcomers produce their debut features, helped veterans realize old projects; O'Hara shot not one but two pictures in fourteen days. Babae sa Bubungang Lata (Woman on a Tin Roof, 1998) was O'Hara's adaptation of Agapito Joaquin's two-character one-act chamber drama, expanded to become a eulogy to the Filipino film industry; Sisa was O'Hara's tribute to Filipino historical figure and hero Jose Rizal, with the conceit that Rizal did not fashion his most famous literary creation out of whole cloth but actually knew her, as a living, breathing, red-blooded woman (remember O'Hara's oft-repeated assertion, that the most vivid characters come from real life); and that this woman was the love of his life (like Shakespeare in Love, only with a fraction of the production budget and a far more bizarre (read: insanely imaginative) approach). 

 
Final Act

In 2000 O'Hara directed his last pito-pito film: Pangarap ng Puso (Demons), basically a genre-bending retelling of recent Filipino history as horror film, war drama, love story, and celebration of Filipino poetry. In 2003 he did Babae sa Breakwater (Woman of the Breakwater) about the homeless folk who live along Manila's breakwater--again O'Hara straying into Brocka territory (most notably Maynila sa Mga Kuko ng Liwanag) only with a strong strain of magic realism running throughout, and troubadour Yoyoy Villiame commenting on the onscreen action through song (again, Robert Bolt's The Common Man, this time set to music). His Ang Paglilitis ni Andres Bonifacio (The Trial of Andres Bonifacio, 2010) uses the actual minutes of the trial of Supremo Andres Bonifacio (much as Carl Theodor Dreyer did in The Passion of Joan of Arc) as basis and occasion to give this neglected contemporary of Jose Rizal the long-delayed, low-budget, magic-realist due he deserves.

O'Hara's reunion with his oft-muse Nora Aunor would prove to be his last major work. Sa Ngalan ng Ina (In the Name of the Mother, 2011), a mini-series retelling recent Filipino politics in teleserye format, turns on the brilliant conceit that much of the melodramatic excesses of contemporary Filipino soap opera (the drama, the betrayals, the sex and violence) reflect the melodramatic excesses of contemporary Filipino politics (the drama, the betrayals, the sex and violence). By this time O'Hara's health may not have been what it used to be; he codirected this tremendous effort (twenty-five hour-long episodes) with Jon Red, who also did all the series' action sequences.  

All that passion, all those sleepless nights, the massive strain on O'Hara's health (at one point shooting Babae sa Bubungang Lata and Sisa back-to-back) must have come at a cost. On June 19, 2012 the report came out over online social media that O'Hara had been rushed to the emergency room due to symptoms of acute leukemia; the family, respectful of his retiring nature, withheld the hospital's name (it was later revealed to be San Juan de Dios). Brother Jerry O'Hara reported that he responded well to chemotherapy. The optimism was premature: on the morning of June 26 word went out that O'Hara had succumbed to cardiac arrest, the quiet man silenced at last.  

 
Curtain Call

O'Hara's significance to Philippine cinema is a challenge to assess. Unlike his more outspoken contemporaries Lino Brocka and Ishmael Bernal, O'Hara disliked discussing the ideas behind his films; he much preferred to stay in the background, playing cup-bearer to the industry's gaudier princes. 

There's an additional difficulty: if the works of the older generation of Filipino filmmakers are generally not readily available (Brocka's Tubog sa Ginto, for example, exists only as bootleg video), and O'Hara's are even more troublesome to obtain than most, then attempting to view his work can be compared in terms of difficulty and expense to a hunt for the Holy Grail (that may not be too much of an exaggeration, with some titles). I'd say at least four or five of the twenty-five film features he directed have no existing print, and that only five are readily available on DVD--not the clearest of copies, and without subtitles (unless otherwise indicated). His masterpiece Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos is on youtube with subtitles, though I refuse to link to that travesty; the experience is like viewing Velasquez's Las Meninas from the bottom of a septic tank (not a big fan of the translation, either).  In trying to talk about his films you can't help but think of the seven blind men trying to describe an elephant; it's impossible to do justice to the wondrous creature.

Nevertheless--

O'Hara was a crucial collaborator of Brocka's, and it's possible to argue that he introduced a note of moral ambiguity not found in Brocka's other pictures--at the end of Insiang, for example, one couldn't really tell who was the victim, who the victimizer; in Tinimbang Ka Ngunit Kulang the character O'Hara plays (Berto the Leper) is first seen as a possible rapist. He took up Brocka's social-realist mode of storytelling  (Bakit Bughaw ang Langit?) and introduced baroque, even fabulist variations (Mortal, The Fatima Buen Story (1994)); later in his career he managed to fashion a mode of cinema inimitably his--imaginative in both form and content, yet filled with political, sociological and historical concerns (Pangarap ng Puso, Sisa)

Arguably O'Hara was more fluent than Brocka in at least one or two dialects of the language of filmmaking. The prison riot that climaxes Kastilyong Buhangin, the varied and at times elaborate fight sequences in Bagong Hari confirm his status as one of Philippine cinema's finest action filmmakers; his use of pointedly angled shots and distinctly staged mis-en-scene reveal him to be the visual descendant of Gerardo de Leon (and behind de Leon the classicists: Ford, Eisenstein, Griffith). 

O'Hara's early training in radio possibly distinguished him from other Filipino filmmakers of the '70s, who mostly came from  Filipino theater: I submit that this training helped free him (the way it freed another filmmaker active in radio, stage and film) from the tyranny of the proscenium arch, giving one the sense of watching a film film instead of a film recording of a stage performance. Musical cuing (Brocka's weakness, according to O'Hara), sound transitions, overlapping dialogue linked his images, subtly amplified their cumulative emotional power. More, there was a fluidity to his editing (see Pangarap ng Puso, where the montage of photo stills act like the flicker-images of memory), a constant bounding from reality to fantasy and back (the protagonist's schizophrenia in Mortal, the children's view of supernatural creatures in the context of provincial life in Pangarap ng Puso) that suggests not so much a spatial orientation as an aural one, or at least one less limited by the unities of a specific location--a heedless leaping across time and space and emotion, taught to him by the equally fearless transitions (from present to past, reality to fantasy, comedy to drama) found in the radio shows of his childhood. 

Not that he turned his back completely on theatricality. In Bubungang Lata he would present large swathes of Joaquin's play as a play, as two characters moving about in a tiny set with the camera just sitting there, drinking in their performances; the plainness of the approach underlined the plainness of their lives, their aspirations (this in contrast to the film's more fabulist characters, who are shot in a variety of angles and lighting). In Ang Paglilitis ni Andres Bonifacio, O'Hara's first ever digital feature, O'Hara refrains from taking advantage of digital video's most obvious virtues (the mobility of the equipment, the ease in creating handheld, constantly moving shots) and instead locks down the camera, viewing the actors with an unblinking, dispassionate eye (if anything he takes advantage of digital's other virtue, its ability to record long takes). The stable framing and vivid color palette emphasizes a stylization not inappropriate to a moro-moro (yet another specifically Filipino form of theater) production, one of which is quoted extensively in the film, and serves as unspoken commentary on the politics behind the trial (in the moro-moro, the outcome is settled long before the play begins).



The heart of the matter


O'Hara's cinematic virtuosity would mean little without a moral and philosophical stance--this being possibly the most difficult aspect of all to pin down. His personal reticence, his reluctance to clarify and explicate his thoughts and intentions in real life extends to his films; in his very best work it's near impossible (Who is the victim? Who the victimizer?). O'Hara's films, like those of his friend and mentor Brocka, depict extremes of love, lust, hate, contempt, sadism, tenderness; unlike Brocka, you sense a distance between O'Hara and his subjects. The  immediacy, the urgency, the white-hot anger that pulses through Brocka's films is missing in O'Hara's, the same time there are emotional hues found in O'Hara that are missing in Brocka (cynicism (the finale of Condemned); a sardonic sense of humor (the severed head in Bagong Hari)). The title of Brocka's breakthrough film summarizes his attitude towards his characters: he judges them, constantly and thoroughly, and can be an unforgiving justice with near-impossible standards.

O'Hara doesn't; there's a vast, yawning cavern of silence where his attitude towards characters should be. He doesn't seem to hate his villains (the Japanese rapist in Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos), doesn't seem to particularly love his heroes (the hapless stuntman in Babae sa Bubungang Lata). His camera has that unblinking quality found in more contemplative Filipino filmmakers (Mike de Leon and Ishmael Bernal, to name contemporaries; Lav Diaz to name a more recent example). On occasion you find him cutting to a shot  from high up looking down--the point of view of a deity, or superior being, or observing scientist, gazing down on its worshipers, inferiors, test subjects.

But if you look and listen closely--again, that aural element--if you pay close attention to his framing, to the timing of his cuts, to the choices made in staging and line readings and even actual words used in dialogue, there is the whisper, hint, suggestion of an attitude. The blind man carrying his palsied brother past the religious procession in Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos; Babette saying goodbye in Bakit Bughaw ang Langit?--the first sequence is entirely wordless (one is struck by the size of the gigantic float swaying past the two brothers); the second nothing but words (it's less the words--mostly bits of practical advice--than Aunor's delicately shaded delivery of them that reveals Babette's true state of mind). O'Hara keeps the lamp-flame indicating his scenes' emotional temperature burning low, low, low...until you realize what the scene is really about, and the full meaning explodes in your face. Where Brocka was a full-on revolutionary raising a fist in the air and demanding change, O'Hara was a subversive, smuggling hidden contraband right under your nose, to detonate deep in your head where no defense is possible. 

O'Hara's distance is no assumed pose; he's far too clear-eyed about the perversity of human nature to think we're just misunderstanding each other, or instinctively inflicting our own inner pain on each other. He understands that there is a keen pleasure to be found in imposing pain (again, the Japanese rapist in Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos), and that there are those among us who crave that pleasure in regular doses (the police officer in Babae sa Breakwater, Rex in Bagong Hari). At the same time you hear a whisper from the cavern's yawning silence; when O'Hara's films are working full-on you feel the hairs rising on your arms and back of your neck as you sense--the way a sensitive senses a presence supernatural--that O'Hara does care about his characters, cares for them deeply, but is too much of an artist to let this concern speak out too loudly. Understanding of this contradictory pull of forces between the impassive and empathic in O'Hara, this double-vision if you will, is possibly key to understanding his cinema. 

What to say, finally, of O'Hara the filmmaker? Frankly I could write for years and it wouldn't be enough. But a few words might help: he is, I believe, Philippine cinema's wayward spirit, its silent wanderer-observer (especially around the Makati-Malate-Quiapo-Divisoria area), its whispered yet insistent conscience. He is its reluctant poet, its low-key fabulist, its (to borrow a phrase from Manny Farber) termite artist, toiling away in the mud and filth to build something that isn't intended to be anything beautiful, perhaps doesn't even presume to become anything near beautiful, but which somehow, in some way, almost by accident if you will (though this random quality may be a hallmark of its authenticity) achieves a wayward, reluctant beauty. 

He is (again, strictly in my opinion) the Philippine's finest filmmaker, and his death does our cinema an irretrievable, irrecoverable harm--not just for the life's worth of recognition owed to him, but for the works he might have given us, if he lived but a year longer (I once spent an evening listening to him talk of the scripts he has squirreled away, one more fabulous than the next). The world is a quieter place with this man gone, not necessarily a better one. We do well to mourn our loss.


Encore

Whatever this article managed to cobble together about O'Hara the filmmaker is likely but a fraction of what the man has done, a fraction (a tiny one) of the regard and affection the man has inspired. 

A lovely tribute from a collaborator (she was involved with the production of Ang Paglilitis ni Andres Bonifacio) and confidante of the family. 

Fellow filmmaker Joey Reyes' impassioned piece on the man (Reyes will hopefully forgive me for saying that this is possibly the best single thing he's ever written, but that's how I feel about it).


Friend and fellow actor/filmmaker Dennis Marasigan's memories of Mario O'Hara.


Versatile writer/editor Gibbs Cadiz gives a more thorough (though again, hardly comprehensive) overview of O'Hara's theater career.

As said, much has been written about the films, but the subject is hardly exhausted--here is a discussion of the sociopolitical meaning of three O'Hara films.

Premiere Filipino film critic Oggs Cruz's writeup (his last few lines are a great favorite). 

A brief citation by Jessica Zafra.

An account of the wake.


Friends give their reaction.

Mell T. Navarro's pictures from the wake


Jude Bautista's photos of the Cinema One tribute. One of the rare times O'Hara was recognized (kudos to the festival for doing so). 


Vladimir Bunoan's Essential O'Hara: 10 films you should watch.



A mini-retrospective of his work at this year's Cinemalaya.


TV5's obituary.

First published in Businessworld, 6.28.12

Saturday, August 11, 2012

Total Recall, Safety Not Guaranteed, Deep Blue Sea

Minor 'Recall'


No, I didn't think Paul Verhoeven's Total Recall (1990) was particularly good--too cartoony, too ready to give away the joke that it's all really a dream--but it had two interesting scenes: the one where Dr. Edgemar (Roy Brocksmith) persuasively argues that Quaid (Arnold Schwarzenegger) is really experiencing implanted memories and that taking a pill will wake him up. It's the film's most Dickian moment, where the two possibilities--this is a dream / this is real life--are most perfectly knife-edge balanced. It helps that Roy Brocksmith personifies the facelessness of bureaucracy--his very blandness argues for the truth of his words.

The second Dickian moment comes towards the end, where Quaid asks Melina (Rachel Ticotin): "What if all this is a dream?" Melina's reply is by turns practical and human and wonderfully droll: "Well, then kiss me quick before you wake up." Everything in between is over-the-top in that exuberant yet decadent fashion Verhoeven perfected in his '90s Hollywood pictures, trash cinema with artistic aspirations (some would say pretensions): not especially memorable, but amusing.

Len Wiseman's remake can't even manage to be that (Verhoeven's "is he or isn't he?" moment is resolve when Quaid spots a drop of sweat trickling down Edgemar's temple (Why would he be nervous if he was telling the truth?); Wiseman's Quaid spots a cheesier teardrop on Melina's face (She loves him so it must be real)). At close to two hours' running time, it's one close call after another, with plenty of high-powered mayhem along the way, a sort of Crank on steroids with electrodes attached; five minutes of this and I was pretty much numbed out--how many scenes of Colin Farrell karate-chopping Kate Bosworth and vice-versa can you watch? Five? Ten? Fifteen? Then there's the other hundred and three minutes to sit through. 

Doesn't help that like another major Hollywood director whose name I won't mention, Wiseman's humor-impaired--a few Schwarzeneggerisms wouldn't have hurt ("Consider that a divorce"); Farell is a far more talented actor than Schwarzenegger but Wiseman seems to have sat on Farell's head for most of the picture (only half the actor's charisma is on display). Beckinsale as Quaid's wife performs competent martial arts, but is barely as sexy (or funny) as the original, played by Sharon Stone. 

Satisfaction guaranteed

Colin Trevorrow's Safety Not Guaranteed was inspired by an actual Backwoods Home Magazine ad, about a request for a time-traveling companion willing to bring his or her own weaponry (Trevorrow claims to still have a copy of the issue)--clever conceit, and I suppose if you aren't familiar with Doctor Who it would seem extraordinarily imaginative. What Trevorrow does bring to the table is an American indie feel, which includes no-budget production design and refreshingly unpolished line readings; that, and a 'is he or isn't he?' tension straight out of Miracle at 34th Street (for all the series' virtues you aren't really given a chance to question the Doctor's authenticity--once he starts pointing his sonic screwdriver about all doubts fly out the left ear).

Indie star Aubrey Plaza with her kewpie-doll looks and deadpan delivery is the main attraction as Darius, the Seattle magazine work intern assigned to investigate the ad. She's the shy nerd's idea of an unapproachable hot date, and there's something to her combination of spiky snark and hidden vulnerability that's hard to resist--but more interesting still is Jake M. Johnson's Kenneth, the star reporter whose ulterior motive for doing the story is to seek out and hopefully hook up with an old girlfriend of his who lives in that same small town. Johnson's a comedian, unafraid to make himself look like an egotistical jerk; at the same time he holds out for the same dreams about love and companionship that Darius and her time traveler do, only his side story has a more believable and ultimately more poignant trajectory.

Aquarium of pain

Terence Davies' The Deep Blue Sea, his adaptation of a 1952 Terence Rattigan play might be considered so mannered and  hermetically closed it's claustrophobic (it's shot mostly in sets and interiors all choked up with smoke--you can't help but gasp for  fresh air). It's the story of Hester (Rachel Weisz), who has left her husband Sir William Collyer (Simon Russell Beale) for handsome RAF pilot Freddie Page (Tom Hiddleston). A familiar storyline: woman feeling constricted by unsatisfying marriage runs out to have a passionate fling--only in the traumatically damaged, essentially selfish Freddie, she finds an even more extreme, less extricable sort of enslavement (the apartment she and Freddie shares feels like a cell for solitary confinement). 

You wonder how Davies, often glancing in his storytelling, can tell this tale of emotional devastation without betraying his sensibilities. Some details give a clue: the essentially two-set film (the apartment, the crowded pub where Hester and Freddie go for a drink); the contemplative pacing and camerawork (the camera gazing at the actors as if trying to suss out their innermost thoughts); even the song Davies plays at one point ("You Belong To Me"--denoting possession and possessiveness) all conspire to construct, detail after detail, a kind of confined crucible in which the heat and pressure of Rattigan's play can build. 

The camera homes in on Weisz and Hiddleston as they suffer, the same time Davies manages to aestheticize the camera's stare (there's an eerie underwater feel to that stare, as if we were peering into an aquarium tank, or formaldehyde jar). Not that Davies is distanced--you sense his sympathy for the characters--but that he seems to look at them unflinchingly through the amber-tinted lenses. 

The result is a breathtaking piece of work, one of the most beautiful and impassioned  (yet hushed, oblique) recent films I've ever seen. Beale, the ostensible villain, wins you over with his helpless decency. Hiddleston manages to make a thoroughly self-centered man--an overgrown emotional brat, in effect--fascinating and empathic; you like him despite (or perhaps because of) his flaws. Weisz owns the picture; her Hester runs the gamut from boredom to ecstasy to absolute abjection without the fetters once snapping open, and you can't help but respond to the sheer pathos of her circumstance. A great film.

8.11.12

Wednesday, August 08, 2012

The Dark Knight Rises (Christopher Nolan, 2012)

(I know, I know, but Nolan's last word on this comic book character and possibly one of the year's biggest movie events is too irresistible a target. Watch out: story discussed in close detail)

Art of darkness

I'd already said pretty much everything I needed to say about Nolan's take on Batman. Does he redeem himself with this version? Some, not enough.

Nolan's better at shooting action--no more shaky-cam (much), and he has learned to keep the camera trained on the fight sequences till they're over. That said, he still hasn't learned to keep his camera trained on the money shot--in The Prestige he cut away when a crucial trick was performed (invalidating the magic of the trick); here someone leaps across space to an impossibly far ledge, and he has to insert a reaction shot from everyone below. He's improved, but still lacks confidence as a filmmaker. 

He's doing better as a writer--somewhat. Borrowing entire pages of detail from Frank Miller's seminal The Dark Knight Returns (with Wayne's retirement shortened to an eight-year absence, and the villain Bane (Tom Hardy) standing in for the mutant leader) he knows how to weave complex plots, how to twist and turn the strands, startling the audience at the right moment, how to build and maintain intensity. Probably his biggest problem is that he wants it to be all intensity, which at two hours and forty plus minutes gets wearying (not to mention repetitive), this imminent sense that something terrible is about to happen, about to happen, about to happen. Nolan like Peter Jackson wears his geekiness proudly on his sleeve when what was probably needed was an artist's skepticism, an ability to stand back and ruthlessly assess the material--what should go, what should stay, what should radically change. 

(And for all his geeky knowingness, his immersion in matters both Bat and scientific, Nolan doesn't seem to understand the forces that act on a suspension bridge, making it stand--that if you sever the two main cables the entire center span will fall or, arguably, the whole thing collapse (I was staring at the bridges in the background, with their span cut. What was holding it up--wishful thinking?)).

He can toll the bells of rhetoric well enough (too well; you get the sense that he loves the sound of his own voice coming out of other peoples' mouths--witness the endless speeches Commissioner Gordon delivers at the conclusion to the last two movies). He loves to pontificate on profound themes, banging the gong when there's a moment to spare (perhaps this is his idea of 'giving an audience a rest') and even when there isn't a moment to spare (when the true nature of one crucial character is fully revealed, said character just has to stop the entire picture and explain the full significance and consequences of said revelation while Batman lay bleeding. "Slow knife" someone at one point says. Slow knife my ass--I thought they were trying to talk him to death). 

Nolan tries for relevance and unfortunately achieves it--every moment someone pulls out an assault rifle, every detonation of a planted explosive whether he intended it or not leaves a sour taste in the mouth. More, Bane's plan, of upending the 1% and leaving the 99% in charge sounds like a parody of the Occupy Wall Street movement--so Bane is the illusory leader of liberal idealism and Batman the conservative reality? Not sure I like the sound of that.

And for all Nolan's eloquence, he still hasn't learned to be funny. Hathaway as Selina Kyle has a few sparkling lines, but you don't get the laugh-out-loud demented dialogue of a Daniel Waters ("Just the pussy I've been looking for!"). And while we're on the subject of Selina, no, sorry, Hathaway doesn't come within striking distance of Michelle Pfeiffer's glorious incarnation. Hathaway is far too healthy and wholesome; Pfeiffer was a knife's edge away from psychologically shattering. Hathaway looks smooth and svelte in her catsuit, Pfeiffer looked stitched-together and fragile, barely able to cohere. Hathaway provides a dose of lighthearted I-don't-give-a-fuck (her gradual changeover to commitment and care actually seems like a betrayal of the character); Pfeiffer was the film's emotional core--loses it early on, is barely able to keep it together, and still manages to be laugh-out-loud funny ("Life's a bitch; now so am I"). Hathaway gives her career a nice little boost; Pfeiffer gave the performance of her life. 

I'd add this much more, on the difference between Nolan and someone like Tim Burton. Nolan writes fairly straightforward Syd Field-style scripts, where even the twists and turns of time travel (Memento) or dreams (Inception) are intricately laid out yet meticulously kept coherent, the genres efficiently exploited for whatever narrative hooks they can provide; Burton is a filmmaker who uses the script as an excuse to leap into the thin air, depending on the beauty and texture of his imagery (and the fascinating whiff of melancholy they give off) to keep him afloat. Nolan gives the impression of being a clever, careful writer who to retain control of his material has turned director; Burton is a trapeze artist, a high-wire act.

Give me something better; at least give me something else. Give me Escape From New York (1981), yet another science-fiction adventure set in the near future where yet another maverick hero infiltrates an isolated Manhattan to save the city and perhaps the world--at least Carpenter's nightmare vision has wit and genuine edge to it, not to mention images that earned it a definite 'R' rating (as compared to Dark Knight Rises' wimpy 'PG-13'). Come to think of it Dark Knight Rises does seem to borrow elements from Carpenter's classic--just not enough to make a real difference.

Give me the ostensibly lighter-hearted but emotionally more complex The Avengers. I wouldn't call Joss Whedon as talented an imagemaker as Burton, but (comparing Nolan's latest to more recent efforts) his latest picture is for me the more impressive achievement, the dialogue far more entertaining (more audible too--half the cast in The Dark Knight Rises seem to mumble, and when you try listen more closely Nolan punishes your attentiveness with a very loud drum in your ear, banging for about a hundred and sixty minutes). Whedon, smartly, focuses less on complicated narrative and more on character interaction (which was what the original Marvel Comics stories were about, anyway), and leavens the occasional drama with bouts of humor, even silliness (the shawarma scene that caps the credits). 

(Humor is an underrated virtue, especially nowadays in this age of superserious superhero pictures (witness the trailer for Man of Steel, where the late Christopher Reeve's charmingly low-key Kryptonian has been reduced to roaring across the sky like supersonic aircraft). Humor can serve as contrast to sharpen the horror in films, can serve as distracting patter while real drama is sneaking up behind, can be (and both Burton and Whedon know this) combined with horror and drama to create an emotionally potent mix. Humor is one of the most powerful weapons in a storyteller's emotional arsenal, of which he is advised to use every item; Nolan seems to be using at most half of his available inventory--or possibly that's all he's got, which would be an even sadder scenario).

If Dark Knight Rises feels more intense than The Avengers that, arguably, comes from focusing on a single character's plight instead of seven. Whedon is no slouch at telling stories about single protagonists, either--his Dr. Horrible's Sing-along Blog delivers more drama and pathos and poignancy in forty minutes and for about $200,000 (set to music, at that) than Nolan ever does with his hundred and sixty-four minute, $250 million epic white elephant. Want a movie full of darkness and doom (not to mention imagination, wit, hummable tunes)? Don't waste your time with Dark Knight, or for that matter The Avengers--download Dr. Horrible instead. Be careful; break your heart, that will.

Revised 8.8.12

As a suggestion for further reading, a friend was kind enough to provide me with a link to an in-depth discussion of the movie, found here. Enjoy! 

And David Bordwell has as usual a thorough and thoroughly considered appreciation of Nolan's career as a filmmaker (a lot more balanced and sober than mine--but y'know me). Towards the end of the article is an interesting link to Jim Emerson's rather ruthless takedown of Nolan's superhero flick--check it out. 

8.26.12

Wednesday, August 01, 2012

Sight and Sound's Ten Greatest Films of All Time


Y'know, I'll just say it out loud: these lists do matter, and this one is about as authoritative as it gets. Sometimes you don't want to be all inclusive and diplomatic and diverse in your tastes; sometimes you want to be ruthless, and rate one work superior to the other. It's human nature; more, it's fun, like scratching an itchy old scab--you can't help it, and you sneak a quick rub even when you don't mean to. 

It's also a way of charting trends and fashion, and one trend the list does chart was the enduring reputation of Welles' debut film, which lorded it over this list (and almost every other list) for some fifty years. One might also note the relative domination of American films (four on this list), the relative lack of presence of Asian films except Japan (which is allotted a measly single slot), and short shrift given to comedy (Renoir's Rules of the Game being the only if formidable finalist).

For the record, I do like the choices on the list, especially the new number one; have long maintained that Citizen Kane while a great film is hardly Welles' best work; think that Sunrise is a great film too, but that Frank Borzage's Seventh Heaven is far more affecting (and consider Murnau's Faust to be his masterpiece anyway); bemoan the lack of Bresson or any film from Indian cinema (easily the most prolific in the world) on the top ten; love Tokyo Story but would rather put Leo McCarey's Make Way For Tomorrow in its place (and anyway have a different pick for favorite Ozu), and scratch my head at the near-absence of any woman filmmaker (to be fair, I couldn't bring myself to include one either, an oversight that needs to be corrected this millennium).

Far more interesting for me--and again, I'm hardly saying anything new for me--are the individual lists, that show the tastes of hundreds of filmmakers and critics. Those I'll be poring over, once made available (the website seems to be down as of this writing, and I'll take that as a hopeful sign of interest), and noting down unusual choices, and unknown titles. That's the exercise's real resource--an excuse to watch more films, hopefully find new gems, new masterpieces. 

And finally the value of this list is to show the limitation of all aggregate lists--that they're the result of compromise and groupthink, rather than an objective reference. So once you've read it, definitely disagree and draw up one of your own. As Mao once said (minus the sinister ulterior motive): "Let a hundred flowers bloom."

8.1.12




TopOfBlogs [Valid Atom 1.0] blogville.us BlogCatalog http://globeofblogs.com/buttons/globe_blogs.gif