Film Works

Ocean’s Thirteen movie review: The odds of getting guilty pleasure

Ocean’s Thirteen movie review: The odds of getting guilty pleasure

Posted using ShareThis

Lucky You movie review: A poker life

Lucky You movie review: A poker life

Posted using ShareThis

Ocean’s Thirteen movie review: The odds of getting guilty pleasure

Ocean’s Thirteen movie review: The odds of getting guilty pleasure

Posted using ShareThis

The Hangover movie review: Hanging over a guy flick

The Hangover movie review: Hanging over a guy flick

Posted using ShareThis

Film News: Raymond Red’s “Himpapawid” (Manila Skies) Screening Feb. 16 at G4

Check out www.raymondred.com

The Hangover movie review: Hanging over a guy flick

The Hangover movie review: Hanging over a guy flick

Posted using ShareThis

The Pacifier movie review: A pacifying time at the theater

The Pacifier movie review: A pacifying time at the theater

Posted using ShareThis

Film Review: Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs

A Slick and Solid Family Slapstick
By Rianne Hill Soriano

Catch colorful candies and marshmallows from the sky. Play around ice cream snowballs. Hop around nacho cheese fountains. Slide onto a giant gumball hill. Go gaga with a palace of Jell-O. Get endless supply of jellybeans. Then there comes the massive pancakes, tornados of pasta, pools of nacho cheese, hailstorm of jellybeans, ice cream blizzard, pizza flurries, and deadly gummy bears… Suddenly, it’s raining steak and gumballs! It’s “Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs.”

The story is engagingly ridiculous. And it’s fun. And it works.

This eye-popping and mouth-watering film cooks up a veritable buffet of the bland and the bizarre, the sweet and the sour, and all other tastes generously offered on screen. It serves up a riot of glee, color, and absurdity. And it actually looks fresh and witty beyond the expectation for it.

With a solid gag ratio and a pretty good animation, “Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs” serves as a commentary on the potential perils of genetically engineered food and the downside of “overabundance.” It makes a social point about how people now have too much of what they need. It’s a culture of excess where wastefulness seems next to coolness.

This impressive film from Sony Pictures is a downright odd family flick with exuberant animation, quirky humor, and plucky characters. It’s a slick and solid slapstick made with technical sophistication and engaging storytelling. This animated venture from writer-directors Phil Lord and Chris Miller have utilized the popular children’s book by Judi and Ron Barrett into a nice movie feature.

The filmmakers know how to play with their food. And at the same time, they capitalize well on the universal compulsion for stomach-filling delight. As a computer-animated 3D extravaganza, it provides entertaining food fights and pleasurable food trips. It amusingly expands the book for the big screen. It provides whimsical detail through: increasingly surreal weather activities, in a way that climate change in the real world suggests a call for action; and a hunger for more when everything is too much already, in a way that capitalism and consumerism in the real world becomes an alarming concern for every nation.

From the gloriously surreal buffet of predatory giant chickens to the psychopathic gummy bears fighting to death, things are quite weird but really wonderful. Mutated food isn’t that far from the reality of junk food and some unwholesome fast food stuff. And all these are actually best seen in 3D splendor. Technically, this 3D food adventure makes terrific use of the format. Things really look stunning, but that doesn’t mean that its conventional 2D counterpart is of no good value. In fact, the film is a good DVD collectible. It’s just that, dining on 3D is another cool treat. It looks natural for the format and it enhances the story. And it’s good to know that the excellent animation is a veritable feast for the eyes and doesn’t overwhelm the storytelling.

As a computer-animated flick, it is bright, cheery, and at times flat-out hilarious as it provides winsome sight gags involving giant food, references to disaster film clichés (including “Independence Day” and “Twilight Zone”), and endearing characters that vividly come to life. The running gags are pretty neat clichés. It’s mostly slapstick yes, but it’s a pretty charming kind of slapstick that works well for its intended commercial value.

The sophisticated presentation doesn’t look pretentious, and it doesn’t sweat the message. As a family-friendly movie, it provides a frenetically tasty offer. It’s insanely funny and at times wonderfully weird. Things work well with the gastronomically hilarious pace and tone of the comedy. It’s visually inventive and can be swallowed very easily while serving some serious food for thought on the side.

Unlike most children movies being insipid and lowbrow, this film doesn’t insult its audiences. It’s light on its feet and it’s quick-witted. It is silly and surprisingly enjoyable – not to mention, a little trippy. It bursts with random sight gags that boast intricate design and goofy humor. It has some grown-up gags to keep the adults amused as well. The characters are likeable amidst the fact that in terms of character development, they don’t render something of the caliber of Pixar’s “Up.” Yet, this movie really assures the audience with such a tasty adventure.

As a hyperbolic exposé of human greed, abusive behavior, and environmental destruction, this food revolting spin of the 30-page children’s book into a 90-minute bountiful big screen buffet is something that the general viewer won’t regret sinking his/her teeth into. Its delicious and imaginative concept takes flight with a real tasty family delight. And while it rains big food, it also rains big laughs and sheer fun.

Dueling DVD Reviews (Terra & Rianne)

Dueling DVD Reviews (Terra & Rianne): Twilight

Posted using ShareThis

How Infrared Security Works | eHow.com

Read whole article at: http://www.ehow.com/how-does_5911843_infrared-security-works.html

An infrared security system works with an infrared light beam detector that serves as an access control/entry detection of a door or window, proving the threshold crossing alert as needed. When the infrared beam is broken by a person or object in its path, it will be detected by the system. The system also works with infrared security cameras, glass breaking sensors and shrill and silent alarms.

Film Review: The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus

A Trippy Imaginarium
By Rianne Hill Soriano

“The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” has a vaudevillian spirit. It flirts with acid-laced visuals and spins circles around the viewers’ heads. The dizzy spell of visual fantasy and the rickety plotting both impresses and bores.

This send-off film for the late Heath Ledger (technically speaking, though personally, I think it’s his Joker in “The Dark Knight” that is his real great send-off) is a highly imaginative mess shot with boldness and extravagance. It works more like a cobbled collection of ideas rather than being a precious stand-alone story.

Though the visual flare is there, things don’t really hold together well. And this issue already gives consideration to the fact that Ledger only finished half of his work on cam – not to say that the other three guys who finished the work for him are of no good value. It’s just that the film, as a whole, clutters with artsy stuff – than mainly putting enough value to characterization. “The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” is visually packed with grandeur, but the story mishmash makes it tiring to watch many scenes. There is that feeling of being overdone. And at some point, it’s like eating too much of a well-garnished meal that’s out of nutritional value. The film’s storytelling can’t keep up with the trippy elements just packed together to create a full-length movie. It’s fitting more like a series of eye-popping music videos spliced together.

When looking at the film separately into scenes of fantastical spins, it’s generally fine. The anachronistic artistry of director Terry Gilliam makes visually splendid slices of brilliant madness. Rife with hyperbolic displays, it is grounded in a fantasy world rendered through an enigmatic odyssey of graphic invention. Yet, a film should put its various elements as a whole body of work. And in this case, “Parnassus” meanders around confused rhythms that make it more like rambling chunks of effects-filled magic that are mostly self-indulgent and gambling. Though it promises something fanciful at times, this doesn’t really quite add up to one grand sight. It teases with magnificently tantalizing moments, but the resulting film looks more like an outlandish jugging act that both dazzles and bums.

As a big-budget pageantry of shifting CGI canvases and frenetic elements, the big deal effects overpowers the story instead of just serving to spice up and backup the storytelling. It looks overburdened with ideas, visions, and concepts while becoming disappointingly moody at times. They are insisted with too much force and urgency that they are more off-putting than entrancing; more exhausting than exhilarating.

“Parnassus” is like a crammed artist’s mind traversing a shaky framework. Sometimes, the magic works and it’s blissful in its own right. But most of the time, it piles on glitter, grunge, and some mumbo jumbo puffs. It really needs a more coherent storytelling to pack every idea about art and imagination as insinuated in its theme. It seems to have passionate intentions about the contradictions of good and evil as played out in the hearts and minds of its characters. It is an ardent morality tale about the consequences of making deals with the devil. It provides a thematically potent sympathy moving freely to the people’s subconscious. And it feels through the artist’s life journey of pleasure and pain.

Heath Ledger’s Tony boosts the film’s value in his fine performance. It’s a chance to see him acting one last time before resting for good. On a lighter note, he will always be remembered with the great characters in his filmography. And the film is appropriately labeled as coming from Heath Ledger and friends.

Talented as he is (evidently with a number of good films under his belt), Christopher Plummer as Doctor Parnassus unfortunately lacks the intensity to make his character work here. His Imaginarium overpowers the film’s crucial element of characterization – although this issue is more a concern with the direction than what the actor can really deliver for what he is told to do. In fact, Lily Cole as Valentina, Andrew Garfield as Anton, and Verne Troyer as Percy have better characterizations than him. Despite the very tricky material, these three, along with Tom Waits who delivers a fine enough performance as Mr. Nick put some value to let the audience willingly ride along further the Imaginarium path.

The retrofitting of Ledger’s role works well on its own. Johnny Depp, Colin Farrell, and Jude Law as the “Imaginarium Tony guys” even make more sense than what the clunks of the story make for the film’s entirety.

“The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus” is primarily a visual spectacle. While the film is not entirely successful, it certainly qualifies as a glorious mess of exploring the imagination. Abandoning oneself to the occasionally uneven but visually stimulating images is the best way to enjoy it. And for those who are willing, it is a hollow, shambling, lovable mess of a movie to watch with a popcorn and soda.

Film Review: Sherlock Holmes

Sherlock Holmes takes a modern slant
By Rianne Hill Soriano

“Sherlock Holmes” is a visually stylish rush of adrenaline. Irreverent and yet true to the spirit as it is, this movie is both fun and numb, enjoyable and exhausting.

With a modern slant, this Sir Arthur Conan Doyle character personified in the big screen by Robert Downey, Jr. should find favor with audiences eager for mere action and effects above everything else. While flawed, it is at least, overall, an entertaining romp. Thanks to the arresting sound and visuals, this new take on the classic story of the world-famous detective is such a popcorn flick.

This film adaptation retains the spirit and a number of significant details from the original source material; though the purists may cringe with some altered elements to keep up with director Guy Ritchie’s modern-style reimagining of the legendary sleuth’s adventures. Now, those willing to accept the clichés and predictability in exchange for the stylish and moody treatment may have some good time then.

The story is simply another in a long line of interpretations of the Detective Holmes and Dr. Watson (Jude Law) stories. This time, it is then turned into a swashbuckling romp – with the tried-and-tested pop culture flourishes meant for those looking for action and thrill on their movie picks. The obvious millions pumped into the film’s CGI effects, set design, star salaries, among other investments on production value, are very much apparent in the film.

“Sherlock Holmes” is more adrenaline than brainpower. Ritchie’s version of old London is moody and atmospheric. He brings the iconic character to a new generation of viewers and uses the modernized makeover style primarily through slow and fast motion visuals, choppy editing, and ramping explosion scenes. Sometimes they work, sometimes they just don’t. There are times that things just get too much that there is no more breathing space with what is continuously provided on screen. There are moments of action-pleasure, there are moments of frenzied and overlong smother.
Aside from its complete predictability, the mystery itself lacks intrigue and suspense that it merely depends on technical power and star wattage to make the excitement for the film palpable to the general audience. So despite being overlong and losing much of its steam halfway through, the film still engages between the cerebral character requirements and the spectacle of popular entertainment.

Downey and Law as the Holmes-and-Watson-duo are considerably good enough to make up for the weak mystery – and they seem to take much pleasure in portraying their roles. Downey’s inherent likeability is as quick-witted as the twists and opportunities that show off his character’s genius. His interpretation of the Holmes character does not completely deviate from the Doyle canon. With his uncanny skill at inventing his own unique spin to his role, he puts a brainy, brawny detective meant to be the story’s slightly crazed superhero. And he plays the brainiac detective like a steamed machine. Law transforms Holmes’ stalwart partner, Dr. Watson, from the bumbling comic relief of most interpretations, into a cool, competent sidekick character for this adaptation. He is a rare Watson who manages to be as interesting and watchable as Holmes. Rachel McAdams as Irene Adler manages to tweak Holmes’ classic adversary into a hot and feisty action heroine. Cunning star power indeed uplifts this flick as supporting and minor characters including Mark Strong as Lord Blackwood, Eddie Marsan as Inspector Lestrade, Geraldine James as Mrs. Hudson, Kelly Reilly as Mary Morstan, and William Houston as Constable Clark make this movie offer a rollicking adventure inside the cunning world of Holmes.

While a diverting enough night out stint or DVD showcase, it is watchable and playable; however, it’s still forgettable. It’s actually a case of more adding up to less. Hopefully, the inevitable sequel will be better.

Film Review: Alvin and the Chipmunks 2: The Squeakquel

“Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel” is a disappointing second installment from the Chipmunks franchise. Well, it becomes at the least commercially watchable (for some laughs) with its light campy touch of comic fun. Thanks to the endearing CGI characters – these singing-and-dancing rodents become really charming in this seamless blend of CGI and live-action elements. It is predictable, terribly acted especially by the live action guys, and heavily reliant on slapstick humor, but it has some entertaining moments nonetheless.

Featuring these rodents in cool outfits while shaking their tushes as they cover a number of danceable pop songs, this Chipmunk squeakquel delivers pretty much the bare minimum: a peppy, brightly colored, tune-filled scenes just enough to meet the low standards of watching merely for some laughs. Its high school rom-com style has no much effort to even mask its predictability. Indeed, the Chipmunks, along with the featured Chipettes, are as cute as ever here, but the plot is almost insultingly predictable, even for the younger viewers.

Amidst the not so engaging plot and flat jokes, the major upside to the movie is still the song and dance numbers. For the most, director Betty Thomas maintains the world famous singing pre-teen chipmunk trio as an appealing pop culture sensation in the big screen. And this time around, they contend with the pressures of school, fame, and a rival female group known as The Chipettes.

Trading on children’s endless appetite for talking animals is really a buy. Yes, there are some slapstick action and catchy soundtrack to enjoy and it can be counted as a family-friendly flick. However, a movie being aimed at children isn’t an excuse for it to be too simple-minded and trivial. In fact, all the more that quality should matter so that even the pre-kindergarten core audience can benefit on a good story. Talk about films like “Up” and “The Fantastic Mr. Fox,” now those are awesome films for the kids (and even adults).

The Chipmunks Alvin (voiced by Justin Long), Simon (voiced by Matthew Gray Gubler), and Theodore (voiced by Jesse McCartney) are still as appealing as the first movie. The addition of the Chipettes Brittany (voiced by Christina Applegate), Jeanette (voiced by Anna Faris), and Eleanor (voiced by Amy Poehler) add to the delight for these performing CGI animals. However, I just wonder, instead of paying for just celebrity voices that are actually unrecognizable and dispensable, why not pay for better writers to make the quality of the story in par with the charm of these adorable computer-generated talking animals?

As Alvin, Simon, and Theodore deal the pressures of high school, Brittany, Jeanette and Eleanor provide two additional things: a reason to get more appeal to those who enjoy pop tunes; and more importantly, the chance to include female pop hits on the cute roster of performances. It is a given that these high-pitched boy and girl pop routines provide the bulk of the enjoyment for the movie. It is interesting to note that the Filipina singing sensation Charice Pempengco actually did a cameo performance here. As always, she’s got that impressive voice to back her up!

And given the circumstances, you could expect an inevitable Threequel for this movie.

Film Review: Avatar

“Avatar” Is What Jaw-dropping 3D Can Be
By Rianne Hill Soriano

“Avatar” is a breathtaking flight of fancy using the typical Hollywood formula engaged with titanic technical achievement. Its technical brilliance and interestingly timely and significant concept are truly worth more than a decade of risky, arduous, and passionate work. Watch it in 3D to get the full experience it offers.

As a feat of fearless imagination and audacity, “Avatar” is a bold eco-opus examining technological wonders and morality. Director James Cameron impressively leads us to his Pandora’s box. Predictable story, clichéd dialogue, and logical lapses aside, this film is thrilling and explosive in the right mix. It has enough soul to effectively escape into the new world of jaw-dropping spectacle. This film gets the closest any has to fulfilling the 3D format’s fundamental mission of creating a new, immersive way of looking at movies. So if you have the chance, watch it in IMAX and see it in all its glory.

With its story, I’m hoping that this is not the kind of future humans will have nor will make; but as a form of cinematic pleasure, I would say that this film is indeed leading the future for new big screen entertainment.

The most-hyped movie of the year just about merits it – Cameron’s visionary bearing for his long-awaited pet project, his first film after the historical 1997 hit “Titanic,” is well worth the wait. Personally, I was half-hearted with my expectations upon watching the awesome 20-minute sneak preview in IMAX 3D a few months ago – it may be too high that I would probably get disappointed as how it usually happens with other hyped Hollywood flicks. Apparently, it’s as awe-inspiring as how I initially was back then… Though there is a certain part of me saying now that the technical brilliance kind of overpowered the storytelling. Nevertheless, things still work considerably fine as a whole. And it definitely makes its mark with its incredible special effects – where bringing to life Pandora and the Na’vi definitely becomes a quantum leap in filmmaking technology.

The film’s concept is full of potential. The theme is full of heart. The vision for it is full of challenge. Not everything makes sense; but in the best possible way, things are dealt in well for pure Hollywood entertainment. And every time it runs out of some credibility especially when it comes to the plot, there are still enough on the screen to qualify as entertaining eye candy offers. It breaks the CG barrier by combining elaborate lighting elements and complicated visual details with state-of-the-art motion capture technology and tried-and-tested recreation of the live action parts. James Horner also makes the 3D equivalent of a soundtrack which is something that should also be carefully managed in order to keep up with the 3D visuals. Here, the sound and music are in par with what the visuals offer.

Cameron and his legion of skilled craftspeople have mounted a convincingly realized artificial world ever created from scratch for the screen. They blur the line between reality and CGI by definitively blending animation and live action elements. The breathtakingly beautiful CGI landscape presents you with a story that easily travels from the human world to the fantastical and back. Its sophisticated editing rhythms represent what contemporary blockbuster cinema dictates – which is something to expect for a $400 million film project. The filmmakers seem to aim for sheer wonderment, and this sci-fi epic with gamer-geek sensibility truly delivers for this purpose.

The tale about profit and progress vs. nature’s power and infinite variety has a fancifully detailed vision. However, it is kind of compromised by a rather juvenile story exposition. There is also a certain aspect of it being a totally jaw-dropping technical showdown of audio-visual effects that sort of overpowers the overall storytelling (most of the intricate details would actually take a few viewings in order for you to fully catch everything – which is actually a good way to get more cash in for the producers). And in terms of the intense expectations for it, amidst the very promising concept, it still falls short in putting enough dimension to its plot as compared to its technical magnificence as a 3D film. Though for this kind of film, it hardly matters because of what is actually being offered to the eyes and ears to feast on. You get busy marveling at all the money on display. The photorealistic 3D imagery truly transports you into an alien world rich with imaginative vistas, creatures, and characters; even at the middle of clunky lines, awkward scenes, clichéd moments, and a script that plays it very, very safe. And so, while its cinematic impact may not quite rise to the ultimate expectation of being “a master of all masterpieces,” this bold and imaginative vision gets to the level of such a descriptive phrase as a “stunning masterpiece of cinematic technology.”

I personally like the metaphorical aspects of the film. When trying to go deeper than the jaw-dropping visuals, there are issues and concerns about progress vs. environment. Value is also given to themes about: tribes and races, physicality and spirituality; love and survival; humanity and technology; pride and purpose; responsibility and morality; war and greed. The world of Pandora is very immersive and the Na’vi people seem to resemble the old culture of the world in the alter ego of American Indians. The marines and the scientists resemble the capitalist and fascist thinkings in the modern domain; while the heroes of the story tells you how to become truly human while being torn in between two worlds. Moreover, it is interesting to note that unlike the overall storytelling getting sort of overpowered by the film’s audio-visual grandeur, the well-realized culture of the Na’vi is comparable to a fantasy novel getting the reader engrossed to the value of its world, resources, and people that the special effects don’t exactly become a barrier to letting you feel for them as they struggle against the destruction of their surroundings by the so-called sky people.

A buffed x-marine in a wheelchair turned into an alien warrior through his avatar (his human mind in an alien body), a free spirited princess of an indigenous alien tribe getting into a love triangle, a military industrial complex with machinery and weaponry of the 22nd Century caliber, a potential world filled with exotic life forms and million dollar stones… This decade-in-the-making dream project of Cameron is like the “Star Wars” of this age. And for all the technical virtuosity of its mythical 3D universe, the Na’vi characters seem much more expressive than most motion capture technology creations, and it is then in par with the brilliance of the exemplary Gollum in “Lord of The Rings.” This invented world is comparable to the technical and thematic milestones that George Lucas and Peter Jackson have made for fantasy and special effects filmmaking. This digital world pegged with a video game environment effectively transports you to a world that doesn’t exist – and it is just impossible not to be immersed with the fantastic visuals of such painstakingly intricate details.

“Avatar” is considerably a little hollow at the center as compared to great film concepts and scripts that have become masterpieces; but the sheer scale and ambition of the production look as tactile and tangible as if they were made of real materials and living tissues. At the same time, this 3D epic ironically gets some warmth from that old-time movie feel through some performances while still setting a new bar in computer-generated animation. In order to make a brand new world of the most eye-popping variety, here, the technical wizardry is at the service of a recycled plot that still effectively pumps blood to immerse you with a new level of film watching. It is essentially a movie that you have seen before; but it is boldly made to look like nothing anyone has seen before. The inadequacies of the story are forgivable for the sake of the undeniably beautiful, engrossing, and mind-bending epic that it is. Gorgeously rendered, it is both visually spectacular and emotionally involving.

The creative epiphany for “Avatar” is an extraordinary experience that more than lives up to the hype. Despite its flaws, this epic is a brilliant, visual extravaganza that is simultaneously thrilling, provocative and surprisingly moving. It might be more impressive on a technical level than as a piece of storytelling opus, but it is indeed a rightful approach of creating a good 3D film experience; thus, paving the way for it to become a 3D sci-fi classic in the long history of Hollywood cinema.

Pera-perahang Lata (Penny from the Tin Can) Screens at Titus Brandsma this December

SHOWING THIS MONTH: PINK CHRISTMAS
Free Admission
December 12, 2008/1pm onwards

Where to find us:
St. Elijah Hall
26 Acacia St. Brgy. Mariana, New Manila
Quezon City

pelikula@titusbrandsma is a free monthly film screening with dialogue that features fine samples of world cinema. It is an offering of the Titus Brandsma Center-Media Program under the auspices of the Carmelites in the Philippines. This monthly event is aimed at giving a meaningful experience for film enthusiasts.

FREE ADMISSION. For inquiries/confirmation, Cal/txt Bituin – 726-6054/09174759244
Email: pelikula_titusbrandsma-own

Film Review: Ninja Assassin

Splatter On: Adrenaline Junkies’ Ninja Flick
By Rianne Hill Soriano

“Ninja Assassin” is primarily committed to its bloodletting and cool fight scenes than to its story and its characters. For those who are looking for a good story and script, it’s a big letdown. But for adrenaline junkies and all those who are into excessive CGI blood and gore, this movie is going to be fun.

This action flick produced by Andy and Larry Wachowski (a. k. a. the Wachowski brothers), filmmakers of the “Matrix” trilogy, really magnifies its selling point: “very cool” fight scenes. It could have meant more if they provided a decent storyline less the dumbness though… The film seems to capitalize on the CG innovation of slicing human bodies by whizzing five-pointed stars, among other bladed weapons. And if the viewer turns off his/her brain, then it’s time to turn up the blood splatter for that entertaining video game-style of killings.

This East meets West slice fest unfolds like a diverting, uncommonly violent action flick. It’s like, there’s no need for an extended critical analysis for it. This ninja movie primarily showcases shiny blades and bloodshed. Director James McTeigue provides visceral fights and stylish gore to please the fan boys and girls who expect ample smashing, gory decapitations, and gushing streaks and rivers of blood in the big screen. The all-about-fun edit provides enough commercial appeal to it as blood-spattered martial arts moves abound to delight the followers of the genre. The film lives in the moment – a gut-driven gouge of a picture where shaky cam in dark cinematography and blatantly fake CGI bloodshed color the screen like a sea of red and black. Most scenes move very fast and are intriguingly dimly lit.

“Ninja Assassin” can be ridiculously exhilarating. Its brisk and exuberantly obvious filmmaking knows how to perk up the audience’s bloodthirsty pleasure for a genre flick – without trying to humanize its comicbook characters or deliver a ludicrous political or societal message. It’s all about the audio-visual satisfaction for throwing stars, swinging swords, and disemboweled bodies. With gusto, it turns these bodies into human salsa for the heck of it; well actually, to live up to its title. And the atmospheric mood with some homage to old-style ninja elements adds some more interest to it.

The disjointed storytelling and unbearable lull moments are the given lackluster parts of this movie. The dialogues are generally flat. Some of the tricked-out fight scenes are not as slick as most, and these are where the aspect of slicing and dicing don’t get to measure up to the audience’s demands for more quality entertainment. They may be engaged at what the screen shows, but they don’t get involved with the characters – making it increasingly hard to care about what ever happens to them. And following the story outside the realm of the “cool fight scenes” is like having to use a useless butter knife when it’s supposed to be a boastfully sharp sword.

Rain justifies his character as a very talented slaughterer here. As Raizo, the ninja assassin who turns away from his clan, could kill with anything within his reach. And it shows how much tough training he had – and thanks to good lighting on his ninja body, he provides that needed entertainment to the viewers by living up to the film’s title. He and Mika, played by Naomie Harris, have moments of stylized lunacy that nearly works, though the lame script punctures the characters’ and the film’s overall potential. Sho Kosugi as the Ozunu clan master, along with the rest of the ninjas around, works way much better when they are doing the fight scenes than doing lip service and some melodramatic moments. All these make the movie work for its basic purpose – as long as there are ninjas fighting on-screen.

“Ninja Assassin” is a bloody concoction of a slasher movie in martial arts form. It is wildly improbable and completely unrealistic, but it’s also bloody good fun. And so, if bloody mayhem is the viewers’ idea of coolness and adrenaline rush, this movie really splatters well.

Film Review: New Moon

A Swoon Movie for the Fans
By Rianne Hill Soriano

“New Moon” knows what it should be. It’s clearly meant to be a teen flick that makes fans swoon and quench. This second bite to the hugely popular “Twilight” saga can’t exactly do the same for the outsiders though. It may not be good enough to seduce new fans, but it’s not bad enough to break off relentless infatuations from its very much anticipating target market.

This installment is more of a teen-focused soap opera rendered for the big screen. It manages to shine for those willing to buy in its central romance about the love between a human and a vampire with an adolescent level of audience consummation. Its moments of hotness flirt with various lingering glances, teenybopper kisses, and de-shirting. And it works well in providing reasons for uncontrollable giggles from the willing fans. It manages to shine for those romantic hearts yearning for an enjoyable teen escapism with pretty girl faces and shirtless hunky boys. Add up the fancy look and coolness of pale make-up with red lips, cool cars, magical powers, teen angst, shapeshifting abilities, and raging hormones, then mix them according to the demands of the willing to be bitten fans, then you got that big bowl of adolescent romantic mush garnished with horror-lite action scenes, forest cat-and-mouse chases, and crazy road trip resulting to a showcase of supernatural gifts.

This Stephenie Meyer adaptation lurches from the sublime to the ridiculous – and what makes it work for its expected audience is the well-kept mood that signals moments of candor and romanticism. It has a generally unappealing formula, but it is oddly effective. It offers some juicy, go-for-broke romantic pleasures the way its predecessor did. The eye candy formula is definitely present to cater to the fans craving for two glossy hours of hotties strutting their stuff. The fans will definitely care, but the casual viewers won’t give as much enthusiasm.

As it settles into a somewhat predictable groove, the occasional longeurs tend to suck life out of the story. There are tedious, long-winded parts. There is that turn off for its slow pace, relentlessly downcast tone, and even its excessive length. Gimmicky and worn out aspects appear here and there. Yet, this sequel is clearly effective with its focus on the gratuitous sex appeal of its two lead male stars – which can be readily proven by the shrieking fans surrounding every theater in the city every time they appear or do something romantic or cool in teenage language terms. From the moody teenager girl who can’t stop whining about how her boyfriend dumped her to the shirtless wolf-men flexing their muscles to the suicidal impulses and fantasies for skin paleness and lip redness, this second chapter on this successful popcorn flick is commendably a good example of contemporary low budget cinema in the middle of the recession hitting the blockbuster mark as if there is no economic crisis, just rising teenage hormones.

The technical parts are quite interesting to dig into. Overall, production values are still on the range of just a decently budgeted Hollywood project, but it considerably works for its bearing – and yes, it’s absolutely reaping much more money than the initial capital for it.

This slickly packaged entertainment has that kind of old-fashioned look. It has dark and moody cinematography that indulges well with its own creepy vision of teenage sexuality. The production design keeps up with its tragic-romantic motif. The nominal special effects provide harmless fun. Director Chris Weitz makes it stronger on dream logic than plot; yet the mediocre performances and dumbed down screenplay still make the film shallow, vapid, and cheesy – an observation out of the bias from the already given fan base whom the producers know will never let them down whatever kind of story they offer to the franchise, as long as the established characters are there for their romantic escapades.

This romance relying on the appeal of fangs and paws primarily survives because of the already esteemed lead characters from the movie’s first installment. The romance between the danger-attractive mortal Bella Swan (Kristen Stewart) and the drop-dead gorgeous vampire Edward Cullen (Robert Pattinson) delves deeper into the darkness and mysteries of the supernatural. And driving the story into their deeper emotions becomes a priority in the storytelling. At the same time, another character gets inside their circle through the buffed Jacob Black (Taylor Lautner), a wolf-teen who establishes a budding relationship with Bella. However, the film suffers on the usual sequel syndrome with symptoms including a laborious establishing of forced conflicts, a general air of drift and pointlessness, and a lack of clear direction. Meanwhile, the cliffhanger ending effectively teases and is clearly intended to make fans hungry for more.

“New Moon” gives fans what they’re looking for – which isn’t to say it’s actually great, only that it’s basically successful in achieving the low end goals it sets for itself through enough fantasy and romance to satisfy its devotees; while everyone else outside the “Twilight” circle will just shrug and move on.

Film Review: 2012

A Spectacular Disaster
By Rianne Hill Soriano

“2012” is everything you could possibly expect from a blockbuster disaster movie: an irresistibly visual spectacle that is perversely entertaining. And the people behind these films really seem to live up to the idea that: “You don’t get off a rollercoaster and complain about the lack of storytelling.” It is totally not credible especially with its unequivocally cheesy, ridiculous story; and yet, it is hugely engaging primarily through its mind-boggling visual effects that makes this cinematic popcorn worthy to be seen on the big screen.

The story is your basic end-of-the-world chaos narrative. It’s your usual Hollywood cash cow with the doomsday premise offered as escapism. It doesn’t necessarily bring anything new to the table, but it’s still one hell of a fun ride. They sure do blow up things real good. In fact, its graceless mess may kind of insult the intelligence of the logic-demanding crowd, yet for some reasons, it still leaves most people thrilled.

It’s everything you can expect from such an apocalyptic movie. The special effects are topnotch in making the film an intense and gripping popcorn experience where the protagonists are expected to flee and escape the most horrific events happening around them at all costs. The main premise is the usual mix of that American family, that responsible and all good scientist, and the devoted and principled US president all struggling to make it through the last days of the Earth. The story is filled with much clichés and everything is just too predictable that it’s just a matter of enjoying the flick’s audio-visual flair and nothing more. Nevertheless, some philosophical and emotional elements of redemption and survival of the fittest still become apparent at some instances.

Formulaic and frenzied, it’s a spectacular but ultimately silly blast from Master of Disaster Roland Emmerich (“Independence Day,” “The Day After Tomorrow”). In his tradition of catastrophic flicks, he offers another look at the end of the world in “2012.” This time around, it’s the End of Days if based from the idea that the Mayan calendar’s last day is said to be Dec 21, 2012. In the film, the earth’s crusts are shifting – causing earthquakes and volcano eruptions on a global scale, followed by inescapable tsunamis. And the movie follows the family’s journey towards their destination, en route to China – where the governments of the world have some sort of a solution through giant ships reminiscent of Noah’s Ark. And this convincingly shows the film as another Noah’s Ark story – interpreted in a 21st Century setting.

“2012” has heavy investment in time and popcorn. Its unrelenting pace, almighty effects, and sheer tongue-in-cheekiness make it consumingly enjoyable. Emmerich provides rollickingly good visual thrills, but it lacks a strong enough script to support its massive scope and inflated length. It gets tad monotonous by the middle part and it further loses momentum by the last act. It really gets too corny by the end that what keeps you with that sigh for that bang for your buck is the fact that you got some sit back moments of fantastical, mind blowing visual feast.

If you want massive destruction spectacle, “2012” has it. Amazing, gasp worthy special effects assume the starring role here. Thanks to cutting-edge technology, the movie’s relentless emphasis on destruction ensures that most viewers will inevitably walk away satisfied with it. And on a big screen, it’s quite a blast to see the mind-blowing, photorealistic scenes of earthquakes, tsunamis, and fireballs, along with the demise of all things on earth including the most famous landmarks as The White House, the Eiffel Tower, the Jefferson Memorial, the Christ the Redeemer statue, and the Vatican, all having that enveloping majesty for this cinematic offer’s sound and visuals.

This end of the world flick throws in bits and pieces from all other disaster movies. Its familiar plot taps into virtually every disaster flick ever produced. The poorest parts of the film can get to the nerves of those wanting something more intelligent in making a preposterous story cinematically convincing. More than the clichéd speeches and unintentionally funny drama, there are just too many clichés that merely relied on the not so challenging storytelling formula of just making the special effects impressive. Period.

For those who want something within the logical wavelength of a really good film that can be both visually and aurally kick ass good while keeping a coherent plot that goes beyond the real but can be justifiable for creative reasons, these are a few of the clunkers: even during the apocalypse, when all communication on Earth has ceased, you will have excellent mobile phone reception when you call from a tsunami-stricken India to the soon to be tsunami-stricken China while inside a tsunami-safe ark; deadly gases in the park that can kill a 250-lb. animal can’t even harm the nostrils of an adult man and his two kids; the metal doors of a high tech ship that is the last hope to protect a handful of humans from the end of the world, built with billions and billions of euros, can easily get jammed by a handy tool, while at the same time, it’s not jammed by a dead man’s body; a limo can be driven in the harshest situations like flying through a collapsing skyscraper, without a scratch or the usual dirt, dust, debris, and dents. The following are also questionable but considerably forgivable enough for that specific idea better known as film license: showing the shots of a helicopter carrying a giraffe than other more reasonable but still landscape shot-friendly animals of better use to humans like cows (well, the story could pass this thing off by showing the better animals that provide humans with food and clothing already inside the ark); and if you want to survive the doom-laden world, whether you are a cosmetic doctor, or whatever field you are in, you should take a couple of flight lessons and you can surely, expertly fly all sorts of planes from a small one to a big Russian jumbo plane – flying them like what hustler players can do best in video games.

Despite the fact that the breathtaking sound and special effects are on the top ranks here, the acting performances are considerably fine. It is quite a job to act in front of all the merely solid colored screens and other film machines then pretend to be already seeing the apocalyptic mess as required in the story. At the least, the characters get to add a certain humanistic touch to make you feel that incredible sense of urgency brought about by the world’s end and the emotional struggle of humans trying to survive the annihilation. A number of recognizable actors including John Cusack, Amanda Peet, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Danny Glover, Oliver Platt, Thandie Newton, and Woody Harrelson are faced with the biggest challenges of living up to the nonsensical script and at some point being kind of dwarfed by the requirements to maintain all those stunning CGIs. They struggle to make the best performances for the movie’s ungodly language and situations, and they strive to keep up with some inane and mostly clichéd dialogues.

At the end of the day, go for the great effects. Take them for what they are and leave logic behind. And amidst the fact that some parts of the laughs are available for the wrong (or bad) reasons, this fundamentally terrible, but almost irresistibly entertaining Hollywood product is still a value-for-money hoot on the big screen.

Film Review: Law Abiding Citizen

The Law Abiding Popcorn Flick
By Rianne Hill Soriano

“Law Abiding Citizen” is increasingly preposterous, but nonetheless mindlessly entertaining for the general public. It’s a phony social commentary that has an intriguing premise with compromised execution as required by the mainstream formula. Yes, it abides by the rules of commercial filmmaking, and this becomes its major flaw.

It is pervasively absurd yet generally appealing for those who just want to consider the high body count of its blatantly nonsensical plot. The film has its action parts laced with shocks and twists that don’t necessarily follow the laws of logic and completely demands the suspension of disbelief for them to work. Its ludicrous plot has its moments; however, its fascinating undercurrents are much less than the off-putting parts of its reactionary revenge theme. And as the logic tumbles more and more until the film’s disappointing ending, it further winds up feeling overwritten and yet underexplained. In its exploration on the flaws of law, of right and wrong, it deflates the fun brought by its interesting tagline “How can you stop a man who’s already behind bars?” by making it a complicated, ragged movie that lacks credibility in the way the story is provided on screen. With such, it really seems more of a pretentious cash cow offer that tries to say something meaningful about America’s justice system.

“Law Abiding Citizen” is the kind of movie that thrills your pulse while not quite making you think. And though the implausible plot is already a given since the very beginning, the provisions for the compelling argument provided by its story thoroughly lose their edge by the end of the film. From the script being backed up by the debate about the ethical challenges of practicing and upholding the law to the poor plotting and pacing especially by the film’s end, things get really trammeled by the endless bullets, body count, explosions… until such a play safe ending. It doesn’t live up to the expectations with Gerard Butler’s words “It’s gonna be biblical!” Yes, it could have been a still powerful enough ending that might just become the preposterous film’s redemption. But what ever happened?

The movie starts out as a potboiler with a troubling character arc and some high-octane thriller moments, then ends up as a goofy, lousy pulp with its actions quickly tipping into lame campiness. This crime drama about outrage and vengeance has jerky narrative shifts with occasional splashes of gore and action courtesy of a brainiac turned psychopath character. And the thrills just keep on coming at a relentless pace that leaves little time to ponder about them. Nevertheless, it is still able to generate some considerable suspense and a sense of dread as an implausible thriller with a few horror elements in the guise as a social criticism.

As a social statement, “Law Abiding Citizen” is a flawed attempt as a high-minded brutality trying to hold the legal system accountable for its shortcomings. As a slick cat and mouse picture, it seems too afraid to tackle the issues it brings up. There are plenty of loopholes in the script that further misguides the concept.

Director F. Gary Gray attempts to provide a visual look that creates the required coldly thrilling atmosphere. And what keeps the story hanging on apart from the movie’s basic atmosphere are some strong performances. Gerard Butler as Clyde Shelton elevates the film’s ridiculous thriller appeal into something watchable with popcorn and drinks. His sharp and invigorating performance as a psycho on a killing spree while behind bars is generally entertaining. He is able to hold some interest for the film as he outwits the authorities – until he loses it by the contrived ending. Jamie Foxx as the district attorney Nick Rice looks bored at most times. There are actually some effective moments that provide the needed emotional investment for his character, but he seems to lack that needed bravura to elevate his character further. The supporting characters do well. Viola Davis as the frustrated mayor of Philadelphia is sharp. Annie Corley as Judge Laura Burch also works. Leslie Bibb as Nick’s staff Sarah Lowell provides enough intensity. And although none of the characters have much depth, most generally move through their roles with enough skill to still keep the willing audience guessing what’s next.

Technophilia at the Chicago Filipino American Film Festival 2009

Chicago Filipino American Film Festival 2009: Official Selections

To all my films near Chicago area, my film “Technophilia” is showing on Nov. 8, 2009, 4:30 pm. You may check the festival website http://cfaff.org for further details.

The Chicago Filipino American Film Festival is proud to announce the 2009 Official Selections:

CFAFF Feature-Length Category
Confessional by Jerrold Tarog and Ruel Dahis Antipuesto
Mangatyanan (The Blood Trail) by Jerrold Tarog
Dayo by Robert Quilao
Gift of Barong by Benito Bautista
100 by Chris Martinez
Inside a Change by Rick Cordero
Concerto
Boses by Ellen Ongkeko-Marfil, BOSES garnered the award for Best Director and Best Film at the Golden Screen Awards. Starring Cherry Pie Picache and Ricky Davao. With English subtitles.
CREATUR

CFAFF Documentary Program
Manilatown is in the Heart: Time Travel with Al Robles by Curtis Choy
Sounds of a New Hope by Eric Tandoc

CFAFF Shorts Program
“O” by Amber Rosario Manuguid
“No. 4″ by Benito Bautista
“Dumaguete Fragments” by Claro De Los Reyes
“The Scorpion and the Frog” by Dan Finley
“The Other Way Round” by Geoffrey Quan
“Technophilia” by Rianne Hill Soriano
“Among All Creatures” by Tyrone Acierto
“Flower Thieves” by Shawn Bernal
“One Year” by John P. Raposas

Film Review: All About Steve

All About the Odds of Trying Hard
By Rianne Hill Soriano

“All About Steve” is all about that screwball comedy offer starring an A-list star trying to carry the movie’s second-rate slapstick gags and awkward schmaltz. And it turns out to be an oddly creepy series of interminable goofball moments missing more than a few crucial screws.

The film unfolds like some formulaic mash-up of cardboard characters seen for the thousandth time in the big screen. Packaged as a romantic comedy but devoid of the touching elements of good comedy and romance, the movie’s all-out, gawky commitment to comic flair doesn’t serve it well. It’s often times bland and consistently preposterous. Its quirky bearing attempts to show the power of words in Sandra Bullock’s character as a tediously kooky constructor of crossword puzzles for a Sacramento newspaper. However, nothing much render authentically while watching the film. And perhaps, its kind of saving grace is that there are still a couple of goofs working to induce some laughs that can already be acceptable to the regular moviegoers who do not demand for a high quality cinematic offer for their paid tickets.

Bullock as the eccentric crossword puzzle constructor Mary Horowitz who falls in love for the handsome cable news cameraman Steve (Bradley Cooper) after their short blind date both works and does not work. Generally, she can pull off such a fluffily quirky character with her talent and on-screen charm. Yet, the very film itself falls short on maximizing what she can do for it. Here, the heroine’s peculiar desperation makes the audience feel more pity for her than actually rooting for her. The movie meshes with too many ideas without sticking to one solid track, leaving the main character flailing in such a ridiculous role. Worse, as nothing much feels authentic even in a screwball comedy sense, it even elicits unintentional giggles at certain times that it actually seeks to deliver a serious message.

The idea behind “All About Steve” has some potential, but then it slides off into a hokey succession of comic events. Without any footing in reality, not much of the characters are recognizable enough in the sphere of human existence that further hinders the viewers to actually relate to such supposedly possible situations in a person’s life. The audience could care less about these superficial and too animated characters rendered in a not so good light. It’s low on laughs and satirical bite because its kind of humor comes from awkwardness. It’s a sort of anti-romance romantic comedy could have worked if the script and direction were improved. Yet the film is unable to control the poor tone of the scenes which considerably leaves the audience unsure whether to laugh or cry by the film’s climax. There are some discontinuities that are very apparent as well. One particular scene to show this is when Mary writes the truck driver’s license number on her left arm in black permanent marker during the hitching a ride scene. However, when she gets out of the truck as the same day moves forward, there is nothing written on her arm anymore.

The characters seem based around the shrillest, most obvious characters imaginable. As a goofball ugly ducking type, Bullock is in between a socially awkward character and an annoying weirdo who stalks the instant love of her life. Something that this movie glaringly lacks is the combination of comic wits and charming humor. There is a minor elevation of emotional resonance by the last part of the film through hardcore sellout music and mainstream formulaic juxtaposition of shots. Yet, even the supposedly key parts like when Mary tearfully confesses that she wears her red boots because they make her toes “feel like ten friends on a camping trip,” it doesn’t sell enough as how it is intended to be. Cooper’s Steve, along with the other major and supporting cast members try their best to deliver such outlandish, cartoony characters. However, the film’s issue on script and treatment doesn’t really work out to their advantage. Thomas Haden Church as Hartman Hughes attempts to throw in some good hearty laughs. Stereotype is what Ken Jeong as Angus and Mary’s newfound fellow weirdo friends radiate. And too bad, this latest entry on Bullock’s long list of movies aren’t even close to the type of screwball comedy she is capable of making.

Film Review: Jennifer’s Body

Capitalizing on a High School Scare Flick
By Rianne Hill Soriano

“Jennifer’s Body” works more as a teen sex ad that seeks pleasure on seeing Megan Fox looking high school foxy as a scarily hot horror queen in the usual scare flick set-up. And it could probably work best for midnight screenings and slumber parties. Overall, it’s not as frightening as it should be; it’s not as hip and funny as it would like to be; yet, it’s not a complete disaster if merely accepted as a lowbrow gore and titillation offer to hormone-raging audiences and undemanding slasher film lovers.

As a brisk, bloody mix of gory horror and high school comedy punctuated by the typical scare elements and high school cheekiness, the film hobbles with tonal inconsistencies because of merely concentrating on having two-dimensional characters. It fails to capitalize on its campy premise about the usual girl-in-distress who would latter go to the opposite side of the fence – which could have effectively worked side-by-side the commercial appeal of Fox who plays the lead character of the film. Actually, there are moments of inspired cleverness and decent scares, but they are not frequent or sustained enough.

The film seems to want a lot but it doesn’t manage to achieve them accordingly. Screenwriter Diablo Cody (Oscar winner for her “Juno” screenplay) has a few good points to make about the frenemy dynamics in a high school setting including teenage relationships and connections, party fun, fame and power plays, sexual excitement, among other things. Director Karyn Kusama tries to mount a certain atmosphere in what it’s like to be adolescent girls who come into sexual and social power through tragedies. However, the final output still looks amateurish that the film actually renders itself as a lackluster scare flick. The good intentions doesn’t get to deliver well, perhaps because of some mainstream requirements to do this and that to maintain its formulaic cash cow bearing. Kusama seems torn between the duty to female empowerment and the movie’s slasher conventions that the main character is not really defined that effectively. Even Fox’s performance makes it hard to measure up to the ideal character development that the audience should see on her. And while it wants to put that higher level of tone and treatment in itself, it gets too lost in trying to be hip, current, alternative, and mainstream all at the same time.

“Jennifer’s Body” actually takes a common theme on slasher films – the panicky fascination with female sexuality which grows to become a weapon of evil. However, the movie doesn’t live up to its full potential because of many things, part of which is its clunky pace, some distracting elements in the screenplay, and the film’s reliance on Fox’s fame to sell tickets. The idea of Fox playing an evil high school beauty queen who eats the boys she seduces definitely sounds sellout interesting primarily in the box office. Yet, the film is neither cringe-inducingly frightening nor laugh-out-loud funny. It is punctuated by gory episodes and high school fun moments, but much of them are not explored well enough – lacking in suspense and surprise to raise the potential of bringing some real cinematic power to itself.

Though Fox as Jennifer and Amanda Seyfried as Needy considerably work well as high school frenemies in the story, especially in terms of chemistry, their thinly conceived and underdeveloped characterizations, along with the heavy-handed direction of the film, leave little to make their characters fully desirable in terms of cinematic brilliance.

Film Article: Pinoys Shine at Pusan International Film Fest ‘09

Pinoys Shine at Pusan International Film Fest ‘09
By Rianne Hill Soriano

The film city of Busan, Korea paved way for another successful year for the prestigious Pusan International Film Festival (PIFF) from Oct. 8 to 16, 2009. And the Philippines, once again, made big waves in this year’s festival.

In its 14^th year, PIFF has truly evolved to become one of the most important film festivals that filmmakers, film professionals, cinephiles, and the general film audience look forward to every October. For this year, 355 films from 70 countries (a record number) were shown – a total of 803 screenings for the festival. 98 of the films were world premieres and 46 films were international premieres – a total of 144 world and international premieres (another record number). And more than two dozen of Filipinos attended PIFF with the country having around two dozen of films shown at the festival’s various programs.

Included in the PIFF official statistics were a number of fully-packed film events: 6 Master Classes, 2 Hand Printings, 14 Seminars, 3 Open Talks, 8 Audience Meet and Greets, 12 Meet the Guest: Talk to Talks, 7 teams of Cinema Together, 13 Press Conferences, and 188 Individual Interviews.

Filipinos at the Festival

The Philippine Night was held at the Grand Hotel in Haeundae, Busan last Oct. 12 and was attended by the Philippine delegation which included some of the filmmakers with films at the festival, the Film Development Council of the Philippines, the National Commission for Culture and the Arts, the Philippine Embassy in Korea, and other festival guests.

A partial list of Filipino attendees included: Raymond Red, filmmaker; Doy del Mundo, National Commission for Culture and the Arts, filmmaker; Ed Cabagnot, Cinemalaya Philippine Independent Film Festival; GB Sampedro, filmmaker; Jim Libiran, filmmaker; Nestor Jardin, Cinemalaya Philippine Independent Film Festival; Tikoy Aguiluz, Cinemanila International Film Festival; Borgy Torre, filmmaker; Maria Isabel Lopez, Actress; Nick De Ocampo, filmmaker; Vicky Belarmino, Cultural Center of the Philippines; Rianne Hill Soriano, filmmaker; and LA Yamsuan, filmmaker.

Philippine Films at the Festival

New Currents Section

Astig (Squalor) by GB Sampedro

Special Mention, New Currents Award

A Window on Asian Cinema

Yanggaw (Affliction) by Richard Somes

Bakal Boys (Children Metal Divers) by Ralston Jover

Lola by Brillante Mendoza

Wide Angle – Asian Short Film Competition

Bonsai by Borgy Torre

Wide Angle – Short Film Showcase 3

Blogog by Rommel Tolentino

Asian Film Academy (AFA) 2009

An Encounter in the Woods (AFA workshop film for PIFF with Rianne Hill Soriano and 12 other young Asian filmmakers)

A Girl (AFA workshop film for PIFF with LA Yamsuan and 12 other young Asian filmmakers)

Special Programs in Focus – Asian Feature Animation Special – Ani Asia!: A Leap of Asian Feature Animation 4

Dayo (The Wanderer in the Land of Elementalia) by Robert Quilao

Pusan Promotion Plan (PPP) Participating Project

Happyland by Jim Libiran

Filipino Independent Film Special – Mabuhay! Pinoy Indi-Cinema!

The festival presented a Filipino independent film special as part of the Special Programs in Focus to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between Korea and the Philippines. It was acknowledged as a meaningful opportunity to take a genealogical journey of Filipino indie films, including those from the 1950’s and the winner of the Best Director Award at the Cannes International Film Festival 2009. This special program offered a rich selection of 14 notable Filipino indie films including:

Criminal of Barrio Concepcion by Lav Diaz

Genghis Khan by Manuel Conde

Independencia by Raya Martin

Insiang by Lino Brocka

Itim by Mike de leon

Kinatay by Brillante Mendoza

Manila by Night by Ishmael Bernal

Oliver by Nick Deocampo

Passionate Strangers by Eddie Romero

Perfumed Nightmare by Kidlat Tahimik

Sakay by Raymond Red

Woman of Breakwater by Mario O’hara

The Blossoming of Maximo Oliveros by Aureus Solito

The Road to Kalimugtong by Mes Guzman

Seminar on Filipino Independent Filmmaking

The Filipino delegation at PIFF provided a seminar about Filipino independent filmmaking. This Filipino independent film special shared the unique ways of low-budget filmmaking in the country including the so-called ‘pito-pito film’ (referring to a film shot in seven days and goes through post-production in another seven days). It also provided a brief history of the country’s indie films and the Filipino filmmakers’ various production methods.

PIFF Fundings, Film Market, Fellowships, and Awards

Asian Film Academy (AFA)

Annually, 24 young filmmakers from 16 Asian countries are being honed to become “The Future of Asian Cinema” through short film productions, seminars, workshops, one-on-one mentoring sessions, film screenings, meetings, and master classes. This year’s program is led by the AFA Dean Kurosawa Kiyoshi (Japan), along with Deputy Dean Park Ki-yong (Korea), directing mentor Ho Yuhang (Malaysia) and cinematography mentor Mahmoud Kalari (Iran). Two Filipino filmmakers Rianne Hill Soriano and LA Yamsuan were chosen for the AFA fellowship this year.

Asian Film Market

A total of 534 companies from 42 countries participated this year. There were 45 sales offices from 75 companies of 25 countries and a total of 50 market screenings (including 40 market premieres) of 43 films.

Asian Cinema Fund: New AND Distribution Fund to support documentary filmmakers

The AND Distribution Fund was newly set up to support distribution of documentary films that have difficulty in being exhibited in theaters.

Support of acquisition (Asian documentary)

1)    Beautiful Islands by Kana Tomoko (Japan)

2)    Bilal by Sourave Sarangi (India/Finland)

Support of distribution (Korean documentary)

1)    The Border City 2 by HONG Hyungsook

Pusan Promotion Plan (PPP)

The 12th Pusan Promotion Plan shared the venue with the Asian Film Market at the Seacloud Hotel, Haeundae Beach as a convenient one-stop shop for film business professionals. Since 1998, PPP has introduced many talented Asian filmmakers and offered wide opportunities for investment and co-production by global film industry professionals. 30 projects from 21 countries, including Jim Libiran’s film project Happyland, participated this year.

PPP Awards

Pusan Award: Decadent Sisters by Aoyama Shinji (Japan)

Kodak Award: Trace by Han Jae-rim / Korea

Göteborg Film Festival Fund: Postcards from the Zoo by Edwin (Indonesia)

CJ Award: Slightly Sane by Pan Nalin (India/France)

Lotte Award: Villain and Widow by Son Jae-gon (Korea)

Wooridul Award: New Policemen Stories by Yang Jin (Hong Kong, China)

KPIF (Korean Producers In Focus) Award (Prime Choice): Good-bye Again by producer Kim Young-jin

14th Pusan International Film Festival Award Winners

New Currents Award

Jury: Jean-Jacques Beineix (Head); Kim Hyung-koo, Pen-ek Ratanaruang, Terri Kwan, Yesim Ustaoglu

Kick Off by Shawkat Amin Korki (Kurdistan/Iraq/Japan)

Naneun Konkyeonge Cheohaessda! (I’m in Trouble!) by So Sang-min (Korea)

Special Mention: Astig (Squalor), GB Sampedro (Philippines)

FIPRESCI (International Federation of Film Critics) Award

Jury: Lee Myunghee, Davide Cazzaro, Borislav Andjelic

Kick Off by Shawkat Amin Korki (Kurdistan/Iraq/Japan)

NETPAC (Network for the Promotion of Asian Cinema) Award

Jury: Aihara Hiromi, Dang Nhat Min, Kang So-won

Paju by Park Chan Ok (Korea)

KNN Movie Award (Audience Award)

Lan by Jiang Wenli (China)

Fast Forward Award

Jury: Kang Soo Yeon (Head); Marianne Slot, Alissa Simon, Frédéric Boyer

Last Cowboy Standing by Zaida Bergroth, (Finland/Germany)

Special Mention: Miss Kicki by Hakon Liu (Sweden/Taiwan)

Sonje Award for Short Films

Jury: Simojukka Ruippo; TATanN Chui Mui; You Ji-tae

Somewhere Unreached by Kim Jae-won (Korea)

Rare Fish, by Basil Vassili Mironer (Singapore/Indonesia)

PIFF Mecenant Award for Documentaries

Jury: Dorothee Wenner, Jane Yu, Ko Young-jae

Earth’s Woman by Kwon WooJung (Korea)

The Other Song by Saba Dewan (India)

Film Article: Cinemanila Celebrates Its 11th Year with Topnotch Local and International Film Picks

Cinemanila Celebrates Its 11^th Year with Topnotch Local and International Film Picks

By Rianne Hill Soriano

The annual Cinemanila International Film Festival celebrated its 11^th year last Oct. 15 to 25, 2009 at the Bonifacio Global City, Taguig. 10 days of films, master classes, seminars, parties, and even reunions for many filmmakers, artists, and cinephiles… It has considerably become a part of their daily routine throughout the duration of the festival.

“Moving Forward with Moving Images.” Young as it is and still facing a number of challenges and tough times, Cinemanila is best known for the good films it shares to the Filipino audience every festival season – a mix of both local and international picks from the freshest and most promising to the well-renowned and critically-acclaimed.

Around 100 international and local films were screened – from the current toasts of the local independent scene to the award winners and favorites at prestigious festivals such as Cannes, Berlin, Venice, Rotterdam, Sundance, and Pusan.

Apart from being known for its good programming of top films from all over the world, another good part of Cinemanila is that it tries to expand itself as much as it could – which then makes itself reaching out to more people. From the outdoor screenings to the 1^st Cinemanila Machinima Film Festival to the Sine Barangay project, these are valuable ways to expose more people, especially those who don’t usually get to watch art-house films, to such cinema experiences.

The parts still needing improvements mostly fall under the major concern of festival budget and funding. Market! Market! and Bonifacio High Street were definitely wonderful places to situate the festival in. However, there was just one major concern for the general audience – they were not very accessible to local public transport especially to those students and working cinephiles who would have to brace rush hour traffic with mostly expensive taxi rides in order to catch their film picks at the festival. And yet, on the brighter side, it’s truly interesting to note that the local government of Taguig has welcomed Cinemanila in their progressive city this year. Personally, I felt the kind of support the Taguig government provided for the festival. In fact, if not for the transportation issue that a number of people were not able to attend due to inaccessibility of direct public transport as MRT, LRT, jeepneys, and buses from major points/work places/schools, things were then developing rather smoothly for the festival. Perhaps, this could be one major concern that festival and the city government should attend to next time – maybe by utilizing The Fort buses with effective dissemination of pick-up points to the people intending to go the festival from work places and schools, and also maybe having additional cinemas and/or outdoor screenings near these places through the help of both private institutions and other local government units. It’s about making Cinemanila a part of the subculture of the Pinoys during this time of the year – with it being customary for them to see such great films from all over the world through the festival. And we can definitely do it if we work together and support one another to make our very own Cinemanila International Film Festival a part of our valuable events to look forward to every year.

As we acknowledge all these growth and learnings, with such a young but promising international film festival by the Filipinos, we should be proud of all these efforts. Every year, we get to see these esteemed films and acknowledge the filmmakers behind them, and we also meet such inspirational people from the industry both in the local and international scenes. Kudos to Cinemanila, the filmmakers, and the Cinemanila audience!

Highlighting the 11^th Cinemanila are films including:

Opening Film – Lola by Brillante Mendoza (Philippines)

Closing Film – Himpapawid (Manila Skies) by Raymond Red (Philippines)

International Competition

Jury Members – Brillante Mendoza, chair (Philippines); and Eric Sasono (Indonesia)

Cheng Du, I Love You by Fruit Chan (China)

Hunger by Steve McQueen (UK)

Independencia by Raya Martin (Philippines)

Mammoth by Lukas Moodysson (Sweden)

Machan by Uberto Pasolini, (Italy/Sri Lanka)

Milk of Sorrow by Claudia Llossa (Peru)

Pandora’s Box by Yesim Ustaoglu (Turkey/France/Germany/Belgium)

Ricky by Francois Ozon (France)

Samson and Delilah by Warwick Thornton (Australia)

Tony Manero by Pablo Larrain (Chile/Brazil)

Tulpan by Sergey Dvortsevoy (Kazakhstan)

Digital Lokal (Philippines)

Jury Members – Sonja Heinen, chair (Germany); In-Seong Yoo (Korea); Sherad Anthony Sanchez (Philippines)

Anacbanua by Christopher Gozum

Biyaheng Lupa by Armando “Bing” Lao

Ang Beerhouse by Jon Red

Dolores by Lito Casaje

69 1/2 by Ted Manotoc

Iliw by Bona Fajardo

World Cinema

Adam Resurrected by Paul Schrader (USA)

A Year Ago in Winter by Caroline Link (Germany)

Baby Doll Night by Adel Adeeb (Egypt)

Black Dynamite by Scott Sanders (USA)

Broken Embraces by Pedro Almodovar (Spain)

Inglourious Basterds by Quentin Tarantino (USA)

Let the Right One In by Tomas Alfredson (Sweden)

I Come with the Rain by Anh Hung Tran (Vietnam/USA)

My Suicide by David Lee Miller (USA)

Leonera (Lion’s Den) by Pablo Trapero (Argentina/Korea)

Asian Cinema

A Matter of Size by Sharon Maymon and Erez Tadmor (Israel)

Beautiful by Juhn Jaihong (Korea)

Call If You Need Me by James Lee (Malaysia)

Caramel by Nadine Labaki (Lebanon)

Engkwentro by Pepe Diokno (Philippines)

Jeonju Digital Project 2009: Visitors (Korea, Japan, Philippines)

Little Zizou by Sooni Taraporevala (India)

Macabre by Mo Brothers Indonesia/Singapore)

My Magic by Eric Khoo (Singapore)

Non-ko by Kazuyoshi Kumakiri (Japan)

Waltz with Bashir by Ari Folman (Israel)

Passion by Ryusuke Hamaguchi (Japan)

Young Cinema Competition (Philippines)

Jury Members – Tan Chui Mui, chair (Malaysia); Kong Rithdee (Thailand); and John Torres (Philippines)

Dalaw by Janus Victoria

Harang by Mikhail Red

Ito ang Gabing Babalikan Kita Pagkatapos ng Tatlong Taon nang Hindi Maiiyak at Masasaktan by Antoinette Jadaone

Limang Libo by Ice Idanan

Save Me!!! by Ramon del Prado

Stations by Emmanuel Quindo Palo

To Siomai Love by Remton Siega Zuasola

Young Cinema Exhibition (Philippines)

The Artist Is In by Marcus Adoro

Ang Ibig Sabihin ng ‘OK Lang’ by Ryan Nikolai Dino

Gemini by Leo Valencia

Gusto Kong Lumipad by Glenn Ituriaga

Irene F**king Jordan by Paolo Herras

Karoler by Michael Angelo Dagñalan

Technophilia by Rianne Hill Soriano

Waiting Shed by Ely Buendia

SEA (Southeast Asia) Film Competition

Jury Members – Ronnie Lazaro (chair); Joel Shepard (USA); and Bee Thiam Tan (Singapore)

Adrift by Thac Chuyen Bui (Vietnam)

Bakal Boys by Ralston Jover (Philippines)

Here by Ho Tzu Nyen (Singapore)

Jermal by Ravi Bharwani (Indonesia)

Karaoke by Chris Chong (Malaysia)

A Moment in June by O Nathapon (Thailand)

Talentime by Yasmin Ahmad (Malaysia)

Woman on Fire Looks for Water by Woo Ming Jin (Malaysia)

SEA Shorts Competition

Uwan Init Pista sa Langit (Philippines) by Remton Siega Zuasola and Keith Deligero

Focal Point (Malaysia) by Alizera Khatami & Ali Seifourri

Rat (Malaysia/Taiwan) by Lau Kek Huat

Outing (Singapore) Jow Zhi Wei

Sea Horse  (Indonesia) by Shalahuddin Siregar

SEA Shorts Exhibition

Lakad ni Sammy (Philippines) by Joel P. Ruiz

Love Suicides (Malaysia) by Edmund Yeo

It’s Not Raining Outside by Yosep Anggi Noen

The 11th Cinemanila awardees are:

Main Competition

Best Actor – Alfredo Castro in Tony Manero (Chile/Brazil)

Best Actress – Tsilla Chelton in Pandora’s Box (Peru/Spain)

Grand Jury Prize – Tulpan by Sergey Dvortsevoy (Germany/Kazakhstan/Switzerland/Russia/Poland)

Lino Brocka Grand Prize – Hunger by Steve McQueen (UK/Ireland)

SEA (Southeast Asia) Competition

Best SEA Short – Focal Point by Alizera Khatami and Ali Seiffouri (Malaysia)

Best SEA Film – Talentime by Yasmin Ahmad (Malaysia)

Special Mention – Woman on Fire Looks for Water by Woo Ming Jin (Malaysia)

Young Cinema (Philippines)

Best Short Film – To Siomai Love by Remton Siega Zuasola

Ishmael Bernal Award for Young Cinema – Remton Siega Zuasola for To Siomai Love

Digital Lokal (Philippines)

Lino Grand Prize – Anacbanua by Christopher Gozum

Lino Grand Jury Prize – Biyaheng Lupa by Armando Lao

Best Director – Christopher Gozum for Anacbanua

Lifetime Achievement Award – Paul Schrader (USA)

Indie Spirit Award – Lav Diaz

Technophilia Screens at the 11th Cinemanila International Film Festival

Technophilia is screening at the Cinemanila Young Cinema Shorts Program this October 2009! =D

Congratulations to all the filmmakers and their films! See you at the Bonifacio Global City this October!

CINEMANILA FINALISTS
September 23, 2009
Cinemanila Finalists Announced: Digital Lokal, Young Cinema, SEA Shorts

The 11th Cinemanila International Film Festival released today its finalists for the Digital Lokal Section (Philippine digital films) Young Cinema Section (Shorts in Competition and Exhibition), and SEA Shorts (Southeast Asian shorts in Competition and Exhibition). They are as follows:

The finalists for this year’s Digital Lokal are:

Christopher Gozum “Anacbanua”
Armando “Bing” Lao “Biyaheng Lupa”
Jon Red “Beerhouse”
Lito Casaje “Dolores”
Ted Manotoc “69 1/2”
Bona Fajardo “Iliw”

For Young Cinema Competition the finalists are:

Janus Victoria “Dalaw”
Mikhail Red “Harang”
Antoinette Jadaone “Ito ang Gabing Babalikan Kita Pagkatapos ng Tatatlong Taon nang Hindi Maiiyak at Masasaktan”
Ice Idanan “Limang Libo”
Ramon del Prado “Save Me!!!”
Emmanuel Quindo Palo “Stations”
Remton Siega Zuasola “To Siomai Love”

For Young Cinema Exhibition are:

Marcus Adoro “The Artist Is In”
Ryan Nikolai Dino “Ang Ibig Sabihin ng ‘OK Lang’”
Leo Valencia “Gemini”
Glenn Ituriaga “Gusto Kong Lumipad”
Paolo Herras “Irene F**king Jordan”
Michael Angelo Dagñalan “Karoler”
Rianne Hill Soriano “Technophilia”
Ely Buendia “Waiting Shed”

For the SEA Shorts Competition the finalists are:

“Uwan Init Pista sa Langit” (Philippines) by Remton Siega Zuasola and Keith Deligero
“Focal Point” (Malaysia) by Alizera Khatami & Ali Seifourri
“Rat” (Malaysia/Taiwan) by Lau Kek Huat
“Outing” (Singapore) Jow Zhi Wei
“Sea Horse” (Indonesia) by Shalahuddin Siregar

For the Sea Shorts in Exhibition are:

“Lakad ni Sammy” (Philippines) by Joel P. Ruiz
“Love Suicides” (Malaysia) by Edmund Yeo
“It’s Not Raining Outside” by Yosep Anggi Noen

###

The 11th Cinemanila International Film Festival will be held from October 15 to 25, 2009 in Bonifacio Global City in Taguig. Around 100 international and local films will be screened in a span of 10 days – from the current toasts of the local indie scene to the award-winners and favorites at prestigious festivals such as Cannes, Berlin, Rotterdam, Sundance, and Pusan. The festival will also feature workshops, seminars and master classes. For more info, or jpegs for a release, please contact cinemanila.press@gmail.com and cinemanila@gmail.com or go to www.cinemanila.org.ph.

The 2009 Cinemanila is presented by the City of Taguig and the Cinemanila International Film Festival Foundation, together with Market!Market! Cinemas and Ayala Malls, in cooperation with Cinema One, Business World, Manila Bulletin, Click the City, Philippine Star, Pep.ph, Spot.ph, Fully Booked, Web Philippines, TBWA\Mangada\Santiago\Puno, Outpost Visual Frontier, Solid Video Corporation and the World Cinema Fund.

From: http://cinemanila.org/?p=725

Film Review: Crossing Over

Interlocking Stories, lllegal Struggles, and Immigration
By Rianne Hill Soriano

From purely a cinematic point of view that is detached from its relevant theme, “Crossing Over” is all a bit too interlocking and hampered by its wayward, overreaching direction and overstuffed script. Forced, heavy-handed and overdone, it gets so wrapped up in its quest for topical resonance that it forgets some of the basics of telling a good narrative. From its paint-by-numbers quality to the banality of presenting its subject matter, this misconceived immigration drama is an incompetent way of mounting a multi-character piece.

Amidst the fact that this seemingly well-intentioned drama tackles realistic issues about U. S. immigration policies and provocative points to make about the country’s attitudes towards migrants and the horrors of getting naturalized, it lacks the needed subtlety and eloquence for it to succeed. Too many of the hurdles in the story often feel like a product of a writer’s imagination than of real-life experiences. Its message is undermined by its cardboard characters and clunky script. And while the film certainly has some viable stance that can have a large number of people around the world relating to it, its crisscrossing stories, heavy ironies, and even heavier moralizing just don’t work. It’s more like a muddle of good liberal intentions that is loosely anchored to a mass of pure Hollywood triteness.

This illegal-immigration drama is timely and well-intentioned; however, it is too contrived and schematic to generate good enough credibility. It’s a serious film that offers some pretty good performances, but their sheer number dilutes their power, leaving the movie a bit of a mess in its own games of sex, violence, and betrayal while diminishing the noble tradition of naturalized citizenship.

“Crossing Over” is a blend of thriller and social drama utilized in a hokum kind of way. Being a politically-minded ensemble piece as it is, its multi-character canvas about immigrants of varying nationalities struggling to achieve legal status in America really falters with a wobbly screenplay and loose direction. It’s somewhat unbalanced with its competing storylines. Its lapses into sentimentality are overkill. It mainly strains, with too many characters, too many story strands, and too much of an effort to cover the bases. The focus on these immigrant dreamers runs into thematic banality because the film’s treatment is filled with much crass manipulation. The characters are stretched thin with only the most overstuffed dialogue to express themselves. And it primarily dictates a general air of dull preachiness with a story improperly fleshed out through stereotypical characters and overly structured sub-stories that keep crossing and bumping into each other.

The camera work, editing, and the entire means of storytelling have that very amateurish feel to it. It’s very choppy. It’s like entire reels have been cut for whatever weird reason. Tied together with endless, flattening shots of American homes, highways, and establishments, it may be sporadically provocative given its theme and subject matter, but it is also often convoluted and dull with undercooked messages and ideas. And as a contrived saga with subplots showcasing immigration woes of all sorts, its markedly unimaginative sense of cinematic storytelling often offers mostly boring moments with little new or insightful to add to the debate on the underlying politics and promise of opportunities, unlimited opportunities in the U. S. A – as mentioned by the judge during the oath-taking ceremony for all naturalized Americans in the film’s Los Angeles setting.

Amidst its unsuccessful mounting, director Wayne Kramer somehow deserves credit for taking on the touchy subject. The presented issues don’t seem pretentious, only the didactic but ineffective way in telling the story is. Somehow, in some way, it is still an interesting failure – a movie that at least strives to be about something with a certain heart and sincerity to its subject matter, even though it entangles itself too much that it fails to become a good cinematic offer.

The lack of subtlety in its multi-stranded storytelling makes “Crossing Over” an overwrought harangue about the gates of illegal immigration. It spoils the supposed empathy for its subject and theme. The surfeit of coincidences weaving the characters together tries to keep the action unified as an anthropological melodrama. However, its intensity doesn’t live up to its very intentions as the sledgehammer approach becomes truly off-putting and risible at most times.

The film has a few moments of poignancy and engaging acting especially with the outstanding performance of Summer Bishil as Taslima Jahangir. Her acting moment is just bull’s-eye to the heart’s core – a very impressive scene that really stands out from a movie filled with utter mediocrity.

“Crossing Over” would have made for a perfectly serviceable film. Yet, it merely provides hysterical little bits of what is already given and nothing much after. You get what the filmmakers are trying to say about immigration and nationalism, but everything is laid down in an overly substantial form that seems mistreated to deliver more yawns than moral, political, and intellectual stimulation. And even with famed names as Harrison Ford as Max Brogan, Ashley Judd as Denise Frankel, Jim Sturgess as Gavin Kossef, Cliff Curtis as Hamid Baraheri, Ray Liotta as Cole Frankel, among other names, this issue-oriented movie is one big disappointment.

When Philippine Cinema Loses a Warrior. Good-bye, Alexis.

When Philippine Cinema Loses a Warrior
By Rianne Hill Soriano

Doing something that you love is most of the time in need of life-changing decisions and sacrifices. Priorities are overhauled. A myriad of issues should be settled – especially if it entails geographical commitments. It happens a lot, especially with Filipinos whose families are scattered all over the world: some are immigrants, some have foreign blood and with family members and loved ones abroad, some are overseas Filipino workers, and lots of other “somes.”

At some point, we are asked to stay with our families abroad, where the so-called greener pastures seem more apparent. Most of us have to go, and there’s no argument on the fact that we have to economically survive for ourselves and our families. Sad to say, other countries benefit with the wide array of talents and work ethics of Filipinos; while our country generally suffers from brain drain. And with a very small percentage of people from middle to upper class who have more chances to endure and keep up with the Philippine economic struggle, it’s even rarer that there are those who prefer to live a simpler but more fulfilled life by contributing to the betterment of our beloved country. Sad to say again, of that small percentage, 1 precious gem, we just lost so unreasonably.

Alexis Tioseco chose to struggle for Philippine cinema’s development than migrate back to Canada with his family. He knows he can do something for the struggling Philippine film industry. The dream to make it thrive has actually taken its baby steps. And right now, it’s looking very good. Much things to be done, but good things are starting to happen. Thanks to a number of brilliant Filipino talents for making the start of this new wave.

Alexis, that profound mind, an accomplished young man who has dedicated a great part of his life for Philippine cinema is now gone.

That morning, I woke up quite early. It’s a rare instance to get up from bed at such time (unless there’s an early call time or any kind of work or meeting requiring me to wake up that early). Breakfast wasn’t even ready, so I took the liberty to open my laptop and go online. And it usually felt so good to keep in touch with so many friends and colleagues from all over – from a few kilometers to continents away (making the idea of migrating to or working in another country a less burdening issue in terms of keeping constant communication). I’ve been raving about the fact that it’s so easy to communicate with people these days. And it’s always easy to express ourselves and be heard through the internet.

But that morning was different. Going online brought me in a total shock. A shock that never in my life I have ever imagined to happen, perhaps not this too early on, way too early. I thought: I just commented on his Facebook post entitled “Dear Film Development Council of the Philippines” a day before. I was commenting among other filmmakers, writers, and film enthusiasts where we expressed our insights and emotions about the topic. Then a day after that last comment I made on his Facebook post, I saw in the same online venue that he and his girlfriend Nika Bohinc, also a well-respected film journalist from Slovenia, was murdered at Alexis’ house in Quezon City. Of course, there was that kind of denial stage and the hope that it was just a wrong news, or even just a bluff, not a funny one at that. But it’s confirmed. What a shock. What a pain. What a loss. And whoever was responsible for the crime that took away their precious lives, I know that karma will be on its way. Yes, how tiring it is to be positive enough with the justice system in this society, but I know that justice will be there, fairly served, beyond the world of the mundane.

It was normal to meet him during film festivals. We had some chats for brief moments in film events. We were not really friends, but we occasionally get to say hi. I even went to his house some years ago for something film-related. It was a pretty ordinary thing to meet up here and there. But now, we, especially those who knew him, further felt how our mortality can grab as away in a whim.

And even until now, it’s quite hard to let everything sink in. Hearing how his life came to an end was like losing somebody so close that I readily burst into tears after confirming the validity of those Facebook messages I read. It feels so awful. It’s even more painful coming from somebody from the same circle as I know that Philippine cinema has just lost not just a gem, but a warrior.

He had a brilliant mind, and so he wrote. He had profound insights, and so he spoke. He started establishing solid connections and resources through his valuable works, and so he continuously struggled for the betterment of Filipino films. He had the composure of a young and accomplished intellectual, and so he continued to provide a voice not just for the film industry but the whole arts community through his relevant opinions, criticisms, and discussions.

He had made himself heard – especially to his fellow supporters of the industry. He reached out until the very last moment he could.

How should we remember Alexis and his beloved Nika? Both of them are gems and warriors in the world of film, from the Philippines to Slovenia to the whole world. We all mourn for the loss. It is just but human to feel too much pain on the fact that he and Nika could never write about film again. But their contributions to the film community don’t really end on their writings. We should keep on helping our own industry, and by doing so, everybody who sacrificed so much, who are struggling, whether people who are still here or those who are not anymore in our midst, we keep their memories alive. We put energy to make their dreams realized.

All Alexis’ and Nika’s writings, recorded insights… chronicled for all of us now and those in the future. They will forever become treasures of ideas, principles, and well-fought battles. I believe that the best way to remember the two of them is continue the long-term struggle for Philippine cinema, and the arts as a whole. Their writings shall remain sparks of hope and ideas to fuel our tough fights.

We have our own skills and talents. We have our own turfs. We have our own resources and connections. We have our own dreams and aspirations. Let us all become the best we can be and contribute to our society and our chosen fields in the best way we can.

For Alexis and Nika, you left us with memories, writings, and chronicled moments to really treasure. You will be well-remembered, not just by us, but also Philippine cinema’s years and years to come.

It has been a long struggle for Philippine cinema, and the fight continues.

Let me share Alexis’ post entitled “Dear Film Development Council of the Philippines” which was also posted on his Facebook Notes:

http://alexistioseco.wordpress.com/2009/08/29/dear-film-development-council-of-the-philippines/

You have the mandate to start the National Film Archive. I have heard that your first priority project in relation to archiving is the digitization of some 70 works into high quality digital copies. While this may be useful, perhaps inquiring into the state of and assisting the various archives in the country (UP Film Center, Mowelfund et al) whose current holdings (which include rare prints if not master negatives of some titles, let alone the entire history of alternative/experimental cinema in the country) are being stored in deplorable conditions, may be even more important. Have you thought about this? Saving the master negatives or prints and storing and caring for them properly will ensure their survival far longer than digital copies (of which we are still uncertain), and in their original state too. Steps need to be made NOW to ensure that we don’t lose more of these films.

I know you would like high quality digital copies of films to be available for public screenings, and its embarrassing when you’re asked for titles, even recent ones, and don’t know where to get them, but to push for this at the expense of the archiving itself, when the situation is clearly a SOS one for many films/archives is a serious mismanagement of priorities.

I saw this poster recently in the National Film Archive of Thailand, an institution that has done so much with so little and continues to do more (I believe you can learn much from them), and thought it would be useful to share it with you:

In memory of Alexis Tioseco and Nika Bohinc.

We seek justice for Alexis and Nika.

Film Review: Whiteout

Frozen to Dullness in Antarctica
By Rianne Hill Soriano

“Whiteout” is like the impending six months of darkness in Antarctica. Not with the chilling thrills, but with the total bore of staying inside a scientific research facility with only the endless stretches of Antarctic ice as companion. And in the most superficial sense, this movie can only be passable for the filmgoer without any other demands but seeing ice everywhere.

This cold film offers no concrete diversion or escape from the heat or cold. It ices itself as a ham-handed murder mystery set in the south pole – with a perfunctory approach to its story and its characters. The story elements struggle to survive; but unfortunately, they just melt away far from the thriller the film promises to be. The cold must have wiped out the needed skills this production requires.

While the setting is considerably interesting and mesmerizing, little else about this movie is captivating. It’s a whodunnit mystery story set on a scientific research base in Antarctica with dullness growing as thick as the ice all over the sets. For all its frozen bodies, blood, assaults with ice axes, and struggle with killer winds and weather that all pique your interest for its cold and windy setting, “Whiteout” turns out to be a pale imitation of the thriller it’s been trying to be – with a twist you see coming a continent away. The central mystery is limp. The mystical setting is wasted with a lifeless pedestrian plot that could be set anywhere.

It feels like one of those movies that has never progressed much beyond its interesting and promising concept. Like the isolated continent where it’s set, the film seems too isolated to make itself become a quality piece. Like the thick ice all around, the storytelling is so dense that the film wimps out to become such an uninspired thriller amidst the many inspirational elements around it.

There’s wonderful potential for such white vistas embodying both metaphorical emptiness and mysterious oblivion. And it could have been a great setting for an ambitious film with an already given A-list star at helm. So what went wrong? Script, direction, sound, music. And for a solid domino effect to it, performances. The characters don’t translate well. The film is filled with mere panicky zooms and badly staged action. The random forensic gross-outs are half-baked. The dialogues put unwelcome commentaries so overdone that no event occurs without a character telling you what you already see. The redundancy is even worsened by the overworked soundtrack telling you for the nth time what is supposed to happen next and even dictate to you what you should feel or think about the very scene you’re watching.

The sub-standard work is very much a missed opportunity. This generic snowbound thriller features blowing winds averaging around 100 miles per hour, but it just doesn’t really throw the audience towards genuinely thrilling moments. Its worst offense is assuming that the audience is so dumb that you will actually be shocked and entertained by characters merely wearing snowsuits and slashing out people, then finding out in the end, how lame the whole thing is – with all the utter lack of excitement and witty twist ending. Hobbled by a ruinously insufficient thrills, chills, and intrigue, it grows to become an increasingly ludicrous mess from the beginning until the ending. And even if you suspend your disbelief, the sub-standard CGI of planes among other things even pulls you down farther the thick white ice.

The cast delivers numb performances with stereotypical, one-dimensional characters that are actually devoid of utter personality. It merely settles to put some feasting eyes on Kate Beckinsale showcasing her almost naked body ready for a hot bathing scene, then showing her curves in tempting blurs from inside the shower within the first five minutes of the film. Yes, that’s the mainstream sellout at work. Beckinsale as U.S. Marshal Carrie Stetko is glossed over with her skin perfectly holding up to the sub-zero temperature all the way.

What’s missing from “Whiteout” is the pervasive sense of paranoia that you’d expect, or hope for, from a thriller set in the coldest and most isolated land mass on the planet. And its intriguing setting and storyline could have been gripping if a more developed story with quality script and smart direction replace the spoon-fed lines of its dull characters, the poor camera work, the lame musical score, and the second-rate Hollywood level CGI.

“Whiteout” is amateur cold.

What Can We Do With the Unfair?

What Can We Do With the Unfair?
By Rianne Hill Soriano

Some weeks ago, I watched Dulaang UP’s “Lulu,” a Frank Wedekind play which is a part of DUP’s 34th season tribute to German playwrights. And I found it interesting that they actually made the decisive portion of the film to be interactive with what the audience feels in relation to the fate of the main character Lulu. And according to the friend who invited me for it, one of the actresses in the play, they really noticed how most people opted to have Lulu dying in the end. Yes, the very ending depends on what the majority of the audience would want through a confab-like part of the viewing experience. Now that made me think, looks like most audiences don’t have much to celebrate, most people find more darkness than light these days.

As the majority of that audience (which included me) voted for Lulu to die during that night in August at the Wilfredo Ma. Guerrero Theater, University of the Philippines Diliman, perhaps, it just goes to show the grief and agony of many people in our country today. Most of those who attended the said theatrical performance were artists. I saw a number of filmmakers, visual artists, writers, curators, and thespians around. And all were mourning on the outrageously tainted National Artists Awards. And just like the countless issues in our country today, the clear deception here was really slapped in our faces.

I thought, perhaps, people are really showing their real emotions on that simple choice that evening. Maybe to end Lulu’s own suffering in this unfair world – maybe to be one with the very aching battle cry for truth and fairness in this society of ours full of self-serving leaders and power-seeking opportunists. How awful it is to see those deserving of merit strapped off their honor in favor of those undeserving allies. What a shame to be in a rotten system of pure deception while we see outright the unfair advantage those in power have just to serve their personal needs for fame and influence – that they would consistently keep arrogant faces to such literally unjust choices by such a scapegoat as “president’s prerogative.” Is my mind a size of a pea for me not to understand how the prominent ones tamper with the rules of law? Is my artistic taste too narrow and only serving my own level of subjectivity according to my status in the society when the actual issue is diverted to other things just for them to avoid getting caught of their blatant acts? Am I not conscious enough that we are surrounded by the truth yet our own leaders tend to abuse their stature to make us feel so dumb and worthless? Am I like a mere pest in their midst that those formidable ones can just curtail my rights whenever they wish? Can’t I do anything? There are so many of us feeling the same way. There are many of us victimized by this injustice. Are we supposed to be mere cowards allowing all these to let those dishonorable and unreasonable slaves of power and prestige reign?

We should not allow this oppression in this so-called democratic world we have in our midst. I am not saying that we just merely march in public places everyday. At this point, I remember the great warrior leader Sun Tzu’s words, lots of them… Why? Because we are in a battle, a very great battle in this time and age where our society is meanly controlled and abused by our own leaders who are supposed to protect and hone us to become better citizens in this humble developing country. We have our own jobs, skills, talents, and principles. Let’s also use them to fight for what we know is right. I know how to write. And now, I am expressing my sentiments about these issues. I can blog, I can write a story. I can make a film. I can express myself in a simple coffee chit-chat with friends. You may know how to draw, or make a song, or perform. You maybe somebody in power who can do more than just express and inspire calls for action. You maybe one of the many heroes we are hoping to do something for the benefit of the people. What else can I do? What else can you do?

You may be an office worker in a 9-5 shift who rather live the life to breathe, eat, earn some, buy some – to merely survive without a life’s fulfillment. You maybe a call center agent working diligently to earn a decent amount to afford some luxury and never mind others primarily because you’re not directly affected. You maybe in a blue collar job who has a cynical view of the world and has merely accepted the despondence and demoralizing society we have. You may be a principled unemployed who is in constant depression and just allows the better of you to take charge of the pathetic situation you are in. You may be a businessman licking asses of those influential rats for your own sake and never mind whatever those social and moral responsibilities mean in your own inadequate notion of the world being “those up there and down there.” You may be part of those actual institutions instigating the many abuses in power and you just allow yourself to validate the cowardly idea that “you can’t do anything anyway.” You may be a promising and thriving individual offered to join the bandwagon of such a vicious circle of abusive forces where temptation of fame, fortune, and power is already blinding you. You may be in the most difficult situation of getting blackmailed or doing some sacrifices so that your loved one remains unharmed. Now that’s too much to bear…

What are we doing? How do we maintain a peaceful heart while we keep ourselves in our own comfort zones or suffering quarters while we watch on TV, hear on the radio, read on print and web how so much people have been suffering? How we are treated as stupid taxpayers who will just yield to what those in power would do? How human are we to bear all these? Until when should we allow all these? How do we maintain dignity among ourselves if we are doing nothing? Like I said, it doesn’t have to be a big leap all the time. It just takes “one big wave of us” – united from our smallest to biggest acts towards our principled goal for the positive change in our society to finally take place.

We rant every now and then. But what do we do next? It’s not with a mere lip service that will let things move on. Perhaps, if the talent of one of us is of a lip service type, then let his/her rants be heard at the least. We know what we can do more. We are just afraid of doing the next step and somehow sacrificing our own comfort zones really. Let us sincerely stand up for our rights and help initiate calls for action whether in a small or big way. Expressing ourselves is a great way to keep us sane enough to stand the biting realities of this world we live in. Healthy discussions and hearing them taking some effect on those involved with the actual issues are more than just exercises for the heart and brain… they make us live life with a valuable cause. But for the naïve and oblivious others, until when should you just watch and listen? When will you stand and be part of the change we all have been waiting for all these times?

Film Review: I Love You, Beth Cooper

Flip-flopping With the Farce and the Funny
By Rianne Hill Soriano

“I Love You, Beth Cooper” is average stuff. That is to compare what you see in the unimaginative trailer and what this teen movie rehash actually delivers for its worn out theme and story. Considerably, it does provide some laughs for its farcical intentions. But that’s about it.

The story revolves around a nerdy valedictorian Denis Cooverman (Paul Rust) who proclaims his love for the most popular girl in school – Beth Cooper (Hayden Panettiere) – during his graduation speech. Much to his surprise, Beth shows up at his door during his post-graduation party and decides to show him the best night of his life. It’s one of those movies about the nerds getting with the high school hottie. This graduation night-road trip flick adapted from Larry Doyle’s 2007 best-selling novel of the same title seems kind of misguided. Or perhaps, the very story is already contrived to this kind of quality for a commercial film work. Or maybe this kind of movie just feels too outdated. The script, also by Doyle, has a few good flashes of comedy, but at most times, it just tries a little too hard. With its painfully awkward shifts between pat sentimentality, hackneyed teen-movie tropes, and parent-baiting raunchiness, this coming-of-age party movie is highly contrived and lacking the courage and conviction to completely tell a memorable character-based story about girls and boys with hyperactive hormones triggered by puberty. Well at the least, the movie can really induce some laughs.

As one-crazy-night teen comedies go, this film attempts to make itself a solid teen comedy flick; but it merely turns out to become a flabby teen movie trying to revive that same breath as “Superbad.” It fails to grasp that needed sincerity to make a spectacularly effective teen comedy masterpiece. It flip-flops between flailing farcical comedy and dull drama with a mixture of obvious jokes and winsome sentiments. The situations are forced. The script is weak. The pacing sometimes drags. The comedy isn’t funny enough all the time. And the film falls short on hitting all its emotional targets.

Director Chris Columbus provides a by-the-number type of filmmaking here – all manufactured for that farcical comedy in teenybopper fashion. There are some mindlessly funny moments that could probably please its target audience. However, the one-sidedness of the movie kind of robs the film of overall quality and conviction.

“I Love You, Beth Cooper” offers nothing new and original. As a bland mix of dumb comedy routines and teen angst, it touches all the bases that have been touched so many times before, with both better and worse ones. On a slightly positive note, it actually exceeds a little of the basic expectations for it. And it’s not to be branded as a totally unwatchable fare, thanks to some really funny scenes. Amidst the clichés and stereotypical stretches, the comic deliveries from Rust as the nerdy Denis and Jack Carpenter as his movie-quoting best friend Rich induces some pretty fine laughs. Yet, flat and sluggish moments here and there just pull it down further. And the flashbacks are sometimes awkward.

Overall, this graduation comedy movie still flunks; but at the least, there are still specific laughing moments that can make the teacher reconsider it to reach a passing mark.