Working in other countries is a dream for many Filipinos. This dream has been fully-realized in exchange of hard work savings earned for lengthy years of service in local companies we have served for. Incidentally, some would sell or barter passed-on material wealth by our ancestors or parents who left us behind in order to augment the fulfillment of that dream.
Some would be successful but others fail. Filipinos thrive best to earn a better living abroad despite sacrifices for family separations and even psychologically-torturing experiences these foreign nationalities might have not been aware of.
The case is simple – make sure working documents are authentic.
The Philippine Educational Theater Association (PETA) recently staged Karaoke Dreams, a musical comedy with full-blast humor using “karaoke” singing as a Pinoy habit and witty social commentaries on the plight of Filipino aspiring migrants who intend to work abroad for greener pastures. Award-winning playwright-composer Vincent de Jesus takes us to a higher level of consciousness with the use of sharp comic devices depicted through the staging and its thematic ingredient of the dramatic text.
In collaboration with the generous European Union (EU) through the Philippine Border Management Project (BPMP) implemented by International Organization for Migration (IOM), the musical has exhibited tremendously an unexpected apt staging with usual cliché about fake passports and visa as deemed by co-Filipino fixers and pretending travel agents. The ensemble cast led by Julienne Mendoza (Rudy Natsugi), Joan Bugcat (Julie Nahuli) and Paolo Rodriguez (Isko Nabisto) masterfully-woven the lives of their families, relatives and friends set in Aling Pising’s Carinderia and Karaoke. .
Other stand-out performances were Mary Ann Espinosa (Aling Doray) and Carlon John Matobato (Bayaw).
Though the musical needs to be tightened-up, director Maribel Legarda explores un-theatrical possibilities especially in blocking an all-cast stage appearance. She may have the purpose of staying it that way but ‘firing squad’ blocking is a “no-no” and a “lazy chore” in the theater. Boni Juan, production designer, gives a very effective devised set contrary to the flat lights design of Ian Torqueza. Some choreographic patterns are interesting to look at. “Factory” dance is one of the highlights.
Over-all, the message is crystal clear. The Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) headed by Secretary Alberto G. Romulo should celebrate as PETA achieves both the artistic integrity in Philippine theater and the socio-political information campaign against using fake passports, visa and human trafficking of aspiring Filipino migrant workers in this timely Filipino musical comedy.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Friday, June 6, 2008
As You Like It (Theater)
In celebration of the University of the Philippines’ Centennial, the duly recognized academic theater organization in Diliman, Dulaang UP, presented in September 2007 English and Filipino versions of As You Like It (Paano Man Ang Ibig), a romantic comedy written by the eminent playwright of the Elizabethan stage, William Shakespeare. The Filipino version was the translation of the late National Artist for Theater and Literature Rolando Tinio. The play was presented at the Wilfrido Ma. Guerrero Theater, Palma Hall Building.
As You Like It is considered by many to be one of Shakespeare’s greatest comedies, and the heroine, Rosalind, is praised as one of his most inspiring characters and has more lines than any of Shakespeare’s female characters. Rosalind, the daughter of a banished duke, falls in love with Orlando, the disinherited son of one of the duke’s friends. When she banished from the court by her usurping uncle, Duke Frederick, Rosalind switches gender and as Ganymede travels with her loyal cousin Celia and the jester Touchstone to the Forest of Arden, where her father and his friends live in exile. Observations on life and love follow (including love, aging, the natural world, and death), friends are made, and families are reunited. By the play’s end Ganymede, once again Rosalind, marries her Orlando. Two other sets of lovers are also wed, one of them Celia and Orlando’s mean older brother Oliver. As Oliver becomes a gentler, kinder young man so the Duke conveniently changes his ways and turns to religion so that the exiled Duke, father of Rosalind, can rule once again.
At the helm of the UP production was Prof. Josefina Estrella (who bills herself as “Jose Estrella”, currently the artistic director of Dulaang UP. Estrella is an associate professor of the Department of Speech Communication and Theater Arts, College of Arts and Letters in Diliman. She finished her Master of Fine Arts in Directing in Columbia University as a Fulbright scholar.
Her artistic team was composed of Dexter Santos (choreographer), Amiel Leonardia (lighting designer), Lex Marcos (set designer) and J. Victor Villareal (music / sound designer).
This theater review touches in part on feministic images used by Estrella in her postmodern day interpretation of Shakespeare’s “As You Like It” and juxtaposes the debatable issue on the representation of female characters in Elizabethan Theater.
Estrella’s Theater Elements
Set. One of the most influential elements in the history of theater performance is the set. It functions dramatically as conveyor of images of the physical environment and the magic it purports. In the fantastical modes of Shakespeare’s setting, the set symbolizes numerous meanings and representations. Chief among them are the forests that always transcend imagery of fantasy and mystery and a castle that perennially connotes hierarchy and bureaucracy.
The set was like the work of art of Saldy Calder (an American artist during the 1930’s), known in the visual arts for using aerial space in his abstract art. Marcos put hanging dried twigs and branches to perpetuate images of the forest Arden where many significant scenes transpied. In addition to the texture of the same scenario, a see-saw was used.
Marcos scenery evoke intuitive feelings. The concept of balance, geometrical shapes, imaging colors, and sculptured installations as studied in Humanities, Physics, and Engineering were executed as one major idea in the set. However, the mechanical illusions had some errors. The see-saw for example, did not function as intended.
Costumes. The costumes had a contemporary look, which proved the usefulness of ready-to-wear outfits. Though the major characters’ costumes were represented by color, they somehow lacked powers of solidity and elegance. The costume statement was aesthetically weak. Even the significant part wherein Rosalind (played by Nathasia Garrucha) cross-dressed did not succeed politically. The scene called for a ritual supposedly aided by the costumes; however, the director created a mishap. Jacques, one of the male characters, experienced the same fate on the choice of his costume, which was deliberately transposed into a female role-play.
It was difficult for the director and designer to achieve the costuming and transposing of the two different genders played by one actor. Conceptually, there was an attempt to manage with intelligence the role-play as perceived through the director’s aesthetic decision. But the costumes were inadequate and sloppy to purport gender transposition. It could have been better if the director and designer teamed up to achieve practical ways for the audience to better understand the play. The wonders of the costumes got lost in the way.
Music / Sound. Music plays a major role in any production. The music put together by Villareal was forgettable. The music did not create any emphatic impact on most scenes. In theater design, Villareal’s choice of music was quite incompatible with Estrella’s conceptual staging. This pastoral play should focus on fundamental music and soundscape. Any designer should ultimately aim for simplifying tests and experimentations in music especially if it is a Shakespearean play.
With Villareal’s execution, an atmosphere of uncertainty was felt that contributed several unnaturalness and irritability in the production.
Lighting. Most scenes in the play were intentionally darkened. Lighting problem had more to do with intensity. Romantic comedies are always staged with a lighter design. A director may still achieve the illusory mood effect provided by a designer, but to intensify darkness on stage may result to eye irritation and unconscious negative reactions from some people in the audience.
Rhythmic lighting was the loophole in the production. The intensity was totally different from the rhythm. The scenes of the play had a struggle, which were manifested sophomorically in the production. Leonardia, compared to his numerous engagements as a lighting designer, did not succeed in this production. In effect, some choreographic movements of Santos were a failure due to dark lighting. Theatrical elements must create a mise-en-scene for the stage play to succeed and lighting has a special function as it unifies almost all elements seen on stage. Lighting destroyed the overall technical composition of all elements of the production.
Acting. Shakespearean plays are usually an actor’s piece because lines are dramatically lengthy and usually hard to deliver. The ensemble style of acting was quite ordinary except for actresses Mailes Kanapi (Jacques) and Dolly Gutierrez (Celia). Both created an exciting visual acting styles and effective internal nuances. Kanapi, with her well-enunciated delivery of words and eloquent portrayal, precisely uttered the famous monologue “all the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players…” Gutierrez established herself as Celia effortlessly and candidly. At some point, with her wit in understanding the essence of Shakespeare’s subtexts, Gutierrez seemed to be one of the greatest actresses in Philippine contemporary theater. Mike Manotoc (Orlando), JC Santos (Silvius), Natasha Garrucha (Rosalind), and Mara Marasigan (Phoebe), though quite new on stage, memorably articulated a clearer character interpretation and intention.
Feministic Images
Estrella’s decision to make a woman play the role of Jacques indicates an imagery of women power. Putting Kanapi into the role of Jacques was dangerous but challenging. In the “classic” periods of Greek and Elizabethan theatre, women were absent from the stage, an absence that has been the object of feminist deconstructive activity (Aston, 1995: 16-17). This evolved with Estrella’s interpretation of Jacques’ character, which connoted a strong female persona.
The play has similarities with the film Stage Beauty directed by Richard Eyre and starred Claire Danes and Billy Crudup. Set in 1660, Edward “Ned” Kynaston (played by Crudup) was England’s most celebrated leading lady as women were forbidden to appear on stage. But Charles II forbade actors to play female roles and the prohibition ended Kynaston’s fateful career on stage. He then reinvented himself by doing male roles on the Elizabethan stage.
Somehow, Estrella’s use of role reversal was a crucial decision that resembled Kynaston’s. Decision to change is a form of empowerment on the part of Estrella since it is a form of experiementation or thinking out of the box that is needed in Philippine theater to induce more audience and entertainment and to apply certain theories in performance studies. The role reversal is also empowering and challenging because it is difficult to act out the role of the opposite sex.
As You Like It showed the complex plot of Shakespeare. Estrella made it more complex, if not confusing. Rosalind’s change of role to Ganymede can be considered as another image of strong feministic force, which Estrella successfully attained due to strong nuances of her actresses Gutierrez (Celia) and Garrucha (Rosalind-Ganymede).
Howard (2001) in Norton Shakespeare explained that Rosalind cross-dressed to become Ganymede whom Orlando wooed. The alias “Ganymede”, however, “commonly signified a young boy who was the lover of another (usually older) man…Provocatively, Shakespeare uses Orlando and Rosalind’s encounters to overlay a story of a male-female desire with traces of another tale of a man’s love for a boy” (1591-1598). This Ganymede-Orlando homoerotic relationship was given a contemporary version through the homoerotic or lesbian movements of Celia and Rosalind. In fact, contexts of homoerotic readings in the roles of Celia and Rosalind were felt more than the supposedly Ganymede-Orlando tandem. It reflected the radical feminist perspective of lesbianism.
Santos’s choreographic movements, as conceptualized by Estrella, explored the use of neck, arms, lips, hips, and legs to symbolize sensuality and vulnerability in Celia-Rosalind’s intimate relationship in the forest of Arden. In another scene, Rosalind was almost nude while Celia seductively helped change her identity into Ganymede using theatric dance movements. Gutierrez (Celia) used her sensitivity perfectly as her eyes, breathing, and hands “caressed” Garrucha (Rosalind) who reacted as if she had an orgasm with a male through a ance ritual of cross-dressing.
Synthesis
Up to now, exclusion of women in the Elizabethan Theater tradition is questionable and oppresive. Feminism is a compelling issue that theater historians have not resolved until now. Wilson and Goldfarb (2000: 197-198) explained that the absence of women in Elizabethan Theater “has led to interesting discussions regarding the representation of female characters. Cross-dressing (that is, dressing as the opposite sex) – which in today’s drama has become popular way to point out sexual stereotyping – had many reverberations in Shakespeare’s plays…We should note that cross-dressing in Elizabethan drama usually did dramatize negative ideas about women.”
Estrella was able to oppose the sexual stereotyping by using role reversal and injecting homoerotic interpretations. The attempt to have a feminist approach is a welcome development in this Elizabethan Theater.
Estrella had Anne Bogart as mentor, one of the pioneers of postmodern viewpoints in theater and whose performance theory applies specifically for all theater artists working for a collaborative end product. As an educator-artist, Estrella reflected Bogart’s viewpoint that “an actor’s craft lies in the differentiation of one moment from the next. A great actor seems dangerous, unpredictable, and full of life and differentiation. Thus, moments are highly-differentiated” (in Dixon & Smith, 1995: 11).
This idea was clearly demonstrated in Estrella’s As You Like It as veteran Philippine actors and actresses underwent the process of “disorientation”, “difficulty”, and “terror.” Bogart emphasized changes in the process and production of a new culture in theater by shaking the culture of every production (in Dixon & Smith, 1995: 5). Estrella’s stage direction, instead of using traditional staging, bravely attempted to rediscover the vision of Shakespeare when he was writing romantic pastoral comedy and applied Bogart’s viewpoints. Even if weak in theatrical elements, Estrella was able to pull through with the strong alliance of feminist actresses’ physical qualities that made her staging quite interesting.
Bogart’s influences on Estrella might also have created several confusion and disorientation among fellow Filipino artists. Are Philippine theater actors and actresses, designers, technicians, and managers ready for this Americanized version of Russian Stanislavski’s theater methodology? A closing thought for fellow artists and scholars.
As You Like It is considered by many to be one of Shakespeare’s greatest comedies, and the heroine, Rosalind, is praised as one of his most inspiring characters and has more lines than any of Shakespeare’s female characters. Rosalind, the daughter of a banished duke, falls in love with Orlando, the disinherited son of one of the duke’s friends. When she banished from the court by her usurping uncle, Duke Frederick, Rosalind switches gender and as Ganymede travels with her loyal cousin Celia and the jester Touchstone to the Forest of Arden, where her father and his friends live in exile. Observations on life and love follow (including love, aging, the natural world, and death), friends are made, and families are reunited. By the play’s end Ganymede, once again Rosalind, marries her Orlando. Two other sets of lovers are also wed, one of them Celia and Orlando’s mean older brother Oliver. As Oliver becomes a gentler, kinder young man so the Duke conveniently changes his ways and turns to religion so that the exiled Duke, father of Rosalind, can rule once again.
At the helm of the UP production was Prof. Josefina Estrella (who bills herself as “Jose Estrella”, currently the artistic director of Dulaang UP. Estrella is an associate professor of the Department of Speech Communication and Theater Arts, College of Arts and Letters in Diliman. She finished her Master of Fine Arts in Directing in Columbia University as a Fulbright scholar.
Her artistic team was composed of Dexter Santos (choreographer), Amiel Leonardia (lighting designer), Lex Marcos (set designer) and J. Victor Villareal (music / sound designer).
This theater review touches in part on feministic images used by Estrella in her postmodern day interpretation of Shakespeare’s “As You Like It” and juxtaposes the debatable issue on the representation of female characters in Elizabethan Theater.
Estrella’s Theater Elements
Set. One of the most influential elements in the history of theater performance is the set. It functions dramatically as conveyor of images of the physical environment and the magic it purports. In the fantastical modes of Shakespeare’s setting, the set symbolizes numerous meanings and representations. Chief among them are the forests that always transcend imagery of fantasy and mystery and a castle that perennially connotes hierarchy and bureaucracy.
The set was like the work of art of Saldy Calder (an American artist during the 1930’s), known in the visual arts for using aerial space in his abstract art. Marcos put hanging dried twigs and branches to perpetuate images of the forest Arden where many significant scenes transpied. In addition to the texture of the same scenario, a see-saw was used.
Marcos scenery evoke intuitive feelings. The concept of balance, geometrical shapes, imaging colors, and sculptured installations as studied in Humanities, Physics, and Engineering were executed as one major idea in the set. However, the mechanical illusions had some errors. The see-saw for example, did not function as intended.
Costumes. The costumes had a contemporary look, which proved the usefulness of ready-to-wear outfits. Though the major characters’ costumes were represented by color, they somehow lacked powers of solidity and elegance. The costume statement was aesthetically weak. Even the significant part wherein Rosalind (played by Nathasia Garrucha) cross-dressed did not succeed politically. The scene called for a ritual supposedly aided by the costumes; however, the director created a mishap. Jacques, one of the male characters, experienced the same fate on the choice of his costume, which was deliberately transposed into a female role-play.
It was difficult for the director and designer to achieve the costuming and transposing of the two different genders played by one actor. Conceptually, there was an attempt to manage with intelligence the role-play as perceived through the director’s aesthetic decision. But the costumes were inadequate and sloppy to purport gender transposition. It could have been better if the director and designer teamed up to achieve practical ways for the audience to better understand the play. The wonders of the costumes got lost in the way.
Music / Sound. Music plays a major role in any production. The music put together by Villareal was forgettable. The music did not create any emphatic impact on most scenes. In theater design, Villareal’s choice of music was quite incompatible with Estrella’s conceptual staging. This pastoral play should focus on fundamental music and soundscape. Any designer should ultimately aim for simplifying tests and experimentations in music especially if it is a Shakespearean play.
With Villareal’s execution, an atmosphere of uncertainty was felt that contributed several unnaturalness and irritability in the production.
Lighting. Most scenes in the play were intentionally darkened. Lighting problem had more to do with intensity. Romantic comedies are always staged with a lighter design. A director may still achieve the illusory mood effect provided by a designer, but to intensify darkness on stage may result to eye irritation and unconscious negative reactions from some people in the audience.
Rhythmic lighting was the loophole in the production. The intensity was totally different from the rhythm. The scenes of the play had a struggle, which were manifested sophomorically in the production. Leonardia, compared to his numerous engagements as a lighting designer, did not succeed in this production. In effect, some choreographic movements of Santos were a failure due to dark lighting. Theatrical elements must create a mise-en-scene for the stage play to succeed and lighting has a special function as it unifies almost all elements seen on stage. Lighting destroyed the overall technical composition of all elements of the production.
Acting. Shakespearean plays are usually an actor’s piece because lines are dramatically lengthy and usually hard to deliver. The ensemble style of acting was quite ordinary except for actresses Mailes Kanapi (Jacques) and Dolly Gutierrez (Celia). Both created an exciting visual acting styles and effective internal nuances. Kanapi, with her well-enunciated delivery of words and eloquent portrayal, precisely uttered the famous monologue “all the world’s a stage, and all the men and women merely players…” Gutierrez established herself as Celia effortlessly and candidly. At some point, with her wit in understanding the essence of Shakespeare’s subtexts, Gutierrez seemed to be one of the greatest actresses in Philippine contemporary theater. Mike Manotoc (Orlando), JC Santos (Silvius), Natasha Garrucha (Rosalind), and Mara Marasigan (Phoebe), though quite new on stage, memorably articulated a clearer character interpretation and intention.
Feministic Images
Estrella’s decision to make a woman play the role of Jacques indicates an imagery of women power. Putting Kanapi into the role of Jacques was dangerous but challenging. In the “classic” periods of Greek and Elizabethan theatre, women were absent from the stage, an absence that has been the object of feminist deconstructive activity (Aston, 1995: 16-17). This evolved with Estrella’s interpretation of Jacques’ character, which connoted a strong female persona.
The play has similarities with the film Stage Beauty directed by Richard Eyre and starred Claire Danes and Billy Crudup. Set in 1660, Edward “Ned” Kynaston (played by Crudup) was England’s most celebrated leading lady as women were forbidden to appear on stage. But Charles II forbade actors to play female roles and the prohibition ended Kynaston’s fateful career on stage. He then reinvented himself by doing male roles on the Elizabethan stage.
Somehow, Estrella’s use of role reversal was a crucial decision that resembled Kynaston’s. Decision to change is a form of empowerment on the part of Estrella since it is a form of experiementation or thinking out of the box that is needed in Philippine theater to induce more audience and entertainment and to apply certain theories in performance studies. The role reversal is also empowering and challenging because it is difficult to act out the role of the opposite sex.
As You Like It showed the complex plot of Shakespeare. Estrella made it more complex, if not confusing. Rosalind’s change of role to Ganymede can be considered as another image of strong feministic force, which Estrella successfully attained due to strong nuances of her actresses Gutierrez (Celia) and Garrucha (Rosalind-Ganymede).
Howard (2001) in Norton Shakespeare explained that Rosalind cross-dressed to become Ganymede whom Orlando wooed. The alias “Ganymede”, however, “commonly signified a young boy who was the lover of another (usually older) man…Provocatively, Shakespeare uses Orlando and Rosalind’s encounters to overlay a story of a male-female desire with traces of another tale of a man’s love for a boy” (1591-1598). This Ganymede-Orlando homoerotic relationship was given a contemporary version through the homoerotic or lesbian movements of Celia and Rosalind. In fact, contexts of homoerotic readings in the roles of Celia and Rosalind were felt more than the supposedly Ganymede-Orlando tandem. It reflected the radical feminist perspective of lesbianism.
Santos’s choreographic movements, as conceptualized by Estrella, explored the use of neck, arms, lips, hips, and legs to symbolize sensuality and vulnerability in Celia-Rosalind’s intimate relationship in the forest of Arden. In another scene, Rosalind was almost nude while Celia seductively helped change her identity into Ganymede using theatric dance movements. Gutierrez (Celia) used her sensitivity perfectly as her eyes, breathing, and hands “caressed” Garrucha (Rosalind) who reacted as if she had an orgasm with a male through a ance ritual of cross-dressing.
Synthesis
Up to now, exclusion of women in the Elizabethan Theater tradition is questionable and oppresive. Feminism is a compelling issue that theater historians have not resolved until now. Wilson and Goldfarb (2000: 197-198) explained that the absence of women in Elizabethan Theater “has led to interesting discussions regarding the representation of female characters. Cross-dressing (that is, dressing as the opposite sex) – which in today’s drama has become popular way to point out sexual stereotyping – had many reverberations in Shakespeare’s plays…We should note that cross-dressing in Elizabethan drama usually did dramatize negative ideas about women.”
Estrella was able to oppose the sexual stereotyping by using role reversal and injecting homoerotic interpretations. The attempt to have a feminist approach is a welcome development in this Elizabethan Theater.
Estrella had Anne Bogart as mentor, one of the pioneers of postmodern viewpoints in theater and whose performance theory applies specifically for all theater artists working for a collaborative end product. As an educator-artist, Estrella reflected Bogart’s viewpoint that “an actor’s craft lies in the differentiation of one moment from the next. A great actor seems dangerous, unpredictable, and full of life and differentiation. Thus, moments are highly-differentiated” (in Dixon & Smith, 1995: 11).
This idea was clearly demonstrated in Estrella’s As You Like It as veteran Philippine actors and actresses underwent the process of “disorientation”, “difficulty”, and “terror.” Bogart emphasized changes in the process and production of a new culture in theater by shaking the culture of every production (in Dixon & Smith, 1995: 5). Estrella’s stage direction, instead of using traditional staging, bravely attempted to rediscover the vision of Shakespeare when he was writing romantic pastoral comedy and applied Bogart’s viewpoints. Even if weak in theatrical elements, Estrella was able to pull through with the strong alliance of feminist actresses’ physical qualities that made her staging quite interesting.
Bogart’s influences on Estrella might also have created several confusion and disorientation among fellow Filipino artists. Are Philippine theater actors and actresses, designers, technicians, and managers ready for this Americanized version of Russian Stanislavski’s theater methodology? A closing thought for fellow artists and scholars.
Skin Deep (Theater)
Point 1: It is indeed a queer parody.
“Queerness can be seen as an oppositional stance not simply to essentialist formations of gay and lesbian identities, but to a much wider application of the depth model of identity which underwrites the epistemology deployed by the bourgeoisie in their ascendancy to and maintenance of dominant power. As such, the queer label contains a critique of a more vast and comprehensive system of class-based practices of which sex/gender identity is only a part. ( Moe Meyer, 1994: 87-88 )
PETA’s Skin Deep has misrepresented the use of the popular “A”lienation Effect which originated from Bertolt Brecht’s idea to break the fourth wall of the stage and establish relationships to the audience for critical evaluation of moral and social values (queer and campy) of the people.
Point 2: It is mindful to say that the production displayed a CAMPY performance.
To use Meyer’s topic of Acting Camp in his introduction to The Politics and Poetics of Camp from the book Performance Analysis, 2001: It would mean that the production would discuss the parodic label of queer. The term “camp” would lead the audience into the concept of “self.” Nor Domingo, Skin Deep director, would lead the audience and substitute the “self” as performative, improvisational, discontinuous and constituted by repetitive and stylized acts instead of providing the notion of “self” as unique, abiding and continuous. He (Domingo) has a gift of a visionary artist but needs further maturity in stylized blocking.
In Domingo’s theatrical elements, he explored intelligently the uses of music, dance, lighting, sound, set, costumes and actors. Stand outs were actors Rem Zamora as Dr. Beau (though weak at times in creating the imagery of a circus master); Erick Bisa as Ciso; Gail Guanlao-Billones as Amor de Sangre; Diana Malahay as Happy; Jonjon Villareal’s magical lighting which juxtaposed very smooth transitional devices per scene; Christine Crame Santillan’s expressionistic-styled choreography and the elegance of repetitive gestures and movements made even more exciting visually. Contrary to its stellar staging and elements were Leo Abaya’s set which did not make it flattering for both actors and the director; Kalila Aguilos’ costumes were a bit confused and half-baked. It did not solidly justify the “campy” appearance and expressionistic mood. Lucien Letaba, Vincent De Jesus and Melvin Corpin’s composition and arrangement in music had a very “un”-unified aural output.
Point 3: It can only reach only to those who are much connected to the artificialities of the world ( the bourgeois society ).
It can be argued innocuously that Skin Deep displayed all modes of sexual identities (heterosexual, homosexual, metrosexual) but did not display all social identities (rich, upper middle, middle, lower middle, lower and outcasts).
The other half which constitutes the major population in reality was totally alienated from this material. This is partially a success and a work that should be in progress.
The parody of beauty and truth is seen through the playwright’s intention to share tragic disappointments in life. In his program notes, Vincent De Jesus, the annotator of this production’s plot, exploits his personal version of queerness and physical instabilities. Taking into consideration of the majority of the population in the country, this piece can never reach out what PETA’s dream vision of becoming the PEOPLE’S THEATER. This is a dangerous decision to include in their repertoire of plays.
These two opposing forces, Vincent De Jesus’ dramatic material text versus PETA’s vision of a People’s Theater, are a misnomer for PETA artists dealing a strict mission to Philippine Theater.
“Queerness can be seen as an oppositional stance not simply to essentialist formations of gay and lesbian identities, but to a much wider application of the depth model of identity which underwrites the epistemology deployed by the bourgeoisie in their ascendancy to and maintenance of dominant power. As such, the queer label contains a critique of a more vast and comprehensive system of class-based practices of which sex/gender identity is only a part. ( Moe Meyer, 1994: 87-88 )
PETA’s Skin Deep has misrepresented the use of the popular “A”lienation Effect which originated from Bertolt Brecht’s idea to break the fourth wall of the stage and establish relationships to the audience for critical evaluation of moral and social values (queer and campy) of the people.
Point 2: It is mindful to say that the production displayed a CAMPY performance.
To use Meyer’s topic of Acting Camp in his introduction to The Politics and Poetics of Camp from the book Performance Analysis, 2001: It would mean that the production would discuss the parodic label of queer. The term “camp” would lead the audience into the concept of “self.” Nor Domingo, Skin Deep director, would lead the audience and substitute the “self” as performative, improvisational, discontinuous and constituted by repetitive and stylized acts instead of providing the notion of “self” as unique, abiding and continuous. He (Domingo) has a gift of a visionary artist but needs further maturity in stylized blocking.
In Domingo’s theatrical elements, he explored intelligently the uses of music, dance, lighting, sound, set, costumes and actors. Stand outs were actors Rem Zamora as Dr. Beau (though weak at times in creating the imagery of a circus master); Erick Bisa as Ciso; Gail Guanlao-Billones as Amor de Sangre; Diana Malahay as Happy; Jonjon Villareal’s magical lighting which juxtaposed very smooth transitional devices per scene; Christine Crame Santillan’s expressionistic-styled choreography and the elegance of repetitive gestures and movements made even more exciting visually. Contrary to its stellar staging and elements were Leo Abaya’s set which did not make it flattering for both actors and the director; Kalila Aguilos’ costumes were a bit confused and half-baked. It did not solidly justify the “campy” appearance and expressionistic mood. Lucien Letaba, Vincent De Jesus and Melvin Corpin’s composition and arrangement in music had a very “un”-unified aural output.
Point 3: It can only reach only to those who are much connected to the artificialities of the world ( the bourgeois society ).
It can be argued innocuously that Skin Deep displayed all modes of sexual identities (heterosexual, homosexual, metrosexual) but did not display all social identities (rich, upper middle, middle, lower middle, lower and outcasts).
The other half which constitutes the major population in reality was totally alienated from this material. This is partially a success and a work that should be in progress.
The parody of beauty and truth is seen through the playwright’s intention to share tragic disappointments in life. In his program notes, Vincent De Jesus, the annotator of this production’s plot, exploits his personal version of queerness and physical instabilities. Taking into consideration of the majority of the population in the country, this piece can never reach out what PETA’s dream vision of becoming the PEOPLE’S THEATER. This is a dangerous decision to include in their repertoire of plays.
These two opposing forces, Vincent De Jesus’ dramatic material text versus PETA’s vision of a People’s Theater, are a misnomer for PETA artists dealing a strict mission to Philippine Theater.
Altar Boyz (Theater)
In the book "Power Plays..." (2000) written by John O. Whitney and Tina Packer, they examined what the notion of power is. To quote: "Power is a freighted idea, filled with shifting cargo: power to build, power to tear down; power to hasten, power to delay; power to inspire, power to frighten; power to give, power to withhold; power to love, power to hurt; power to do good, power to do evil." (p.25)
Repertory Philippines' ALTAR BOYZ did not actually promote such versatility of power. This musical comedy should somehow be associated to the classic rendition of what musical farce is. Farce, by the way, in its common definition would mean - a depiction of life-situation and mockery of society's problems like faith in its most comical-sarcastic way. The term "farce" is ordinarily-termed as the "satire" of today.
Farce, when staged, should be ideal in its theatrical elements. Perfection is needed and hightened accuracy of simple details should be achieved by its director. The director of the production, Chari Arespacochaga, was not able to achieve the idealism on such genre (musical-farce) configured to be called a musical-satire. What lacks is power! The power of this material is to transform somehow the enormous faith in Catholicism and Christianity of the believers (audience). To achieve this realization, an audience member is needed to reflect or even renew religious beliefs and common practices after watching through this almost post-contemporary (technological) age.
Kevin Del Aguila (book), Gary Adler and Michael Patrick Walker (music and lyrics) should be recognized for their generous efforts to discuss simple but relevant microscopic view of what faith really is. Thanks to an interesting material.
The power, as mentioned in the introduction, is needed badly in the production. Faith (Religion) is POWER and POWER is attained when used in multiple variations such as what Whitney and Packer would see.
The production was not even edgy and sharp.
To go into the theatrical use of elements by Arespacochaga, the set (designed by Tuxqs Rutaquio) almost attempted to ridicule concert sets. Unfortunately, it did not function well during the actual staging. Through the downstage blocking, the actors were not able to move freely to all sides of the stage (in terms of aesthetics and logical actions), hence, making their movements so limited as opposed to the conventional musical concerts that we see in reality. It (the material) calls more for a bare stage with strategic scaffolds and the use of moving lights on stage should fuel-up the energy of the set. It also calls for a more sarcastically concert-type of thing.
The costumes (designed by Faust Peneyra) were too flat. Again, "concert" concept should provide an avenue for experimentation in fashion. Peneyra lost sight on this valuable idea. The change of costumes from one song to another should signal magic and mystery - threading another sub-story into it. This interesting idea got lost in the way.
Lighting (as designed by Martin Esteva) served only an illumination and not the usual superfluous and terrific effects each concert musicale would appeal in tangent with live music (where an effective band-play was executed). Ace Philippine lights designers John Neil Ilao Batalla and Voltaire de Jesus might agree on the idea of concert-effect lighting. Several lighting cues of Esteva should have had hundreds of lighting cues in this kind of dramatic-material.
The only effective element used in the production was the band-play (music notation) headed by Jojo Malferarri (Musical Director / Conductor / Keyboardist and Repetiteur). Again, unfortunately, because of the direction, the band was not seen entirely which defeated the very purpose of a musical concert. Why? What was the purpose of it? It really did not work efficiently in the production.
Finally, the performances of the actors-singers were partially effective. Definitely, there were attempts to exaggerate hilarious scenarios which should be, since this is a presentational (musical) staging. However, only Red Concepcion (played the role of Mark) and Reb Atadero (played the role of Juan) contributed to its obvious genre.
PJ Valerio (played the role Matthew), Ryu (played the role Luke) and Chevy Mercado (Abraham) lacked bigger and theater facial expressions and nuances. Most of the production dance numbers were too tamed and ordinary, nothing to brag about on its movements and patterns of dances (choreographed by Jason Zamora).
To sum the production, it really lacked POWER.
The power to build, power to tear down; power to hasten, power to delay; power to inspire, power to frighten; power to give, power to withhold; power to love, power to hurt; power to do good, power to do evil.
These different approaches and uses of power should somehow be the initial guiding principle of the production.
"ALTAR BOYZ" needs to fuel-up more POWER!
Repertory Philippines' ALTAR BOYZ did not actually promote such versatility of power. This musical comedy should somehow be associated to the classic rendition of what musical farce is. Farce, by the way, in its common definition would mean - a depiction of life-situation and mockery of society's problems like faith in its most comical-sarcastic way. The term "farce" is ordinarily-termed as the "satire" of today.
Farce, when staged, should be ideal in its theatrical elements. Perfection is needed and hightened accuracy of simple details should be achieved by its director. The director of the production, Chari Arespacochaga, was not able to achieve the idealism on such genre (musical-farce) configured to be called a musical-satire. What lacks is power! The power of this material is to transform somehow the enormous faith in Catholicism and Christianity of the believers (audience). To achieve this realization, an audience member is needed to reflect or even renew religious beliefs and common practices after watching through this almost post-contemporary (technological) age.
Kevin Del Aguila (book), Gary Adler and Michael Patrick Walker (music and lyrics) should be recognized for their generous efforts to discuss simple but relevant microscopic view of what faith really is. Thanks to an interesting material.
The power, as mentioned in the introduction, is needed badly in the production. Faith (Religion) is POWER and POWER is attained when used in multiple variations such as what Whitney and Packer would see.
The production was not even edgy and sharp.
To go into the theatrical use of elements by Arespacochaga, the set (designed by Tuxqs Rutaquio) almost attempted to ridicule concert sets. Unfortunately, it did not function well during the actual staging. Through the downstage blocking, the actors were not able to move freely to all sides of the stage (in terms of aesthetics and logical actions), hence, making their movements so limited as opposed to the conventional musical concerts that we see in reality. It (the material) calls more for a bare stage with strategic scaffolds and the use of moving lights on stage should fuel-up the energy of the set. It also calls for a more sarcastically concert-type of thing.
The costumes (designed by Faust Peneyra) were too flat. Again, "concert" concept should provide an avenue for experimentation in fashion. Peneyra lost sight on this valuable idea. The change of costumes from one song to another should signal magic and mystery - threading another sub-story into it. This interesting idea got lost in the way.
Lighting (as designed by Martin Esteva) served only an illumination and not the usual superfluous and terrific effects each concert musicale would appeal in tangent with live music (where an effective band-play was executed). Ace Philippine lights designers John Neil Ilao Batalla and Voltaire de Jesus might agree on the idea of concert-effect lighting. Several lighting cues of Esteva should have had hundreds of lighting cues in this kind of dramatic-material.
The only effective element used in the production was the band-play (music notation) headed by Jojo Malferarri (Musical Director / Conductor / Keyboardist and Repetiteur). Again, unfortunately, because of the direction, the band was not seen entirely which defeated the very purpose of a musical concert. Why? What was the purpose of it? It really did not work efficiently in the production.
Finally, the performances of the actors-singers were partially effective. Definitely, there were attempts to exaggerate hilarious scenarios which should be, since this is a presentational (musical) staging. However, only Red Concepcion (played the role of Mark) and Reb Atadero (played the role of Juan) contributed to its obvious genre.
PJ Valerio (played the role Matthew), Ryu (played the role Luke) and Chevy Mercado (Abraham) lacked bigger and theater facial expressions and nuances. Most of the production dance numbers were too tamed and ordinary, nothing to brag about on its movements and patterns of dances (choreographed by Jason Zamora).
To sum the production, it really lacked POWER.
The power to build, power to tear down; power to hasten, power to delay; power to inspire, power to frighten; power to give, power to withhold; power to love, power to hurt; power to do good, power to do evil.
These different approaches and uses of power should somehow be the initial guiding principle of the production.
"ALTAR BOYZ" needs to fuel-up more POWER!
Marisol (Theater)
Jean Vilar wrote:
“A director who cannot detach himself from his work during the final rehearsals is only a mediocre craftsman, however much it might seem that this is the very point at which he should be most intensely involved in it. Failing this detachment, the director blinds himself – the worst possible error. Such poor fools forget that theatre is play, in which inspiration and child-like wonder are more important than sweat and tantrums.” ( p. 211: The Making of Theatre: From Drama to Performance, Robert W. Corrigan)
Premise:
Not all theater artists can be directors. A director has the innate ability for both visual and aural aspects of the theater. Not everyone has that capability. Thus, the director makes him / her a major asset in contemporary theater.
Damages:
The 21st century theater in the Philippines upholds the significant impact and influence of a director to the production. Without the director, the conglomeration of such event would not be enough for other artists to articulate and present a cohesive execution of exciting theatrical elements in a production.
One.
The whole theatrical event still lies on the very vision of the director. Krystal Banzon, a visiting American Fulbright scholar-artist and the director of this production, failed to synthesize the very essence of theater – to say something to the audience in the most articulate way possible – visually and aurally.
The staging did not say anything. Hence, making her an ineffective and unimaginative creator of the theater. She exhausted a lot of potential images on stage with absurd ( "meaningless" ) forms.
What do you want to say?
Two.
Rody Vera’s adaptation of Jose Rivera’s Marisol promoted the physical environment ( from the rural to the urban, capitalism, discrimination, corruption among others ) we have today here in our country. However, it did not compliment the lyricism of Rivera’s apocalyptic interpretation of the Second Coming (The Book of Revelations ) to that of our existing contemporary Filipino language. Hence, it sounded constipated and askew.
The director Banzon might have not adequately guided all the actors in using the text on stage as Vera perhaps would see it done effectively. It is important when the playwright or in this case, the writer who adapted the original work should closely collaborate with the director. Hence, it felt that it lacked communication between the director and the writer.
Three.
Basically, the actors for this production were quite confused whether to impose an artificial theater acting styles or just to go for “truth.” Most of them were under-utilized. Mailes Kanapi ( Marisol ), one of the leading stage actresses of today, poured in a lot of effort physically, emotionally, intellectually, psychologically and artistically. What is so sad is that: actors can only do so much. Even if the director has the best actors in town, they should still be guided technically and truthfully. Kanapi, depressingly, did not transcend the microcospic message of the playwright, thus, becomes unsuccessful. Marjorie Lorico ( Angel ) might have been effective if not for her zombie-like walking and less magical and mysterious attack as the fallen angel. There was no power in her. She looked exorcised and nervous. Contrary, Nicco Manalo ( Golf-club man, ice-cream man, Lenny, Beggar with a scar ), the only male actor with multiple roles, created his chance to showcase versatility and passion for his work as an actor in this production. Finest when Manalo enunciated and thrown his lines with a lot of sincere energy to his co-actors. Surely, he displayed the most engaging acting approach.
Sigrid Bernardo ( June, Vigilante ), Virgie Sorita-Flores ( Jeepney barker, Babaeng marangya ), Tao Aves ( Bulag ), Miela Sayo ( Everlasting girl ), Chic San Agustin ( Takatak boi ) were either not directed or because of the director’s inexperience of Philippine culture that made them look so amateur onstage. There were even internal laughs ( internal punchlines ) and groping for lines ( lack of mastery of the script ) used by these actors which also made them incompetent – worst at that.
Four.
There was something wrong with that humongous set. Lex Marcos, aspiring to be a set designer, did not help the actors primarily. The giant set looked flat and boring maybe because the director was not able to utilize and maximize its symbolical representations through visual enunciation. Marcos would have been a big help (a Fine Arts graduate and now pursuing Art Studies) had he been strict and accurate with his ideas. There was an attempt to purge a lot of images in the play that were seen on canvass or at the ceiling using fiber glass. Hence, another failure for Marcos ( "As You Like It" set designer for Dulaang UP ).
Five.
The costuming was terribly awful. All accessories were just “accessories.” There was no conceptual interpretation of the costumes - no meaning transcended to the audience. The use of newspaper and discs over a black fabric indicated a puny transformation of images.
Six.
Roxanne Pagdanganan chose the music of Filipino popular hits such as Gloc-9, Francis Magalona, Yano, Wolfgang, Sandwich, Pepe Smith, Juan Dela Cruz band, Matilda and Sugar Hiccup. The question here is – what for?
Why would a director use these? Answer: to sound like it is set in the Philippine? This did not work as experienced during the run. It was more of a display of OPM hits than the usual magic of music when played in between scenes.
Seven.
The technical design also created a lot of uncertainty and purpose. To cite some, the volume level of gunshots was not accurate and balanced; the lighting design ( Ed Abquina ) was way out of the context of “end of the world” scenario; chaos did not look like “chaos” among other unimaginative and mediocre supplies of technicalities.
Eight.
A simple question: How did the staging move from a dramatic text to the actual performance? What was the idea of all these? It was very clear that the production forgot to include the audience and how the audience would react on the director’s idea through visual messages, themes and illusions of Jose Rivera about apocalypse and even post-apocalypse ( as faith in the bible would declare in the book of Revelations).
Nine.
The audience would normally reciprocate warmly or stiffly on any production. In this case, aside from being too exhaustingly long, the production made no impact at all.
Ten.
Sadly, Rivera’s “Marisol” is an interesting visual and aural allusions of poetry and lyricism though used in a dark and mysterious subject matter. As one hears the lines, one would question faith, power, hope and rebirth. The production assured not anyone of the above mentioned concepts might even help them regain the trust of the audience. At the end of it – one would ask: what is the point of staging this supposedly engaging text?
A note to all theater directors:
Consider your power to command on all the theatrical elements in a production with a clear conceptual staging in tow.
In every production the director wonderfully conceives a child but sometimes, the director can also be the "murderer" of his / her own child.
“A director who cannot detach himself from his work during the final rehearsals is only a mediocre craftsman, however much it might seem that this is the very point at which he should be most intensely involved in it. Failing this detachment, the director blinds himself – the worst possible error. Such poor fools forget that theatre is play, in which inspiration and child-like wonder are more important than sweat and tantrums.” ( p. 211: The Making of Theatre: From Drama to Performance, Robert W. Corrigan)
Premise:
Not all theater artists can be directors. A director has the innate ability for both visual and aural aspects of the theater. Not everyone has that capability. Thus, the director makes him / her a major asset in contemporary theater.
Damages:
The 21st century theater in the Philippines upholds the significant impact and influence of a director to the production. Without the director, the conglomeration of such event would not be enough for other artists to articulate and present a cohesive execution of exciting theatrical elements in a production.
One.
The whole theatrical event still lies on the very vision of the director. Krystal Banzon, a visiting American Fulbright scholar-artist and the director of this production, failed to synthesize the very essence of theater – to say something to the audience in the most articulate way possible – visually and aurally.
The staging did not say anything. Hence, making her an ineffective and unimaginative creator of the theater. She exhausted a lot of potential images on stage with absurd ( "meaningless" ) forms.
What do you want to say?
Two.
Rody Vera’s adaptation of Jose Rivera’s Marisol promoted the physical environment ( from the rural to the urban, capitalism, discrimination, corruption among others ) we have today here in our country. However, it did not compliment the lyricism of Rivera’s apocalyptic interpretation of the Second Coming (The Book of Revelations ) to that of our existing contemporary Filipino language. Hence, it sounded constipated and askew.
The director Banzon might have not adequately guided all the actors in using the text on stage as Vera perhaps would see it done effectively. It is important when the playwright or in this case, the writer who adapted the original work should closely collaborate with the director. Hence, it felt that it lacked communication between the director and the writer.
Three.
Basically, the actors for this production were quite confused whether to impose an artificial theater acting styles or just to go for “truth.” Most of them were under-utilized. Mailes Kanapi ( Marisol ), one of the leading stage actresses of today, poured in a lot of effort physically, emotionally, intellectually, psychologically and artistically. What is so sad is that: actors can only do so much. Even if the director has the best actors in town, they should still be guided technically and truthfully. Kanapi, depressingly, did not transcend the microcospic message of the playwright, thus, becomes unsuccessful. Marjorie Lorico ( Angel ) might have been effective if not for her zombie-like walking and less magical and mysterious attack as the fallen angel. There was no power in her. She looked exorcised and nervous. Contrary, Nicco Manalo ( Golf-club man, ice-cream man, Lenny, Beggar with a scar ), the only male actor with multiple roles, created his chance to showcase versatility and passion for his work as an actor in this production. Finest when Manalo enunciated and thrown his lines with a lot of sincere energy to his co-actors. Surely, he displayed the most engaging acting approach.
Sigrid Bernardo ( June, Vigilante ), Virgie Sorita-Flores ( Jeepney barker, Babaeng marangya ), Tao Aves ( Bulag ), Miela Sayo ( Everlasting girl ), Chic San Agustin ( Takatak boi ) were either not directed or because of the director’s inexperience of Philippine culture that made them look so amateur onstage. There were even internal laughs ( internal punchlines ) and groping for lines ( lack of mastery of the script ) used by these actors which also made them incompetent – worst at that.
Four.
There was something wrong with that humongous set. Lex Marcos, aspiring to be a set designer, did not help the actors primarily. The giant set looked flat and boring maybe because the director was not able to utilize and maximize its symbolical representations through visual enunciation. Marcos would have been a big help (a Fine Arts graduate and now pursuing Art Studies) had he been strict and accurate with his ideas. There was an attempt to purge a lot of images in the play that were seen on canvass or at the ceiling using fiber glass. Hence, another failure for Marcos ( "As You Like It" set designer for Dulaang UP ).
Five.
The costuming was terribly awful. All accessories were just “accessories.” There was no conceptual interpretation of the costumes - no meaning transcended to the audience. The use of newspaper and discs over a black fabric indicated a puny transformation of images.
Six.
Roxanne Pagdanganan chose the music of Filipino popular hits such as Gloc-9, Francis Magalona, Yano, Wolfgang, Sandwich, Pepe Smith, Juan Dela Cruz band, Matilda and Sugar Hiccup. The question here is – what for?
Why would a director use these? Answer: to sound like it is set in the Philippine? This did not work as experienced during the run. It was more of a display of OPM hits than the usual magic of music when played in between scenes.
Seven.
The technical design also created a lot of uncertainty and purpose. To cite some, the volume level of gunshots was not accurate and balanced; the lighting design ( Ed Abquina ) was way out of the context of “end of the world” scenario; chaos did not look like “chaos” among other unimaginative and mediocre supplies of technicalities.
Eight.
A simple question: How did the staging move from a dramatic text to the actual performance? What was the idea of all these? It was very clear that the production forgot to include the audience and how the audience would react on the director’s idea through visual messages, themes and illusions of Jose Rivera about apocalypse and even post-apocalypse ( as faith in the bible would declare in the book of Revelations).
Nine.
The audience would normally reciprocate warmly or stiffly on any production. In this case, aside from being too exhaustingly long, the production made no impact at all.
Ten.
Sadly, Rivera’s “Marisol” is an interesting visual and aural allusions of poetry and lyricism though used in a dark and mysterious subject matter. As one hears the lines, one would question faith, power, hope and rebirth. The production assured not anyone of the above mentioned concepts might even help them regain the trust of the audience. At the end of it – one would ask: what is the point of staging this supposedly engaging text?
A note to all theater directors:
Consider your power to command on all the theatrical elements in a production with a clear conceptual staging in tow.
In every production the director wonderfully conceives a child but sometimes, the director can also be the "murderer" of his / her own child.
Rm.180 (Film)
If the French New Wave film director and critic Jean-Luc Godard started with a 10-minute short, director Rico Gutierrez might have been right to start a cinematic career with his 40-minute work entitled “Rm.180”, a definitive gender-bender story structure of two male lovers trapped figuratively in a motel room. One man (Andoy Ranay) suffers from guilt and trauma as he commits himself with heterosexual marriage but is in love deeply with his long time buddy (Earl Ignacio) who masochistically tortures his friend for sexual pleasure and self-comfort.
Originally written for the stage during the early 90’s with its title “Short Time” (Dean Alfar), this plot translates intensely for the screen by screenwriters Augie Rivera and Mike Rivera. This digitally-made film excites audiences as it captures present day dilemmas of bi-sexual and gay relationships into a “cine-theatrical” illusion (combination of film and theater elements).
Gutierrez’s vision works best when aspiring filmmakers choose to execute simple but engaging images. He understands the medium (film) well and tries to achieve minimalism in his cinematic elements. However, not all plots are similar as that of his work. This is when directors decide critically whether to create a grandeur work or a more practical but substantial artwork. Gutierrez chose what works the best for the material and he worked it out elegantly at most, it even reaches its quintessence, perhaps almost.
Production designer Jerry Santos worked effectively in establishing crucial atmosphere of a motel though a little bit pushy for color variations as opposed to a very neutral black-gray-white VIP motel room color combinations at present. There should have been more furniture pieces that would entail more exciting camera movements from foregrounding to background plus the natural dynamism of the actors on screen. There are some sex equipment available in some motels and intensive research and exposure would make the film more symbolical and intellectually-substantial. Whereas the flashback scene of the couple (Andoy Ranay and Frances Makil-Igancio) was too vertical in design. It needed more curves and slants as confrontational scenes of Ranay and Makil-Ignacio do not represent straights nor “at rest” stances. It could have been quite successful if the room was bigger and textured. The background of Makil-Ignacio was so flat and unmoving. Seeing the art direction functional more than decorative is the only way to capture sexuality and perversive acts in the film.
Cinematographers Armin Collado and Pao Orendain partially exhibited sharp images and natural lighting. One instance is when the audience sees that much glaring of the lights to the faces of the actors which one would not be aware of where the source of stronger lights is coming from. This is perennially the problem of a digitally-shot made film – its generation loss (amount of lights reduced but not seen in the actual filming). Camera movements, on the other hand, successfully attempted consistently “handheld” (holding of the camera not by steady tripod but with hands) concept though at times shaky and inaccurate. Sound (Vince Tabios) became one of the weaknesses of the film since it lacked balanced, natural incidentals plus the total loss of music. Music should still be put in some important transitions in the scenes especially when it dissolves to the past. The ambient sounds were not so evident which is why the concept of space was undeniably weak. This might be a work in progress for the director.
Ranay played the character melodramatically. The style he insinuates positively creates the amalgam of theater and film acting triumphantly on screen. He is perfect for the role and can easily communicate meritoriously to the camera. Earl Ignacio is a revelation too for his witty humorous lines and natural facial expressions. Ignacio’s being natural for comedy establishes sure-to-hit punchlines and crispy enunciation of lengthy lines. In the end and with a twist, he somehow fails the serious reconfiguration of clearer non-verbal thoughts to the camera. It was almost there but fails to capture the essence of his realization. Frances Makil-Ignacio’s portrayal induces theatricality above cinematic expressions. She was truly strong when seen on screen but true emotions were hardly captured because of its consistent framing (steady full-shot) of the intended shot.
Rm.180 was about to achieve catharsis when it stopped (ended).
“Rm.180”, as the title suggests, significantly aims to present both the fictional world (film script-setting) and the reel world (capturing the 180 degrees view of the set). This may be described perhaps as the half-moon voyeurism into the characters' sufferances.
Gutierrez made an almost quintessential atmosphere.
Originally written for the stage during the early 90’s with its title “Short Time” (Dean Alfar), this plot translates intensely for the screen by screenwriters Augie Rivera and Mike Rivera. This digitally-made film excites audiences as it captures present day dilemmas of bi-sexual and gay relationships into a “cine-theatrical” illusion (combination of film and theater elements).
Gutierrez’s vision works best when aspiring filmmakers choose to execute simple but engaging images. He understands the medium (film) well and tries to achieve minimalism in his cinematic elements. However, not all plots are similar as that of his work. This is when directors decide critically whether to create a grandeur work or a more practical but substantial artwork. Gutierrez chose what works the best for the material and he worked it out elegantly at most, it even reaches its quintessence, perhaps almost.
Production designer Jerry Santos worked effectively in establishing crucial atmosphere of a motel though a little bit pushy for color variations as opposed to a very neutral black-gray-white VIP motel room color combinations at present. There should have been more furniture pieces that would entail more exciting camera movements from foregrounding to background plus the natural dynamism of the actors on screen. There are some sex equipment available in some motels and intensive research and exposure would make the film more symbolical and intellectually-substantial. Whereas the flashback scene of the couple (Andoy Ranay and Frances Makil-Igancio) was too vertical in design. It needed more curves and slants as confrontational scenes of Ranay and Makil-Ignacio do not represent straights nor “at rest” stances. It could have been quite successful if the room was bigger and textured. The background of Makil-Ignacio was so flat and unmoving. Seeing the art direction functional more than decorative is the only way to capture sexuality and perversive acts in the film.
Cinematographers Armin Collado and Pao Orendain partially exhibited sharp images and natural lighting. One instance is when the audience sees that much glaring of the lights to the faces of the actors which one would not be aware of where the source of stronger lights is coming from. This is perennially the problem of a digitally-shot made film – its generation loss (amount of lights reduced but not seen in the actual filming). Camera movements, on the other hand, successfully attempted consistently “handheld” (holding of the camera not by steady tripod but with hands) concept though at times shaky and inaccurate. Sound (Vince Tabios) became one of the weaknesses of the film since it lacked balanced, natural incidentals plus the total loss of music. Music should still be put in some important transitions in the scenes especially when it dissolves to the past. The ambient sounds were not so evident which is why the concept of space was undeniably weak. This might be a work in progress for the director.
Ranay played the character melodramatically. The style he insinuates positively creates the amalgam of theater and film acting triumphantly on screen. He is perfect for the role and can easily communicate meritoriously to the camera. Earl Ignacio is a revelation too for his witty humorous lines and natural facial expressions. Ignacio’s being natural for comedy establishes sure-to-hit punchlines and crispy enunciation of lengthy lines. In the end and with a twist, he somehow fails the serious reconfiguration of clearer non-verbal thoughts to the camera. It was almost there but fails to capture the essence of his realization. Frances Makil-Ignacio’s portrayal induces theatricality above cinematic expressions. She was truly strong when seen on screen but true emotions were hardly captured because of its consistent framing (steady full-shot) of the intended shot.
Rm.180 was about to achieve catharsis when it stopped (ended).
“Rm.180”, as the title suggests, significantly aims to present both the fictional world (film script-setting) and the reel world (capturing the 180 degrees view of the set). This may be described perhaps as the half-moon voyeurism into the characters' sufferances.
Gutierrez made an almost quintessential atmosphere.
Caregiver (Film)
Star Cinema and ABS-CBN management should start to re-think whether they would want to produce quality and insightful products or just fairly provide big ‘on-screen’ weekly television drama anthologies in Philippine cinema. There is actually a major dramatic difference between business and art. Hard to combine, it can still be done if paradoxically analyzed by producers and artists themselves involved in the production. However, ‘Caregiver’ is another machination of its system that entails purely for business pleasure or dominantly gearing towards box office conclusion. A thinking audience would not deny about the film’s verisimilitude (appearance of being true or real) on screen as the plot moves forward in an Aristotlean way but if one really cares about the aesthetics of cinema and not just its thematic message, one would obviously see its definite loopholes in the courses of actions.
The story (Jewel Castro, Chris Martinez, Chito Rono) simply provides another special episode of the very influential tycoon Charo Santos’ Maalaala Mo Kaya in her television anthology drama. Nothing is extraordinary and cinematic about the film script. Her being one of the executive producers reflects the kind of quality Star Cinema provides for the audience. They just made the whole thing bigger as it is seen on big screens instead of boob tubes. Eli Balce, the director of photography, fails to capture interesting mood lighting moments aside from the predictable day and night sources. This is quite a mediocre for a creative artist such as failing to achieve excellent measurable photography. The style of editing (Manet Dayrit) provides the usual stamp of television editing. Raymond Bajarias, the production designer (responsible for setting and costumes with make-up), did not render stimulating sceneries that would accurately capture textured London setting. The make-up was extremely awful and ridiculous as foreign-aged actors look zombies, dead people or even project ghosts from the past. Rica Peralejo’s make-up was totally inconsistent and even Sharon’s make-up in some scenes. This is where appropriate continuity would be felt. Carmina Robles-Cuya presented the predictable soap opera’s incidentals and themed music to the film the same way as Albert Michael Idioma finalized an unbalanced rendition of sound engineering and not to mention the participation of field sound reocordists (Chito Alamazen and Wielder Catapat). More heads can ruin the film.
Versatile Anita Linda marks another interesting characterization of a grandmother who forgets scenic memory and identity of others. In less than five scenes, she was able to pull-off an undeniably remarkable performance as she holds back and maintains tears in her eyes without dropping it intentionally. Her bravura performance so far makes the entirety of the film applaudable.
Sharon Cuneta who plays the character of Sarah is supposed to transfer signs of depression, sadness, pity and poverty while she leaves her mother country and her only son in exchange of golden opportunities abroad particularly London in the film. In her seemingly-established cliché of melodramatic notion, Cuneta provided an exaggeratedly non-stop tear-dropping. She has mastered her craft pretty much well in her previous films which made her multi-awarded actress so far in her film career race. The least that she could have done is not to repeat once more what she has done in the past. This is where versatility comes in. It would have been much appreciated if pain is delivered and seen only in her mind or some sort of an internal-plot to provide a visual representation as to where in the scenes she would start to cry and when to end it. Though she mildly used mannerisms like pouting of the lips, making her eyes smaller as it is, and occasionally holds her hair back, her performance still needs to be graphed. Cuneta holds better in several ‘non-crying’ scenes though not her the best so far. She was when she did Lino Brocka’s Pasan Ko Ang Daigdig (1987).
John Estrada played the male-insecured husband stereotypically. Rica Peralejo’s portrayal created a weak mark. Jhong Hilario attempted but did not transcend as he was too pushy with the character playing. Mickey Ferriols made her role the typical ordinary support. Makisig Morales was somehow effective together with John Manalo’s performance. Others contributed fairly to the success such as Marita Zobel, Lotlot De Leon and Boots Anson-Roa. Surprisingly, Monique Wilson suddenly disappeared in the film as she did not create her mark as well and thought to be an invisible actress in the end.
What Chito Rono did was to unconsciously disengaged the film to a supposedly magical tempo. Robert Benton’s Kramer vs Kramer (1979) is surely one melodramatic film that features “adagio” (slow) tempo. Meryl Streep’s performance was absolutely effective in terms of natural rhythm leading to her dramatic catharsis. Rob Reiner’s Misery (1990) starred in by stunning performance of Kathy Bates, recognizes in an “allegro” (fast) tempo.
Speed can be of different pace, as Roger Kamien examines in his book “Music: An Appreciation”, very slow broad; very slow solemn; slow; moderately slow, a walking pace; moderate; moderately fast; fast; lively; very fast; and as fast as possible, which all of these provide tempo – the speed of the beat and is the basic pace of the music. Associations are considered to be fast tempos (energy, drive, and excitement) and slow tempos (solemnity, lyricism, or calmness) which create versatility and texture.
To care – would mean to follow track all possible improvements. Not to care – would absolutely be in denial of possible improvements. Tempo, which completes an exciting characteristic in music, is seamlessly connected to a film but ‘Caregiver’, a Star Cinema and ABS-CBN productions, decided to disengage it.
Post-script:
The film is saying something socially for it tells the plight of overseas Filipino workers who labor and sacrifice a lot just to fulfill decent lives for their families and relatives. Sarah represents the epitome of courage as she risks her life outside her boundary; sense of freedom as her mother country, the Philippines, is pulling her down because of the pathetic way of living and hopelessness, eventually making her decide to work abroad; and frustrations as she senses the miserable faces of Philippine societal masks through poverty, mediocrity and crab mentality.
Being a teacher is not the ideal way of a decent living in the Philippines as they begin to be frustrated about financial rewards, benefits and academic citations. One needs to go first in other countries either to study or to attend month-long crash courses even if foreigners would look you down like a piece of junk. In other words, one would take a degree or ph.D for own interests and promotions and finally be respected by peers and society.
Caregiver or carer as it is supposed to be coined as a nurse assistant abroad is a different case. One has to go out to be bought in by hospitals for unselfish but caring services to others who are not even our own relatives. These services are acquired by the hospitals paying dollars but not really in recognition of the nurses but more on to them. Thus, one will never go back for Philippine pride and honor.
It is pathetic. This is really pathetic. The government should have to say something meaty about this issue and should be taken as a serious dilemma of Filipinos still living in the country at present.
The story (Jewel Castro, Chris Martinez, Chito Rono) simply provides another special episode of the very influential tycoon Charo Santos’ Maalaala Mo Kaya in her television anthology drama. Nothing is extraordinary and cinematic about the film script. Her being one of the executive producers reflects the kind of quality Star Cinema provides for the audience. They just made the whole thing bigger as it is seen on big screens instead of boob tubes. Eli Balce, the director of photography, fails to capture interesting mood lighting moments aside from the predictable day and night sources. This is quite a mediocre for a creative artist such as failing to achieve excellent measurable photography. The style of editing (Manet Dayrit) provides the usual stamp of television editing. Raymond Bajarias, the production designer (responsible for setting and costumes with make-up), did not render stimulating sceneries that would accurately capture textured London setting. The make-up was extremely awful and ridiculous as foreign-aged actors look zombies, dead people or even project ghosts from the past. Rica Peralejo’s make-up was totally inconsistent and even Sharon’s make-up in some scenes. This is where appropriate continuity would be felt. Carmina Robles-Cuya presented the predictable soap opera’s incidentals and themed music to the film the same way as Albert Michael Idioma finalized an unbalanced rendition of sound engineering and not to mention the participation of field sound reocordists (Chito Alamazen and Wielder Catapat). More heads can ruin the film.
Versatile Anita Linda marks another interesting characterization of a grandmother who forgets scenic memory and identity of others. In less than five scenes, she was able to pull-off an undeniably remarkable performance as she holds back and maintains tears in her eyes without dropping it intentionally. Her bravura performance so far makes the entirety of the film applaudable.
Sharon Cuneta who plays the character of Sarah is supposed to transfer signs of depression, sadness, pity and poverty while she leaves her mother country and her only son in exchange of golden opportunities abroad particularly London in the film. In her seemingly-established cliché of melodramatic notion, Cuneta provided an exaggeratedly non-stop tear-dropping. She has mastered her craft pretty much well in her previous films which made her multi-awarded actress so far in her film career race. The least that she could have done is not to repeat once more what she has done in the past. This is where versatility comes in. It would have been much appreciated if pain is delivered and seen only in her mind or some sort of an internal-plot to provide a visual representation as to where in the scenes she would start to cry and when to end it. Though she mildly used mannerisms like pouting of the lips, making her eyes smaller as it is, and occasionally holds her hair back, her performance still needs to be graphed. Cuneta holds better in several ‘non-crying’ scenes though not her the best so far. She was when she did Lino Brocka’s Pasan Ko Ang Daigdig (1987).
John Estrada played the male-insecured husband stereotypically. Rica Peralejo’s portrayal created a weak mark. Jhong Hilario attempted but did not transcend as he was too pushy with the character playing. Mickey Ferriols made her role the typical ordinary support. Makisig Morales was somehow effective together with John Manalo’s performance. Others contributed fairly to the success such as Marita Zobel, Lotlot De Leon and Boots Anson-Roa. Surprisingly, Monique Wilson suddenly disappeared in the film as she did not create her mark as well and thought to be an invisible actress in the end.
What Chito Rono did was to unconsciously disengaged the film to a supposedly magical tempo. Robert Benton’s Kramer vs Kramer (1979) is surely one melodramatic film that features “adagio” (slow) tempo. Meryl Streep’s performance was absolutely effective in terms of natural rhythm leading to her dramatic catharsis. Rob Reiner’s Misery (1990) starred in by stunning performance of Kathy Bates, recognizes in an “allegro” (fast) tempo.
Speed can be of different pace, as Roger Kamien examines in his book “Music: An Appreciation”, very slow broad; very slow solemn; slow; moderately slow, a walking pace; moderate; moderately fast; fast; lively; very fast; and as fast as possible, which all of these provide tempo – the speed of the beat and is the basic pace of the music. Associations are considered to be fast tempos (energy, drive, and excitement) and slow tempos (solemnity, lyricism, or calmness) which create versatility and texture.
To care – would mean to follow track all possible improvements. Not to care – would absolutely be in denial of possible improvements. Tempo, which completes an exciting characteristic in music, is seamlessly connected to a film but ‘Caregiver’, a Star Cinema and ABS-CBN productions, decided to disengage it.
Post-script:
The film is saying something socially for it tells the plight of overseas Filipino workers who labor and sacrifice a lot just to fulfill decent lives for their families and relatives. Sarah represents the epitome of courage as she risks her life outside her boundary; sense of freedom as her mother country, the Philippines, is pulling her down because of the pathetic way of living and hopelessness, eventually making her decide to work abroad; and frustrations as she senses the miserable faces of Philippine societal masks through poverty, mediocrity and crab mentality.
Being a teacher is not the ideal way of a decent living in the Philippines as they begin to be frustrated about financial rewards, benefits and academic citations. One needs to go first in other countries either to study or to attend month-long crash courses even if foreigners would look you down like a piece of junk. In other words, one would take a degree or ph.D for own interests and promotions and finally be respected by peers and society.
Caregiver or carer as it is supposed to be coined as a nurse assistant abroad is a different case. One has to go out to be bought in by hospitals for unselfish but caring services to others who are not even our own relatives. These services are acquired by the hospitals paying dollars but not really in recognition of the nurses but more on to them. Thus, one will never go back for Philippine pride and honor.
It is pathetic. This is really pathetic. The government should have to say something meaty about this issue and should be taken as a serious dilemma of Filipinos still living in the country at present.
Ploning (Film)
One way to read a film is to understand the concept of space. Film, especially in realism, should capture the elements of montage and mise-en-scene. Montage creates the illusion of conformity in events and mise-en-scene supplies the imaginary map of almost all the cinematic elements used by a director namely the actors (characters), production design (setting and costumes), art direction (arrangement of the decor and furniture), cinematography (lighting and camera movements) and visual effects (techniques in distorting the images).
Space would include memory, silence, verbal and non-verbal pauses, nuances, beats, incidental sound and composition.
These two very important elements were not evident in the film. Director Garcia might have overlooked on this since he poured in over into the story telling device which, as a director, is not vital. The case is: Trust your material and visually comply to the standards of excellent cinematic elements.
The material text of "Ploning" has a simple question and that is, from the boy's point of view, "Is this my hometown where I have left for a very long time?" "I want to remember" is the most basic answer to the question.
Andre Bazin, the theorist behind The Ontology of Photographic Image, suggests that: "realism is more a matter of psychology than of esthetics. He does not make a simple equation between film and reality, as does Kracauer, but rather describes a more subtle relationship between the two in which the film is the asymptote to reality, the imaginary line that the geometric curve approaches but never touches." p. 407, How To Read A Film: James Monaco
The film ended to be stiff and artificial as opposed to the Italian neo-realism's (De Sica's Bicycle Thief, Tornatore's Cinema Paradiso) nostalgic truth. In a nostalgic mood, narration should be seamless. Apparently, the film likes to talk and even talks too much. The significance of silence in memory should not be directed but psychoanalyzed.
Eugene Domingo's portrayal must have been a triumph if she magnifies the concept of memory and silence. Her function is supposedly the memory (whereas before she could still walk) of the past and silence ( the decaying aspect means death) of the present. There is no future. She should have been the key character to nostalgia. Judy Ann Santos is another device. Her character shares with that of the film "Malena." Unfortunately, her character is insignificant with nostalgic mood. She should have done a different role which would make her portrayal unpredictable. The one who is reminiscing, the boy-man, should have knitted the whole piece but it did not work in its essence. Other actors included did not know what to do. they were very confused and misled. Even Gina Pareno's portrayal was not purposive though has the capabilities. Meryl Soriano, Mylene Dizon, Ketchup Usebio, Tony Mabesa, Ces Quesada and Tessie Tomas did not help achieve truth in realism.
The montage (editing) was so badly done. Abruptions in the eyes were too much not to bother it. It always starts and ends with an intended pose of the actors involved and its movements of the actors were overly-directed.
The mise-en-scene: cinematography (lighting and camera movements) was purely mechanical and did not create the necessary symbolical representations in the film. production design (setting and costumes) had created partially what it was intended to do but wrongly used by the director. This is not only for aesthetic purposes but for functionality as well.Music was so usual ( teleserye ) and did not help move the film. Leitmotiff is used best in this kind of film, again, wrongly used and irritating at most in important scenes.
Overall, the film has so much to say. Nostalgia is not one of those. Truth in memory is missing. Silence is nowhere. What else do we have in a "nostalgic" film "Ploning"?
This film needs an impressionistic (inner) device perhaps.
This film has a lot of disappearances more than its acquired appearance.
Space would include memory, silence, verbal and non-verbal pauses, nuances, beats, incidental sound and composition.
These two very important elements were not evident in the film. Director Garcia might have overlooked on this since he poured in over into the story telling device which, as a director, is not vital. The case is: Trust your material and visually comply to the standards of excellent cinematic elements.
The material text of "Ploning" has a simple question and that is, from the boy's point of view, "Is this my hometown where I have left for a very long time?" "I want to remember" is the most basic answer to the question.
Andre Bazin, the theorist behind The Ontology of Photographic Image, suggests that: "realism is more a matter of psychology than of esthetics. He does not make a simple equation between film and reality, as does Kracauer, but rather describes a more subtle relationship between the two in which the film is the asymptote to reality, the imaginary line that the geometric curve approaches but never touches." p. 407, How To Read A Film: James Monaco
The film ended to be stiff and artificial as opposed to the Italian neo-realism's (De Sica's Bicycle Thief, Tornatore's Cinema Paradiso) nostalgic truth. In a nostalgic mood, narration should be seamless. Apparently, the film likes to talk and even talks too much. The significance of silence in memory should not be directed but psychoanalyzed.
Eugene Domingo's portrayal must have been a triumph if she magnifies the concept of memory and silence. Her function is supposedly the memory (whereas before she could still walk) of the past and silence ( the decaying aspect means death) of the present. There is no future. She should have been the key character to nostalgia. Judy Ann Santos is another device. Her character shares with that of the film "Malena." Unfortunately, her character is insignificant with nostalgic mood. She should have done a different role which would make her portrayal unpredictable. The one who is reminiscing, the boy-man, should have knitted the whole piece but it did not work in its essence. Other actors included did not know what to do. they were very confused and misled. Even Gina Pareno's portrayal was not purposive though has the capabilities. Meryl Soriano, Mylene Dizon, Ketchup Usebio, Tony Mabesa, Ces Quesada and Tessie Tomas did not help achieve truth in realism.
The montage (editing) was so badly done. Abruptions in the eyes were too much not to bother it. It always starts and ends with an intended pose of the actors involved and its movements of the actors were overly-directed.
The mise-en-scene: cinematography (lighting and camera movements) was purely mechanical and did not create the necessary symbolical representations in the film. production design (setting and costumes) had created partially what it was intended to do but wrongly used by the director. This is not only for aesthetic purposes but for functionality as well.Music was so usual ( teleserye ) and did not help move the film. Leitmotiff is used best in this kind of film, again, wrongly used and irritating at most in important scenes.
Overall, the film has so much to say. Nostalgia is not one of those. Truth in memory is missing. Silence is nowhere. What else do we have in a "nostalgic" film "Ploning"?
This film needs an impressionistic (inner) device perhaps.
This film has a lot of disappearances more than its acquired appearance.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
