PinoyDVD: The Pinoy Digital Video & Devices Community
Entertainment => Film & TV Talk => Pinoy Entertainment => Topic started by: Klaus Weasley on Dec 22, 2009 at 10:26 PM
-
He said in an article at the Inquirer today that if he was running things, he'll help the Philippine movie industry by proposing that.
How do you guys feel about it?
-
So the dvd bootleggers are contributing to his campaign now?? ;D
Limiting anything will only increase unscrupulous means ;)
-
malulugi at lalangawin mga sinehan.....
-
Make good movies FIRST. Only then should you have the balls to say that. Because, El Panday, you're just coming off as delusional by proposing that.
-
so promote Philippine movies by force. stupid!
-
He said in an article at the Inquirer today that if he was running things, he'll help the Philippine movie industry by proposing that.
How do you guys feel about it?
mabuti na lang! :D
-
;D His brain is in his ass. He's running again for Senator - do not waste your vote on this MORON!!
-
He said in an article at the Inquirer today that if he was running things, he'll help the Philippine movie industry by proposing that.
How do you guys feel about it?
He did say that it will face a lot of opposition and it's against GATT rules, so I'm not worried about this. He's probably just making noise to promote his mala-Lord of the Rings Panday.
-
Pretty ironic that he has railed against Hollywood movies yet for the past couple of years, he's been desperately trying to ape them.
-
Any form of censorship is dangerous. The government should invest more on the film art including preservation. Maybe it would help a little if they lower the tax for locally produced movies...
-
Make good movies FIRST. Only then should you have the balls to say that. Because, El Panday, you're just coming off as delusional by proposing that.
I agree sir! ;D
-
Make good movies FIRST. Only then should you have the balls to say that. Because, El Panday, you're just coming off as delusional by proposing that.
x2 !!!
-
this senator is a total idiot! mas lamang pa yata si lito lapid sa kanya eh! >:(
-
Na-insecure siguro sa turnout ng avatar :o
Laos yung panday niya.
-
this senator is a total idiot! mas lamang pa yata si lito lapid sa kanya eh! >:(
aahhh.... one can argue all day who's the bigger idiot. ;D
-
this senator is a total idiot! mas lamang pa yata si lito lapid sa kanya eh! >:(
aahhh.... one can argue all day who's the bigger idiot. ;D
HAHAHAHA ;D ;D ;D
-
though i agree na korea now has "international quality" movies ... "possibly because of their hollywood movie limit" and i laud the support of our local movie industry.
BUT he's just too much of an ass to be taken seriously.
nakakakilabot ang conflict of interest niya ... parang ako gumawa ng batas na lahat ng babae sa pilipinas, sakin lang puwede magpakasal unless panget.
-
I've read that article in the Inquirer. I wonder why he becomes a senator.
-
taragyis na bong revilla jr yan...
-
payag ako kung 2 hollywood moviesa month. ;D
tapos magpalabas na lang ng pelikulang hapon,. koryano,instik, prances, at syempre mga pinoy na indie.
mapurol ang utak ni bong at obviously may ulterior motives siya dyan at ubod ng panget ng trailer nung bago niyang Panday, pero in principle agree ako sa pag-ban ng hollywood films
pang-bobo - - -at nakakabobo - - -kasi 90% ng hollywood films.
(at mukhang hindi din naman nakakatulong sa grammar an pagpapanood ng pelikulang ingles. look around.) ;D
kagaya ng avatar. gusto ko siyang panoorin pero konting-konti pa lang ang nagkukwento tungkol sa kanyang naratibo , karaktr, structure. puro special effects at aksyon ang pinaguusapan. hanggang doon na lang ba ang kaya ng utak ng manonood? at dahil ba ito sa monopoly ng 'dumbed down" hollywood films? o sa diyeta? pagpapalaki? quality of education?
o ganun lang ba kababaw ang avatar? feelng ko naman hindi.
of course, mukhang mas masahol ang bagong panday.
isama na din natin yan sa mga iba-ban. walang ni-katiting na kaibahan ang karamihan ng gawang hollywood sa karamihan ng gawang star cinema/viva/regal. pambobo.
-
Make good movies FIRST. Only then should you have the balls to say that. Because, El Panday, you're just coming off as delusional by proposing that.
x2 !!!
oh we are making good movies already. just that nobody's showing them. or watching them when the studio/mall/mtrcb mafia allows them to be shown.
-
nakakatawa yung mga ibang umaalma dito na gumagawa din ng ibang klaseng sining (hindi pelikula). ayaw nilang ma-ban ang hollywood movies pero naiinis sila pag nasasagasaan ang mga gawa nila sa kani-kanilang field ng kanilang mga american competitors.
and any blanket condemnation of philippine cinema without having seen a de leon/avellana/brocka/o'hara/de leon/ bernal/celso ad/lav/raya/brillante/raymond red film is outright stupid.
still, bong revilla is a moron.
-
hmmm... dapat hindi na natin pag usapan pa yung suggestion ni bong revilla. kasi the more na we debate on this eh the more coverage he will get... alam niyo naman ang mga pinoy voters ngayon, baka madala sila sa mga ideas na "ipaglaban ang _________ (<---- insert strong campaign word here)". it will be like.. dati if my memory serves me right, isko moreno was suggesting to ban crayon shin chan and other anime from local tv kasi bad example raw. dahil napagusapan siya before na marami naman ang alam natin na galit na galit sa mungkahi niya eh he ended up winning. councilor ba siya?
-
oh we are making good movies already. just that nobody's showing them. or watching them when the studio/mall/mtrcb mafia allows them to be shown.
Most of the more interesting and great Filipino films being shown today ARE the indies. But most of them are shown at most at one or two theaters (if they're shown at all) and in CineManila and Cinemalaya.
I find it mind-boggling that the MMFF has yet to accept any indie/digital films from any of our emerging auteurs. Puro Joel Lamangan na lang. I heard they have a rule that films to be considered for entry must be shot on film. Is that true?
-
I find it mind-boggling that the MMFF has yet to accept any indie/digital films from any of our emerging auteurs. Puro Joel Lamangan na lang. I heard they have a rule that films to be considered for entry must be shot on film. Is that true?
More like puro Mother Lily na lang.
Ever since the MMFF was moved to the Christmas holiday season, the focus for organizers and producers had been to rake in as much money as possible. Unsurprisingly, these are the films that cast the most famous stars or that feature the most special effects, because these are the types of movies that are guaranteed to draw families. Filipino indie/digital films have the reputation of being too dark or too sexy or too serious, that these are clearly not the kinds of films a commercialism-centric film festival would showcase. Besides, if a big chunk of your criteria involves box office grosses, then clearly you're more concerned with income generation rather than artistic development.
-
oh we are making good movies already. just that nobody's showing them. or watching them when the studio/mall/mtrcb mafia allows them to be shown.
There wasn't any doubt about that. Indie movies are kicking mainstream pinoy movie ass, yet they get minimal exposure, the condemnation of "moralistas" for god knows whatever reason's against whatever version bible they're thumping, and recognition only by international bodies and Chicago-Sun Times movie critics.
If we could have a revival of sorts of the work that de leon/avellana/brocka/o'hara/de leon/ bernal/celso ad/lav/raya/brillante/raymond red have already done -- a special re-screening of their brilliant works that is accessible to the public (and not at some hole in the wall holier-than-thou highbrow film snob pretentious "art" film festival) -- then have government and the private sector support it, then we wouldn't have all of these big studio hacks passing off a romantic teen drama/comedy as the pinnacle of modern Philippine cinema.
Maybe.
About Avatar. I think the reason why no one is delving into Avatar's story, characterization, etc., is because most movie goers just want to be entertained. And most movie goers are not film critics. What they take away from a movie is personal and unique. My initial impressions are just as shallow, if not shallow-er. But hey, ask me to write something about it and give me two hours then I'll give you an effin' review full of references so obscure they're not even on the Internet (or Wikipedia), yet ;D ;D ;D
OT na ;D
Besides, if a big chunk of your criteria involves box office grosses, then clearly your more concerned with income generation rather than artistic development.
That's what Carlo J. Caparas admitted many years ago. In a TV interview during the height of the massacre movie "genre", he said that art was measured by how much money the product got at the box office.
Douchebag. I know.
-
Any form of censorship is dangerous. The government should invest more on the film art including preservation. Maybe it would help a little if they lower the tax for locally produced movies...
Filipino films are heavily tax plus censorship are one of the big disadvantage also. If only we have a fully operational film archive so that many people can have access to the film classics.....maybe they will forget Hollywood.
Although I would love to see AVATAR....i'm go for limiting the influx of Hollywood films...two will be fine. At least you have pure escapism although ten years after....you forgot it already. ;D
-
Banning of foreign films will not necessarily make way to quality Filipino films being shown in our cinemas. Just look at Metro Manila Film Festival. For 2 weeks every December we limit the showing of movies around Metro Manila to Pinoy movies only. Still it's very rare that the organizers choose quality work. They'd probably include one or two tolerable entries, the rest are just garbage.
-
I like the idea. Model it after China or South Korea or India--three most financially successful movie industries outside of Hollywood at the moment.
-
here is the article
http://www.spot.ph/2009/12/22/bong-revilla-we-should-show-only-one-hollywood-movie-a-month/
-
About Avatar. I think the reason why no one is delving into Avatar's story, characterization, etc., is because most movie goers just want to be entertained. And most movie goers are not film critics. What they take away from a movie is personal and unique. My initial impressions are just as shallow, if not shallow-er. But hey, ask me to write something about it and give me two hours then I'll give you an effin' review full of references so obscure they're not even on the Internet (or Wikipedia), yet ;D ;D ;D
Oh and I don't doubt that you can come up with a good review(two hours? hey, I take even longer than that hehehe) ;D
But is story really too difficult to parse in a narrative movie? And I respectfully disagree that story goes out the window in the name of entertainment. Is it that difficult to come away from Avatar with any opinion on the narrative - - -was it any good would make a sufficient starting point.
I still maintain that most people's faculties tend to fixate on(or would that be can't go beyond) the special effects of a movie like this. Whether it's a mental limitation or just an odd habit is not for me to say. It's like listening to the most beautiful music in the world and all you can say is that it brings out the best in their home theater system. The "unique and personal opinion" (which is what I personally try to look for in any experience and write down when I write more than any obscurantist anecdote or critical objectivity or whatnot) goes out the window because in the multiplex/CGI culture we live in, movies are just something to take the family/wife/girlfriend to on weekends and are for the most part approached wih all the empathy and intellect one approaches a rollercaster in a theme park. ;D
-
Which is to say, to get back ontopic, that maybe Bong's little folly might not be such a bad idea.
At the very least, it might create a restaurant boom. ;D
-
Most of the more interesting and great Filipino films being shown today ARE the indies. But most of them are shown at most at one or two theaters (if they're shown at all) and in CineManila and Cinemalaya.
I find it mind-boggling that the MMFF has yet to accept any indie/digital films from any of our emerging auteurs. Puro Joel Lamangan na lang. I heard they have a rule that films to be considered for entry must be shot on film. Is that true?
There wasn't any doubt about that. Indie movies are kicking mainstream pinoy movie ass, yet they get minimal exposure, the condemnation of "moralistas" for god knows whatever reason's against whatever version bible they're thumping, and recognition only by international bodies and Chicago-Sun Times movie critics.
If we could have a revival of sorts of the work that de leon/avellana/brocka/o'hara/de leon/ bernal/celso ad/lav/raya/brillante/raymond red have already done -- a special re-screening of their brilliant works that is accessible to the public (and not at some hole in the wall holier-than-thou highbrow film snob pretentious "art" film festival) -- then have government and the private sector support it, then we wouldn't have all of these big studio hacks passing off a romantic teen drama/comedy as the pinnacle of modern Philippine cinema.
It's a mafia thing. These studios are big bullies. They should be covered by the ban,too.
Of course,there's also the overriding fact that most Filipinos won't be caught dead watching ANY Filipino film - - or indeed any film without special effects and lots of action in it (you don't usually hear the Avatar groupies crowing about ,say, Doubt or Julie and Julia. ;D).
-
Oh and I don't doubt that you can come up with a good review(two hours? hey, I take even longer than that hehehe) ;D
But is story really too difficult to parse in a narrative movie? And if Cameron only wanted film critics to get the story then why did he bother writing an elaborate one when most of his movigoers just want to be entertained anyway and hence, dispense with appreciating the story? And I respectfully disagree that story goes out the window in the name of entertainment. Is it that difficult to come away from Avatar with any opinion on the narrative - - -was it any good would make a sufficient starting point.
Because there are some of us who appreciate story and there are some of us who appreciate entertainment and even some who appreciate both -- because a film is not just about story, it is a combination of the talents of the director of cinematography, effects supervisor, sound designer, editor, etc. Throwing any one element out the door is a dismissal of the talent and work that was poured into that aspect of the film as a whole. There is no black and white.
And it's not difficult "to come away from Avatar with any opinion on the narrative". Everyone has an opinion if you simply ask them instead of assuming that what they say initially encompasses all that they know of the film. It's just that others are more forthcoming with their discussions, unprompted.
A lot of the people posting here have already made comments about the quality of the film side-by-side with the 3D visual effects. Railing against those that only see the forest for the trees is a time-waster.
And yeah, an hour and a half, tops.
To get back on OT:
Bong Revilla's an idiot. In the digital age, more people will turn to piracy because of him. And who is he to tell me that I can't watch something at the same time as everyone else in the world? Capitalist stinker.
Nahahalata tuloy ang katamaran ng ating mga elected officials. Ang kaya lang nilang gawin ay ang mga solusyon na madali, pero nakakasagasa sa karapatan ng mamamayan. Kung may utak nga yang Bong Revilla na yan, dapat makinig muna sya sa panig ng mga mamimili para matuto sya ng lubusan >:(
It's a mafia thing. These studios are big bullies. They should be covered by the ban,too.
Of course,there's also the overriding fact that most Filipinos won't be caught dead watching ANY Filipino film - - or indeed any film without special effects and lots of action in it (you don't usually hear the Avatar groupies crowing about ,say, Doubt or Julie and Julia. ;D).
There should be a law or group that monitors the local studios and malls with this kind of thing. Checks and balances!
And hey, I love to watch Pinoy films. It's the access that's the problem. Kung may access naman, quality nagiging problema because there are only a handful of good films in a given year. I wish i could have watched Kinatay or Foster Child or maybe films out of Cinemalaya that I don't have to travel across three cities just to see it. >:(
-
because a film is not just about story, it is a combination of the talents of the director of cinematography, effects supervisor, sound designer, editor, etc..
Facepalm.
So I ask: is it all "astounding visuals" or is there something else in there for me to waste three hours and my hard-earned cash on? Do the special effects serve the story and vice versa? How about the editing? The sound? All the other elements you mentioned that come together that isn't special effects? And I'm curious what the difference between "story" and "entertainment" is in an "entertainment narrative" such as Avatar? (It's been more than three hours already,minimum)
Qualifiers are well and good and they sort of put things into perspective but even you took several posts and a moderate amount of discourse for the assumed sweeping generalization that "Filipino movies are bad" ("Make Good Movies First")to be qualified as "Filipino indie movies are possibly good but hard to catch". On a message board like this(where time is elastic as to not be prone to being wasted) , or any situation that isn't a face to face conversation, first impressions tend to be taken at face value. And can you blame me if I conclude that all three hours of Avatar is nothing but empty SFX after several summations along the lines of "amazing/astounding/mindblowing visuals/effects/PQ.will watch again soon"?
(Oh and excuse me if I'm a bit suspicious about blanket condemnations of Filipino cinema from people who haven't seen much or go by the trailer or,worse,prefer GI Joe instead.I'm not saying you, but it does happen a lot.)
(And yeah, I've read some of the more elaborate reviews and yeah,they've been very helpful. I was just using the forest-for-the-trees crowd as an example of consumer behavior when it comes not just to Hollywood films Vs.Pinoy films but to dumbed-down Hollywood films (i.e.the blockbusters that spark pages of message board thread) to not dumb films from anywhere . . .trying to keep on-topic and all)
Capitalist stinker. Yeah. You could say the same for the mall theaters who outright ban local films from screening so they can make room for Hollywood product.
At the risk of sounding like an apologist for Bong Revilla, which I'm not - - -may ilan-ilan ding mamamayan na hindi masa at gustong makapanood ng mas maraming pelikulang pilipino at may mga mamamayan din na hindi sumasamba sa simbahan ng Hollywood. Hollywood is a monopoly at the moment. That favors the whims of the Hollywood worshippers. But there's nothing fair or balanced in the programming of films these days. Particulary for that segment of society aforementioned.
But then again, who cares kung masagasaan natin ang karapatan ng mga mamamayang yan? Pinoy na mahilig sa pelikulang Pinoy? Pinoy na ayaw manood ng Hollywood na puro aksiyon at konting istorya in 3D? Freaks.
-
Facepalm.
So I ask: is it all "astounding visuals" or is there something else in there for me to waste three hours and my hard-earned cash on? Do the special effects serve the story and vice versa? How about the editing? The sound? All the other elements you mentioned that come together that isn't special effects? And I'm curious what the difference between "story" and "entertainment" is in an "entertainment narrative" such as Avatar? (It's been more than three hours already,minimum)
Just go watch the damn movie old man ;D if you haven't, that is. And for the record, G.I. Joe ROCKS. Oh wait... me stoopid...
Qualifiers are well and good and they sort of put things into perspective but even you took several posts and a moderate amount of discourse for the assumed sweeping generalization that "Filipino movies are bad" ("Make Good Movies First")to be qualified as "Filipino indie movies are possibly good but hard to catch". On a message board like this(where time is elastic as to not be prone to being wasted) , or any situation that isn't a face to face conversation, first impressions tend to be taken at face value. And can you blame me if I conclude that all three hours of Avatar is nothing but empty SFX after several summations along the lines of "amazing/astounding/mindblowing visuals/effects/PQ.will watch again soon"?
Life is out there, not in a message board. On another note, I'd rather criticize a movie rather than the audience who watches it.
And I noticed you highlight "Avatar" all the time. Writer ka, noh?
Merry Christmas, X44. Always a pleasure :)
Back on topic:
Bong Revilla is an idiot.
-
And I noticed you highlight "Avatar" all the time. Writer ka, noh?
Nah, just another average idiot lurking in a message board full of it. ;D
Merry Christmas, X44. Always a pleasure :)
And a Merry Christmas to you,too, sir. ;D
And oh yeah, Bong Revilla is a moron.
-
He did say that it will face a lot of opposition and it's against GATT rules, so I'm not worried about this. He's probably just making noise to promote his mala-Lord of the Rings Panday.
Then again, why are the likes of James Cameron appealing to China to open its doors to more Hollywood releases???
We cannot expect to implement what other countries like China/South Korea/India are doing...even if they hold off Hollywood movies for a decade, they have a rich enough history to mine film ideas from.
-
Then again, why are the likes of James Cameron appealing to China to open its doors to more Hollywood releases???
It must be on a country-to-country case. We probably have an agreement with the US regarding this. Or that China is a special case.
-
It must be on a country-to-country case. We probably have an agreement with the US regarding this. Or that China is a special case.
Hm... I'm not aware of any agreement we have... I just always thought that as long as there is a local Hollywood studio distributor here that means whatever they produce we get to have. But I'm not really sure how these dealings go :-\
Bong Revilla is an idiot.
-
It must be on a country-to-country case. We probably have an agreement with the US regarding this. Or that China is a special case.
Fuck China...they've always been given preferential treatment because of the sheer size of their land, the 2 billion+ people, yada yada yada....
-
Bong Revilla: "Limit Hollywood movies to only 1 a month"
There are so many things that he could've said instead:
"Limit Star Cinema releases to only 1 a year."
"Limit Regal Films to only 1 a decade."
"Subsidize the restoration of our classics."
"Encourage independent filmmakers by offering grants to those who've received international recognition."
So much more...
-
I find it really stupid that despite the fact that Kinatay won at Cannes, it STILL didn't receive a wide release. Well, you can view it on the PLDT webside (I haven't yet because my computer's being stupid) but still...
-
We cannot expect to implement what other countries like China/South Korea/India are doing...even if they hold off Hollywood movies for a decade, they have a rich enough history to mine film ideas from.
Whoa--and we don't? That's the 'damaged culture' theory, where there is something intrinsically wrong with our culture, something inferior about our country that it always lags behind other countries.
I don't buy it. What's more, I don't think our indie filmmakers buy it either--Lav, Raya, John T., Brillante and the rest are putting out story after story after story, and not one of their product look or feel alike (I mean the work of one filmmaker looks and feels different from the other).
I think it's high time we tried putting the brakes on Hollywood encroachment. What are we going to miss--the next Potter movie? The last one was already a pain.
China's a special case, in that they said no. It's really that simple. So did India, and South Korea. Another half of the equation is that they have a vibrant film industry putting out good product.
We do, or at least we used to (in 1998 we made more films than Hong Kong). We do still put out good product--just needs to be marketed and distributed properly. The indie filmmakers haven't figured out how to do that yet. But limiting the importation of Hollywood films was an important part of that equation (in France if I remember right, the Hollywood studios are taxed and a portion of the taxes help pay for the production of French films. I like that idea too).
Just remember, the capitalist system caused the global meltdown. So what about a little socialism this time, hm?
On Avatar--nah, still working on my post. But anyone notice from interviews and so on how highly Cameron thinks of his writing abilities?
-
I think it's high time we tried putting the brakes on Hollywood encroachment. What are we going to miss--the next Potter movie? The last one was already a pain.
Speak for your damn self, I wouldn't like missing Deathly Hallows.
I do however like the idea of increasing the taxes of Hollywood movies to help fund and market QUALITY Filipino films. Not more Mano Po's.
-
new breed of actors and actresses will also help... ;)
-
I think it's high time we tried putting the brakes on Hollywood encroachment.
There are so many things that he could've said instead:
"Limit Star Cinema releases to only 1 a year."
"Limit Regal Films to only 1 a decade."
"Subsidize the restoration of our classics."
"Encourage independent filmmakers by offering grants to those who've received international recognition."
I agree. It's an incomplete vision - - - if you could call it that. Those four points are equally as important in fulfilling what Revilla seems to want to achieve.
Except, of course, that it ultimately isn't a cultural issue anymore but one of commerce.
(The bigger cultural issue is a nation that condemns its own cinema without having experienced it or worse, a nation that disowns its own culture - - -and thereby disowning itself - - -and would prefer embracing and adopting another)
(It's a phenomenon that seems unique to the Philippines. HK and Japan seem to subsist on a balanced diet of foreign and local cinema. The Philippines doesn't. It only feeds on American films. I could be wrong but if it turns out that the regional cinemas of Davao and Cebu have a measure of support - - if not pride,which is a given almost - - -from its locals then it's a phenomenon that's unique to the Tagalog region. Or Manila even - -the world capital of Hollywood)
There is a demand for these things (Hollywood movies), a demand that has exagerrated over the years of conditioning as a result of both the slow death of the local film industry and the slow monopolizing of Hollywood. And the vehemence with which the mere suggestion of truncating the influx of Hollywood product is met shows that whoever is benefiting from the monopoly of Hollywood movies in our theaters has the entire nation rooting for them to succeed.
Like someone - - -an American - - - once said somewhere:"We're here to take over the world. If not with missiles then with movies."
Least in this corner of the world, that has come to pass,for better or for worse.
-
Tax Hollywood films heavily then subsidized the earnings for putting up a good film archive. Don't dictate the producers to limit their films to once a month.....more people will lose jobs!
-
I don't think anyone is blanketly condemning ALL Filipino films. It's just what Bong Revilla has said is to support NOT Philippine cinema but rather the Philippine movie industry. As in the mainstream studios Bong Revilla works for so they can churn out most of the same junk and make more money. Take note that his past couple of films are mostly just rip-off's of Hollywood movies. Masyado siyang trying hard to keep up sa Hollywood. It seems to me, his response to compete with Hollywood movies is to not work on offering Filipinos something different, maybe even something better in terms of story at least, but to try to emulate/imitate them...only in Tagalog and he gets to keep all the money.
-
I agree.
Bong Revilla's motives are self-serving and dubious and yes, it doesn't necessarily help Philippine cinema but the Philippine movie industry, which would be the major studios, which is every bit as bad as the worst of Hollywood. And I agree he's a hypocrite in the sense that he's really going for Hollywood aesthetics and Hollywood money in his "work".But ,whether he's aware of it or not, the model he upholds (Korea) is actually an ideal, if difficult, recourse.
I've personally experienced blanket condemnation of Filipino cinema both firsthand and and via snide offhand remarks along those lines through the years. It may be specific to current studio fare - -which often deserves to be bashed - - -but I think what the attitude is towards our cinema classics and indies is even worse: indifference, if not a begrudging distaste. I think if one asks the average middle class moviegoer, chances are most of them would prefer Hollywood over the output of their own country - - classic,current,indie,whatever. Of course, if the current indie fare is given the runs it deserves, and if we do get some sort of local cinematheque/revival program going, who knows if the attitude might change.
-
Speak for your damn self, I wouldn't like missing Deathly Hallows.
I do however like the idea of increasing the taxes of Hollywood movies to help fund and market QUALITY Filipino films. Not more Mano Po's.
The best damn advice I have heard in this entire discussion. But I've never watched a Harry Potter movie on the big screen yet. Technically, I did. But I fell asleep halfway through.
-
I agree. It's an incomplete vision - - - if you could call it that. Those four points are equally as important in fulfilling what Revilla seems to want to achieve.
Except, of course, that it ultimately isn't a cultural issue anymore but one of commerce.
...
(It's a phenomenon that seems unique to the Philippines. HK and Japan seem to subsist on a balanced diet of foreign and local cinema. The Philippines doesn't. It only feeds on American films. I could be wrong but if it turns out that the regional cinemas of Davao and Cebu have a measure of support - - if not pride,which is a given almost - - -from its locals then it's a phenomenon that's unique to the Tagalog region. Or Manila even - -the world capital of Hollywood)
...
Like someone - - -an American - - - once said somewhere:"We're here to take over the world. If not with missiles then with movies."
Least in this corner of the world, that has come to pass,for better or for worse.
Then again, Hong Kong has Jackie Chan along with excellent visionary helmers like Johnnie To (who should be lauded for resisting the siren call of Hollywood megabucks)
Japan will always have anime.
Heck, see Thailand's action and horror films, and you'd dismiss our local product as inferior.
The problem here isn't the dominance of H'wood product (frankly speaking, I haven't seen the last Harry Potter film...and I don't have plans to catch up with it!!!!)...it's the creative constipation brought about by unreasonable censorship, high taxation and a star system that doesn't encourage risk-taking (how about an action film starring...ten-ten-tarrannn...Sam Milby as a NPA rebel???)
-
The studios are a pox on cinema. More so now than before.
But local product isn't just Star Cinema and Regal and Viva in the same way that Thai cinema isn't just Ong Bak 2.
Lav Diaz, Brillante Mendoza, Raya Martin, Jeffrey Jeturian, John Torres, Raymond Red, Ditsi Carolino, Rey Gibraltar, Khavn de la Cruz, Rico Ilarde, Richard Somes, Aureus Solito, Ato Bautista, Mes De Guzman, Christopher Gozum, Jade Castro, etc etc. etc. etc. etc.
Also, a vast back catalog of classic cinema that deserves revival exhibitions, not to mention extensive restoration.
The rest of the world - - -including some nutjob named Tarantino - - - seem to think highly of these.
Still. In the end, you can't make Pinoys love their own if they'd really much rather love something else.
-
Hollywood doesn't necessarily mean bad. Like our industry it produces both good and bad movies. Aside from that, let's not forget that most of our filmmakers (both mainstream and indie) have been influenced by it.
-
Hollywood does its share of bad and good movies, true, but the difference is it's distributing those movies all over the world.
And it isn't all 'free market' and 'what people want,' not all the time. Hong Kong's decline as a film industry started when Hollywood started really flexing its muscles overseas, in the '90s. Hong Kong caved in to pressure to open its theater screens to Hollywood films and--whoops, all of a sudden it's all Hollywood. It took Johnnie To, working quietly behind the scenes and almost all by himself, years to give Hong Kong back some of its pride.
Japan was in a long decline, ever since the '60s. But live action films (as opposed to anime) hasn't really recovered, and the competition from Hollywood hasn't helped. Again there it's a matter of political will, not just economic forces.
France hasn't quite hit upon the formula to make its system work. It's very protectionist, but it hasn't captured the popular taste, the way India and South Korea has (China does okay, but there isn't the same sense of excitement).
It's what's going on out there--it's not just laziness of our industry people, or market forces, tho they do exert their own pull; Hollywood is making an overt and concerted effort to conquer foreign markets, and with the US economy backing it up, it's making real strides, not just in the Philippines, but all over the world.
And this economic downturn--well, lemme tell you; almost every industry is in the doghouse here in America EXCEPT the movie industry. And the screaming yowl of idocy from this manure factory just doesn't stop.
(read Deathly Hollows by the way, and not really impressed. Am more interested in the upcoming Narnia films to be directed by Michael Apted, hopefully).
-
Banning Hollywood films may have worked for South Korea. But Pinoys are not Koreans. Banning anything in this country has the exact opposite effect.
Just do the films you want and let them be shown and reap awards in the film festivals around the world. That's how Korean films started to make waves and getting noticed by a wider audience with films like My Sassy Girl, Shiri, Samaritan Girl, Oldboy, etc. It's really amazing the Koreans would be the first to take recognition in Cannes and other film festivals before Pinoys who've had a much richer movie making history. They've even made horror movies that Hollywood copied, like A Tale of Two Sisters. And to think Pinoy horror tales are supposed to be one of the most freightening in the world.
-
Just do the films you want and let them be shown and reap awards in the film festivals around the world. That's how Korean films started to make waves and getting noticed by a wider audience with films like My Sassy Girl, Shiri, Samaritan Girl, Oldboy, etc.
The conditions made it possible for these films to be made, make waves and get noticed by a wider audience. We don't have those conditions ,making it diffuclt to "just make the movies we want". That's putting it a little too simplistically.IMHO.
It's really amazing the Koreans would be the first to take recognition in Cannes and other film festivals before Pinoys who've had a much richer movie making history.
Conde went to Cannes in 1952. Kidlat Tahimik was in Berlin in 1977, Brocka was in Cannes in the 80s. Raymond won a Palme D'Or in 2000. Brillante and Raya have been Cannes mainstays the last two,three years or so. Lav and Pepe Diokno recently won in Venice. There have been several major international retrospectives in the last few years, including a major Brocka retrospective just this year. There's more. We were there before the Koreans.
And yes, I agree, we have a much richer movie history. But does anybody really care abuout that enough these days?
We love to piss on our cinema and parade how bad it is compared to the cinema of other countries. And now we have to add Uruguay to the list of countries that better us. ???
And to think Pinoy horror tales are supposed to be one of the most freightening in the world.
Sigaw was adapted. Scorpio Nights,too. And hey they weren't copied, the filmmakers got paid.
Let's not understimate Pinoy films too much. Love your own,brother. Merry Christmas. :)
-
Banning this or that isn't meant to work on Filipinos, it's what worked on Hollywood distributors. Incidentally it's not mere banning--I remember China and India operate on a strict quota system, South Korea was some kind of taxation and subsidies system, and so on and so forth.
It's not just us Filipinos--Hollywood distributors too. If they undermined Hong Kong cinema, if they undercut Japanese cinema, we need to address their actions too.
-
The conditions made it possible for these films to be made, make waves and get noticed by a wider audience. We don't have those conditions ,making it diffuclt to "just make the movies we want". That's putting it a little too simplistically.IMHO.
Conde went to Cannes in 1952. Kidlat Tahimik was in Berlin in 1977, Brocka was in Cannes in the 80s. Raymond won a Palme D'Or in 2000. Brillante and Raya have been Cannes mainstays the last two,three years or so. Lav and Pepe Diokno recently won in Venice. There have been several major international retrospectives in the last few years, including a major Brocka retrospective just this year. There's more. We were there before the Koreans.
And yes, I agree, we have a much richer movie history. But does anybody really care abuout that enough these days?
We love to piss on our cinema and parade how bad it is compared to the cinema of other countries. And now we have to add Uruguay to the list of countries that better us. ???
Sigaw was adapted. Scorpio Nights,too. And hey they weren't copied, the filmmakers got paid.
Let's not understimate Pinoy films too much. Love your own,brother. Merry Christmas. :)
The nice thing about making films these days is the availability of digital technology in HD or even 2G res that makes it easy and affordable to those who would like go into the movie industry or just engage in amateur film making. Video editing and animation software are also very accessible. A good short-film demo can be your ticket. The popularity of Youtube and other online video sharing sites have made it increasingly easy to get the entire world as your audience for your creativity. And there have been stories of hollywood producers noticing great work on these sites.
Simplistic? Maybe. But all I'm saying is the barriers to making a film is not as steep as before. If you have the talent and the drive, you can make it. It won't be a Pixar-grade film ofcourse, but hey, cost is never a hindrance for resourcefulness borne out of compelling creativity. If getting sponsors for a film project is what's stopping you, then perhaps you're not resourceful enough.
The fact that Conde and other Pinoy directors already made waves in Cannes before makes it even more tragic and regrettable. We already have a foot on the world stage and others beat us to it. And no, what makes you think I'm underestimating pinoy films? Until now I'm still on the lookout for Oro Plata Mata on DVD which I consider one of the best films of the 20th century.
-
Until now I'm still on the lookout for Oro Plata Mata on DVD which I consider one of the best films of the 20th century.
I own it. ;D
It's no longer available in Astroplus/Astrovision?
-
I own it. ;D
It's no longer available in Astroplus/Astrovision?
Lucky you. I heard it was released but I was probably too late to catch it when I got to the Podium Astro branch. Never got to see one in our local Astro shop.
-
Banning Hollywood films may have worked for South Korea. But Pinoys are not Koreans. Banning anything in this country has the exact opposite effect.
Just do the films you want and let them be shown and reap awards in the film festivals around the world. That's how Korean films started to make waves and getting noticed by a wider audience with films like My Sassy Girl, Shiri, Samaritan Girl, Oldboy, etc. It's really amazing the Koreans would be the first to take recognition in Cannes and other film festivals before Pinoys who've had a much richer movie making history. They've even made horror movies that Hollywood copied, like A Tale of Two Sisters. And to think Pinoy horror tales are supposed to be one of the most freightening in the world.
However, it always works in the Koreans' favour (or for that matter, the Thais') because they do not have to live with onerous censorship as well as the lack of genuine risk-taking among our producers and directors...
-
However, it always works in the Koreans' favour (or for that matter, the Thais') because they do not have to live with onerous censorship as well as the lack of genuine risk-taking among our producers and directors...
Very true.
Old Boy, for example, had a very shocking plot twist that would NEVER fly here with mainstream producers. But it's become one of Korea's biggest international hits of the past decade.
-
Uy, naging censorship issue na. Then even if you limit or ban hollywood films, we'd still be crapped by the censors and prudish producers.
I guess you nailed down one of the roots of our movie making ills. Little or no risk-taking,. It has nothing to do with limiting or banning hollywood influx. We like it safe. None too controversial, iconoclastic or daring. Sometimes you really need to be loud and daring to get noticed in this world.
-
None too controversial, iconoclastic or daring. Sometimes you really need to be loud and daring to get noticed in this world.
In the MTRCB rulebook, it's quite explicit that it's perfectly legal for them to ban films that speak out against or criticize the government or religious institutions.
From the MTRCB website:
E. NOT FOR PUBLIC EXHIBITION (“X”) – X-rated movies are not suitable for public exhibition.
A movie shall be disapproved for public viewing if, in the judgment of the BOARD:
1.The average person, applying contemporary community standards, would find that the dominant theme of the work as a whole appeals to prurient interest and satisfies only the craving for gratuitous sex and/or violence.
1.The work depicts in a patently lewd, offensive, or demeaning manner, excretory functions and sexual conduct such as sexual intercourse, masturbation and exhibition of the genitals.
1.The work clearly constitutes an attack against any race, creed or religion.
1.The work condones or encourages the use of illegal drugs and substances.
1.The work tends to undermine the faith and confidence of the people in their government and/or duly constituted authorities.
1.The work glorifies criminals or condones crimes.
1.The work is libelous or defamatory to the good name and reputation of any person, whether living or dead.
1.The work may constitute contempt of court or of a quasi-judicial tribunal, or may pertain to matters which are sub-judice in nature.
-
Lucky you. I heard it was released but I was probably too late to catch it when I got to the Podium Astro branch. Never got to see one in our local Astro shop.
There are still some copies of it at Astro Southmall and Astro Robinson's Place Manila that I saw a few weeks back.
And just to add another off-topic, Orapronobis is another film I would like to see readily available on some form. It turns out it's available as a free download here:
http://www.archive.org/details/Ora_Pro_Nobis
I don't know the legality of this since Brocka hasn't been dead for more than 50 years, if I recall correctly. But hey, the best things in life are free.
-
In the MTRCB rulebook, it's quite explicit that it's perfectly legal for them to ban films that speak out against or criticize the government or religious institutions.
From the MTRCB website:
You can be loud and daring without having to incite against the government or religions. A simple story can be daring enough to stand out and be noticed.
-
If a limit was levied (which is stricter than China's foreign film limit) I personally wouldn't be affected. The last movie I watched & paid for in theaters was Star Trek. I prefer the convenience of iTunes and watching the flicks in a home theater. Avatar sucked so I had someone pay for it. ;)
I can watch what I want when I want without dealing with stupid MTRCB morality, human error in the projection room, unsanitary chairs, noisy patrons and celphones going off, bad food and I can drink in the theater. :))
I could see a lot of theaters closing down if they imposed this limit. Higher end malls would be greatly affected. SM not that much.
If Bong wants to improve the quality of local films he has to create an environment conducive for people to invest. Right now piracy is uncontrolled so where is the incentive to invest? If he goes after the pirates he'll anger his core constituents.
-
Oo nga pala, nothing will really prevent people from watching what they want, hollywood films or whatever. The internet takes care of that. Yun nga lang hindi na 3D. ;D Ang kawawa will be the theater owners. Imagine after investing on 3D equipment, they only get 1 or 2 3D movies a month, unless Shake Rattle and Roll, Ang Panday, Mano Po and other Pinoy films throughout the year can be made into 3D.
-
Very true.
Old Boy, for example, had a very shocking plot twist that would NEVER fly here with mainstream producers. But it's become one of Korea's biggest international hits of the past decade.
Speaking of risk-taking, wasn't the female lead of Oldboy (or was it Sympathy for Lady Vengeance) also "Daejanggeum" in the Koreanovela "Jewel in the Palace"??? Pls. correct me if I may be wrong....
-
Very true.
Old Boy, for example, had a very shocking plot twist that would NEVER fly here with mainstream producers.
Middling shocking, I thought. Mike de Leon's dealt with it before. So has Yam Laranas, I think, though in a more hamfisted way. Ditto Carlitos Siguion Reyna.
On the subject of risk-taking--I can't imagine anyone in South Korea, or China, or even India where the average length of a movie is three hours ever taking a risk on Lav Diaz. Brillante Mendoza, maybe, but not Lav. Of course if it's commercial Filipino cinema we're talking about, I agree. One needs to make the distinction.
-
Oo nga pala, nothing will really prevent people from watching what they want, hollywood films or whatever. The internet takes care of that. Yun nga lang hindi na 3D. ;D Ang kawawa will be the theater owners. Imagine after investing on 3D equipment, they only get 1 or 2 3D movies a month, unless Shake Rattle and Roll, Ang Panday, Mano Po and other Pinoy films throughout the year can be made into 3D.
2010 is said to be the year of 3D TV & 3D projectors... so no problem.
-
Oh goody, so Christmas of 2010 will hopefully see a 3D Shake Rattle and Roll.
-
On the subject of risk-taking--I can't imagine anyone in South Korea, or China, or even India where the average length of a movie is three hours ever taking a risk on Lav Diaz. Brillante Mendoza, maybe, but not Lav. Of course if it's commercial Filipino cinema we're talking about, I agree. One needs to make the distinction.
Yup. Too bad no one is.
-
The fact that Conde and other Pinoy directors already made waves in Cannes before makes it even more tragic and regrettable. We already have a foot on the world stage and others beat us to it. And no, what makes you think I'm underestimating pinoy films? Until now I'm still on the lookout for Oro Plata Mata on DVD which I consider one of the best films of the 20th century.
We still are making waves in 2009. We're all over the planet getting invited to filmfests ,getting shown and winning awards. There was a major Filipino film (new and old) retrospective a few months ago in both Korea and Europe. That's how active we are on the so-called world stage and that's also how current. Nobody beat us to it.
More foreigners have (paid and) seen Lav Diaz , Brillante and Yanggaw hands down one of the best Asian horror films of the 2000s) than Filipinos, hell more foreigners have seen Kidlat Tahimik, Raymond Red, Manuel Conde and Lino Brocka - - - that's what's tragic and regrettable,specially since these films often get shown here free.
There are two kinds of Filipino cinema: the Star Cinema/Viva/Regal commerial crap most everybody misidentifies as the end-all be-all of Philippine cinema.
Saying Phil.cinema is crap based on this is like saying the Philippines is an ugly place after only having gone to Payatas.
And the risk-taking, challenging and in many ways masterful independent cinema the rest of the world seems to have fallen in love with. (That's another aspect we're behind on,it seems, loving our own stuff.)
There has to be a distinction made.
All this stuff does get shown ,even the classics enjoy a revival or two. Granted, the venues and runs are limited. But did a limited run ever stop anyone from dropping everythng to catch a Hollywood film?
-
Great, then all this talk about banning Hollywood movies is nonsense. I am not at all as interested in art films thriving only on the applause of critics and film festivals overseas as with commercial films making the artistic grade. Festival successes help a lot to be noticed. But you need more than that. If Pinoy Indie films have become popular in those Cannes and Berlin festivals, well and good and hope the people behind them get to have commercial success as well and be PREFERRED by their own people. We seem to be celebrating overseas festival successes without taking care of commercial ones at home. Or more bluntly, allowing idiots to run it.
Art films rarely define a thriving movie industry unless they rake in the box office receipts. You can't have a thriving film industry with just one or the other. You need both in one. For all the crappiness of commercial films, you need them for local cinema to survive. But you need to elevate their bland mediocrity to go beyond survival mode and truly thrive to be both a business success and something we can be proud of. I am sure films that took in raves in Cannes wouldn't mind being commercial sucesses as well. Why not aim like Caregiver? Or Macho Dancer? Or other Pinoy films that were both artistic and commercial successes? Art films like Foster Child could have been a commercial success if the directors had known better how to thread the line between commercialism and art. I am looking at the example of domestic Korean films that have made a dent on their local box office not because the Korean people flocked in droves to watch their favorite stars but because the films themselves were worth watching and in the process outgrossed the Hollywood films right in their own game. Films like Shiri, My Sassy Girl, My Wife Is A Gangster and Oldboy to mention some outgrossed high tech Hollywood films that were shown at the same time in Korean box office. So much so that Hollywood has taken note and even adapted some of their titles to a wider world audience. That's really what I meant when I said they have beaten us to it
You can distinguish between the two all you like, but you are encouraging and fostering an elitist divide between people who can appreciate a film and those who only like to see their stars. Why must you even distinguish? A successful cinema industry should have both qualities of artistry and commerce. Sometimes the easiest thing to do is just indulge in your creative juices without regard to anything else., Art for art's sake. That's just fine. But a thriving cinema is more than that. It's a business concern as well. No industry thrives if not run as a business. It's a collaborative artistic and technical process that carries not only social and cultural dimensions, but fiduciary as well. A creative and responsible director has a responsibility to the people who finance his work as a business undertaking. But even so, you don't have to prostitute one for the other. The most endearing movies have both. Despite all its flaws, that's what Hollywood does quite successfully for the most part. They create a balance between artistry and commerce. Not always successful, of course.. But that's where the real challenge lies - making the cinema both a creative media and a successful business. I don't see much point being celebrating your art films while crapping on your commercial successes, no matter how deservedly.
-
How about not allowing a senator to do movies? He's wasting taxpayer money. If you want to promote philippine movies, they should get better actors Hindi yung puro tuta at minomolest Lang ng mga director and producer para may project. Also stop doing his kind of idiotic movies.... Lumang lumang tugtugin na pinipilit parin.
-
Speaking of risk-taking, wasn't the female lead of Oldboy (or was it Sympathy for Lady Vengeance) also "Daejanggeum" in the Koreanovela "Jewel in the Palace"??? Pls. correct me if I may be wrong....
It's Sympathy not Oldboy tho I have yet to watch the latter. Saw Sympathy during the Cinemanila and I really liked it. It was a simple story on revenge but how the "vengeance" was executed sent chills down my spine. Really edgy and thought provoking.
-
How about not allowing a senator to do movies? He's wasting taxpayer money. If you want to promote philippine movies, they should get better actors Hindi yung puro tuta at minomolest Lang ng mga director and producer para may project. Also stop doing his kind of idiotic movies.... Lumang lumang tugtugin na pinipilit parin.
While I agree we need better actors, I'm don't think senators will do any better as directors. They'll likely make the MMFF a venue for political propaganda. ;D
-
I don't see much point being celebrating your art films while crapping on your commercial successes, no matter how deservedly.
Me neither. That's why I'm not interested in making sarcastic remarks about Shake Rattle & Roll 3D or somesuch, even in jest. And why I'm going to go watch Wapakman this week. And why it looks more and more like I'm siding with Bong Revilla on the matter being discussed in this thread. Oh well. Them's the breaks, I guess.
Shiri, My Sassy Girl, My Wife Is A Gangster and Oldboy, incidentally, had name stars in them, not that Hollywod cares they were just pillaging for suprlus, like with Sigaw when they remade it. But you probably meant something else when you said people didn't go see them for its stars. Oh well. You're probably more privvy to the Korean moviegoers' psyche than I am.My bad,I guess.
Just trying to make a distinction in this discussion because it's unfair everytime someone puts down Philippine cinema - - -its history, its international reputation, its product - - -without fact-checking and using the excesses of the commercial fare as a whip. It's unfair. Hindi tayo huli sa awards abroad, mayaman ang kasaysayan natin sa pelikula, madami tayong ginagawang magandang pelikula hanggang ngayon. A little perspectve is all. If I'm a little bullish about it, so be it. I'm a big, big fan of (and very recent convert to) Philippine cinema in all its permutations. Sue me.
And nobody's saying we don't need local pop cinema to thrive. Hell, I'm all for it. I 'd rather have our crap - - those Shake Rattle Roll movies we do so love to piss on - - - than American crap.( Not Avatar,no. It's the second greatest film of its kind. I liked Ferngully just a litle bit better,though.)
-
And popular Filipino cinema has its champions. The odd Maryo J. Delos Reyes; Joyce Bernal; Mario O'Hara had his moneymakers, so with Celso. Even Mike De Leon had a hit, despite himself ;D.
Bernal and Brocka did their share too. I liked some Guillen, even some Diaz-Abaya (though I dont' know if it's her hits I liked). Same with Jarlego, Posadas, Poe.
You have to remember, South Korea did have a quota system--50% of theaters required to show local films. It was part of the reason why their industry recovered. Hong Kong was a victim of Hollywood incursion--Hollywood started its globalization about the same time Hong Kong film receipts declined. So it's not as if Hollywood's the innocent party in this.
-
The Korean Psyche is a topic on its own that should be emulated by Pinoys. I'm not going to digress there except to say that they have more faith and confidence in their abilities than we do, allowing them to match Japanese economic muscle in just 30 years after the Korean War. I am not really surprised that they are leapfroging us in just about ALL aspects of the economy and industry. Cinema is just one of them.
And all these talk about creating distinction between indie and mainstream is defeatist to say the least. You only succeed in further highlighting an Ayala Alabang and Tondo distinction in cinema. You showcase great indie films in foreign festivals but you can't put your own house in order. If I say the local film industry is generally crap, it's about the films that make up the 80% of box office reciepts, not the 20% that are seen in art houses and festivals. For the most part, I consider them as exceptions. To point to them and say we're not that bad cinematically is tantamount to saying we're not exactly a poor country; just look at the people in Alabang driving BMWs and Benzes.
The challenge is akin to spreading the wealth to the 80% poor folks. How do you now translate your festival successes to your home cinema industry? It won't happen if you continue to foster the divide.
I frankly would not mind if Hollywood films are limited or banned entirely. I have the internet on the side. But what makes the suggestion laughable to say the least is it comes from one of those idiots who perpetuate the mediocrity in local cinema. And without your Hollywood crap to compete against, you have Pinoy crap lording it over. No, thanks. At least now you have a choice which crap to take.
Unfortunately, the time is past to have protectionism in any industry.
-
And it's not as if pinoy movies can't compete with Hollywood films. We have Sukob that beat out X-men the last stand at the tills. You have Ang Taniging Ina N'yng Lahat that trumped Twilight and Iron Man at the box office last year. Whether for the right reasons or not, pinoy crap can take on Hollywood crap. So I see no reason to ban or limit Hollywood films. Now if only those festival-bound indies can cross over to mainstream commercial movies blurring any distinction to define what the local movie industry is, then you have a lot to look forward to for the local movie industry.
-
I frankly would not mind if Hollywood films are limited or banned entirely. I have the internet on the side. But what makes the suggestion laughable to say the least is it comes from one of those idiots who perpetuate the mediocrity in local cinema. And without your Hollywood crap to compete against, you have Pinoy crap lording it over. No, thanks. At least now you have a choice which crap to take.
Unfortunately, the time is past to have protectionism in any industry.
x2 !!! 8)
-
And it's not as if pinoy movies can't compete with Hollywood films. We have Sukob that beat out X-men the last stand at the tills. You have Ang Taniging Ina N'yng Lahat that trumped Twilight and Iron Man at the box office last year. Whether for the right reasons or not, pinoy crap can take on Hollywood crap. So I see no reason to ban or limit Hollywood films. Now if only those festival-bound indies can cross over to mainstream commercial movies blurring any distinction to define what the local movie industry is, then you have a lot to look forward to for the local movie industry.
...so that non-Filipino citizens like Anne Curtis and Sam Milby can make millions (and thumb their cute noses at our BID)
Hah hah f'in hah.
-
Actually a little protectionism DOES make sense at this moment in time. What just happened? Global economic collapse. Why did it happen? Free market economies. Why is China so quick to recover? They're focusing on their domestic market.
So if free markets f*cked us up so bad, how about Something A Little Different?
-
Then what?
It's the same situation why the coups against GMA failed. Who you gonna install after GMA?
Okay, so there's no Harry Potter, no Ironman, no Robin Hood. You now have the entire domestic box office to your own. What's next?
-
With all these up and comers doing digital, what next? When the South Koreans cut off the crap from Hollywood, did they imagine Park Chan Wook? Kang Woo-Suk? Jang Sun-Woo? Bong Joon-ho? Kim Ki Duk? Hong Sang Soon? Stretch your imagination, cast off fear. Do we need to wait for the Americans to hand us our cinema ready made, the way they did our independence in 1946?
-
Okay, so there's no Harry Potter, no Ironman, no Robin Hood.
All we have left is Lav Diaz, John Torres, Raya Martin, Brillante Mendoza, Dennis Marasigan, Rico Ilarde, Ellen Ongkeko, Ralston Joven, Veronica Velasco, Sherad Anthony Sanchez, Auraeus Solito, Joyce Bernal, Quark Henares, Jeffrey Jeturian, Ditsy Carolino, Ramona Diaz, Khavn de la Cruz, Chito Rono, Maryo J. delos Reyes, Peque Gallaga, Laurice Guillen, Marilou Diaz Abaya, Lupita Kashiwahara and (hoping against hope) Celso Ad. Castillo, Mike De Leon, Mario O'Hara?
Heaven help us then! ;D
-
And nobody's saying we don't need local pop cinema to thrive. Hell, I'm all for it. I 'd rather have our crap - - those Shake Rattle Roll movies we do so love to piss on - - - than American crap.( Not Avatar,no. It's the second greatest film of its kind. I liked Ferngully just a litle bit better,though.)
I respectfully disagree. I'd much rather watch a crappy American/foreign movie then at least I can laugh at its incompetence rather than be embarrassed by a crappy Filipino movie. It will only make me depressed.
-
Sheer observation, no scientific basis:
Most lower class like watching Pinoy crap. Most middle and upper class like watching Hollywood crap.
-
I respectfully disagree. I'd much rather watch a crappy American/foreign movie then at least I can laugh at its incompetence rather than be embarrassed by a crappy Filipino movie. It will only make me depressed.
"THIS."
-
I respectfully disagree. I'd much rather watch a crappy American/foreign movie then at least I can laugh at its incompetence rather than be embarrassed by a crappy Filipino movie. It will only make me depressed.
Amen to that!
-
I respectfully disagree. I'd much rather watch a crappy American/foreign movie then at least I can laugh at its incompetence rather than be embarrassed by a crappy Filipino movie. It will only make me depressed.
+1 Agree ;D
-
With all these up and comers doing digital, what next? When the South Koreans cut off the crap from Hollywood, did they imagine Park Chan Wook? Kang Woo-Suk? Jang Sun-Woo? Bong Joon-ho? Kim Ki Duk? Hong Sang Soon? Stretch your imagination, cast off fear. Do we need to wait for the Americans to hand us our cinema ready made, the way they did our independence in 1946?
Like, how can we even try to appreciate what South Korea has done in its cinema when their products don't even reach local shores (no, D-Wars doesn't count).
There was a time when Hong Kong and Japanese productions managed to hit our shores...WTF happened?
Where are the Hayao Miyazaki anime masterpieces?
-
No one brings them in because they're too busy bringing in the Hollywood blockbusters.
It's the same even in the US. You get dozens and dozens of copies of The Half Blood Bore and no one bothers to push Desplechin's A Christmas Tale, one of the best films of 2008. Why? Because Hollywood's drowning out the smaller voices, including our own.
It's time we turned their volume down.
-
Bong Revilla on Hollywood movies (http://criticafterdark.blogspot.com/2010/01/bong-revilla-show-only-one-hollywood.html)
Mario O'Hara's Tatlong Taong Walang Diyos and Lino Brocka's Bona out on DVD (http://criticafterdark.blogspot.com/2009/12/mario-oharas-tatlong-taong-walang-diyos.html)
Avatar (James Cameron, 2009) (http://criticafterdark.blogspot.com/2009/12/avatar-james-cameron-2009.html)
Is Avatar racist? (http://criticafterdark.blogspot.com/2009/12/is-avatar-racist.html)
-
When I asked what's next I was hoping someone would tell me how they plan to go about limiting or banning hollywood movies and what to expect after. It's so easy mouthing some advocacy about it.
How do you invoke the Cultural Exception principle in the GATT/WTO/Unesco requirement that France, China, Taiwan, et al have been granted. Are we already enjoying it considering that we are in violation of the National Treatment principle behind GATT that explicitly forbids giving incentives to commercial products in the guise of protecting culture? There are already tax rebates on local films. There's a pending act in congress exempting domestic films with GP and PG-13 rating from the 30% amusement tax. There's another pending lifting the 12% VAT on imported film making equipment. Yet despite these incentives, where are we?
Then what? Will the government cast a safety net to theater owners who will lose income from foreign films? And what other incentive is there to increase film production to fill in the void?
Importation quota is meant to control competition with foreign products. But will there be a quota set against home entertainment materials like DVDs and BDs, because these are other competition channels. How about piracy? Will they be finally stamped out? How about the internet, will the government ban torrent sites? How? Because if not, any quota of hollywood films goes out the window because people can just watch them at home.
Like I said, it's too late. Any kind of protectionist importation quota should have been done right after a disastrous calamity or war that threatened to eradicate a culture or at least make it difficult for a nation to compete against imported products from countries that didn't suffer the same fate. That was what France did after WWII, protecting its film industry after the war devastated its economy. The French had worked hard to define cinema as a cultural product and had a cultural exception principle adopted in the GATT. Same with South Korea after the Korean War. We should have done the same thing like France after WWII. But we were too confident we had the stars that we claim to be better than hollywood stars. We had a Paraluman who was more beautiful than a Rita Hayworth. We had Fernando Poe Jr, that many say was better than Gary Cooper. We had an Amalia Fuentes which many say is more beautiful than Elizabeth Taylor. In short, we thought nothing of competing with hollywood films and we actually trumped many of them in the local box office.
Now in the age of internet and the opening of commercial borders, protectionism has lost any of its power to preserve culture. South Korea didn't get its cinema up because of it. Sure it helped at the start, but if not for their intrepid directors and excellent movie stories that really showed them at their cinematic best, no amount of protectionsim would have brought them to where they are today. Same with Japan, China and India. Where is France cinema today. More than half a century of protectionism and they still claim they need it to get an even playing field.
-
GATT is frankly something we walked into without much critical thought. "Oh free market, it's got to be good for us." Yeah, right--did us just fine in 2008 and 2009.
I'd say the key word is 'commercial products.' Reword and redefine Filipino movies to be cultural products where the studios are renumerated for expenses and not much else (profit can be distributed through a dozen other means) should get around GATT provisions (I say redo those treaties, but assume the political will isn't there, or at least not yet). We're so creative about going around rules and regulations I can't imagine this should give us a hard time.
As for further details, I suggest checking out the French subsidy system (the stress there is cultural as opposed to commercial preservation), not to mention South Korea's quota system. Throw in China's too. Works for them, don't see why it won't work for us.
-
Imagine your children growing up with mostly Filipino shows/movies. Puro kabaklaan, kajologan, prostitusyon, incest, panggagaya, kaingayan (hiyawan), sayawan (ng kalandian), neverending sequels, telefantash*ts, recycled casts (parang wala nang ibang mahanap), etc.
All I can say that I thank my dad for not permitting me to watch Filipino shows when I was growing up.
I hate to generalize but that's the way i see it. Global warming is enough of a dilemma for our future generations.
-
Naw, we just watch Hollywood garbage, where white skin is better, girls are sexy and objects of rape and lust, gay men are comic relief and/or serial killers, Islam is the Devil's religion, the gun is glorified beyond all measure, and the USA beats all countries at war.
Oh, and "kajologan, prostitusyon, incest, panggagaya, kaingayan (hiyawan), sayawan (ng kalandian), neverending sequels, telefantash*ts, recycled casts (parang wala nang ibang mahanap), etc."
It's not that different. At least there's a Filipino flavor to our garbage (I agree with X).
"I thank my dad for not permitting me to watch Filipino shows when I was growing up"
No O'Hara, Brocka, Bernal, Ad. Castillo, Guillen, the two de Leons, Silos, Conde?
You poor thing.
-
Puro kabaklaan
Whoa--so what do you mean by that? Something wrong with homosexuality? Some of our regular posters are gay.
-
GATT is frankly something we walked into without much critical thought. "Oh free market, it's got to be good for us." Yeah, right--did us just fine in 2008 and 2009.
I'd say the key word is 'commercial products.' Reword and redefine Filipino movies to be cultural products where the studios are renumerated for expenses and not much else (profit can be distributed through a dozen other means) should get around GATT provisions (I say redo those treaties, but assume the political will isn't there, or at least not yet). We're so creative about going around rules and regulations I can't imagine this should give us a hard time.
As for further details, I suggest checking out the French subsidy system (the stress there is cultural as opposed to commercial preservation), not to mention South Korea's quota system. Throw in China's too. Works for them, don't see why it won't work for us.
Except for China, all the countries you mentioned with movie protectionist policies are signatories to the GATT. France and India signed it in 1948, Japan in 1955 and South Korea in 1968.
The problem lies in differentiating cultural products and commercial products. The former is entitled to GATT exemption in the interest of protecting cultural diversity, the other is not. What culture are you protecting with Darna, Iskul Bukol, Wapakman, Panday or Shake Rattle and Roll? There's so few attempta to paint our culture in our cinema. Rizal, Muro Ami, Himala, Oro Plata Mata, Macho Dancer. Tuli, Foster Child, Caregiver, Kubrador, maybe. I think you have to show more than that when you want to seek GATT exemption.
And protectionism will just be another toothless grin with a borderless and impossible-to-regulate internet age sprinkled with piracy. We should have done it as early as the 70s. Now, the challenge of global competitiveness can no longer be set aside in favor of parochial interests. Better to rise to the occasion than hide behind anchronistic trade barriers. We've been doing it already, trumping hollywood blockbusters in the local box office. We just need to produce more. It's really no different from getting the entrepreneurial risk taking spirit among pinoys in any industry. We need to get more producers to invest on Pinoy directors who make good in filmfests.
Sadly, just as we don't have entrepreneurs to engage in our own car making industry, or consumer electronics (Do we have a Pinoy Cellphone or PC?), our cinema industry mirrors all our lackluster enterprising efforts. We can be world class artists, but not world class industry leaders and businessmen. No amount of trade protectionism can solve that.
-
All I can say that I thank my dad for not permitting me to watch Filipino shows when I was growing up.
i think that is a bit harsh since it's always been more of a personal choice for me not to see local films for most of the reasons cited.
-
"all the countries you mentioned with movie protectionist policies are signatories to the GATT"
And that's our chance right there. If they can come up with regulations on the inflow of Hollywood movies and remain GATT signatories, then we can too. What have they got that we don't got?
"I think you have to show more than that when you want to seek GATT exemption. "
That's a marketing problem. Marketing needs the will, first of all. Bong may be an idiot, as so many here noted, but he at least spoke out.
-
Like I said, it's too late.Any kind of protectionist importation quota should have been done right after a disastrous calamity or war that threatened to eradicate a culture or at least make it difficult for a nation to compete against imported products from countries that didn't suffer the same fate.
And what do you call this global economic meltdown? What do you call Hollywood's gobbling up the Hong Kong and Mexico markets?
Same with South Korea after the Korean War.
Yeah. Check recent South Korean history--they imposed their latest quotas in the 90s, after Hollywood brought down their industry.
South Korea didn't get its cinema up because of it. Sure it helped at the start
And that's what I'm calling for--a start. Turn down that volume, and let's start.
no amount of protectionsim would have brought them to where they are today
They still have a quota.
Where is France cinema today. More than half a century of protectionism and they still claim they need it to get an even playing field.
It's all about money, folks. Hollywood has money, we don't. We do, however, have the power to legislate. That's the function of government.
-
Naw, we just watch Hollywood garbage, where white skin is better, girls are sexy and objects of rape and lust, gay men are comic relief and/or serial killers, Islam is the Devil's religion, the gun is glorified beyond all measure, and the USA beats all countries at war
No Brocka, Bernal, Ad. Castillo, Guillen, the two de Leons, Silos, Conde?
You poor thing.
Never said that I only watch Hollywood films. And you seem to be the expert on Tagalog films and film history, so good luck with that. ;) I still sleep well at night so no worries.
Whoa--so what do you mean by that? Something wrong with homosexuality? Some of our regular posters are gay.
Nice try in stirring things up for your delight. "Some of our regular posters are gay." - bravo!
I have gay friends. Who doesn't? But what they do with their “leisure time” is something I'm not interested in. Same applies to everyone with different beliefs.
I'll cite one example since you're clearly enjoying the discussion regarding "kabaklaan" - gayness.
Joey's Quirky World - Should be a very educational and informative program, especially for kids. But who the hell knows why they had to put 2 straight men to commentate using gay lingo and intonation (with the annoying shrieks if I may add). Add another fat, straight cross-dressing guy playing assistant to the equation and you get the general idea of what I’m trying to imply. I doubt the children will be able to pick up useful words to store in their vocabulary banks after watching such shows.
And if the show was targeted for the younger audiences, is that the network’s surefire and proven way of getting through to them? If it is, then that says a lot of what you're going to expect with these network producers who are also into film making. What's the new Michael V. show? I forgot the name - all I know that it's just another show with a cross-dressing host. But who cares right? It sells.
-
It's the same even in the US. You get dozens and dozens of copies of The Half Blood Bore and no one bothers to push Desplechin's A Christmas Tale, one of the best films of 2008. Why? Because Hollywood's drowning out the smaller voices, including our own.
Because Harry Potter movies grossed billions of dollars worldwide and has a very wide fan-base whereas A Christmas Tale is a small French drama with limited audience appeal. I mean, you can't sell merchandise on a film about a family struggling with mental illness during Christmas. Average Joe Movie Goer won't go far that. Most it can do is a limited art house run, probably a few festival screenings and then it's straight to the Criterion Collection (which is releasing it, FYI).
I think a more apt criticism on the "imperialism" of Hollywood is this: There ARE non-Hollywood movies out there that are PERFECTLY maketable and can compete with Hollywood films at least in terms of story and have the potential to be breakout hits and win over Average Joe Movie Goer. Like The Ring, Let the Right One In, [REC], The Orphanage etc. but what does Hollywood do? They buy the property and remake them in English so they get to keep a bigger chunk of the money instead of doing what they should do: Allow them to be distributed wider and market it. Hollywood is also fond of convincing Average Joe Movie Goer that films with subtitles are automatically boring and only for film snobs. Pan's Labyrinth and Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon are exceptions to the rule but then again, their respective directors have already worked with Hollywood, so maybe it's not.
-
And what do you call this global economic meltdown? What do you call Hollywood's gobbling up the Hong Kong and Mexico markets?
Every country is experiencing the global recession. But nowhere near the calamity of a WW II.
Mexico is so much like the Philippines. More than half their population wants to own green cards. And because of its proximity to the land of milk and honey, most of their local stars and directors got their wishes. You have Mexican Holywood stars like Ramon Novaro, Lupe Velez, Cantinflas, Dolores del Rio, Gilbert Roland, Ricardo Montalban, Gael García Bernal, Diego Luna, Salma Hayek, to mention some. And great directors who landed hollywood jobs or had workls distributed worldwide to commercial success like Alfonso Cuaron (Y Tu Mama Tambian, Children of Men, Harry Potter PA), Guillermo del Toro (Pan's Labyrinth, Hellboy, Blade II). Alejandro González Iñárritu (Babel, 21 Grams). They probably don't need protectionism as much as we do. Mexico could have invoked GATT exemption. But it's interesting to note that AFAIK no Latin American country ever took advantage of the cultural exception in the GATT. Not that it matters to us, but I can understand their indifference to the idea.
Hongkong cinema is a bit more complicated with its integration into mainland China so that any distinction between the two has increasingly blurred over the years. The main factor in its decline include an increasingly sophisticated population that found Hollywood movies more acceptable to their taste than the local films that have spiraled down in terms of quality. The Asian financial crisis of the 97 was the final straw that broke the mighty private sector that has been financing movies eversince. Most of these entrepreneurial producers found themselves financially bankrupt to further make movies the way they used to. Hongkong cinema is unique as it's the only Asian cinema that never got a single cent from government incentives and yet really stood on its own against Hollywood in the international market for the years before its decline in the 90s. Local hongkong market is just too small to support local cinema which promptly embarked on world audiences as its markets. It's no different from the history of its flag carrier Cathay Pacific which could not have survived with no domestic market if not for its international operation. Hongkong cinema's decline is almost inevitable with a confluence of socio-economic and political factors that now subsume the industry into the larger mainland China cinema especially with China already making international quality films.
Yeah. Check recent South Korean history--they imposed their latest quotas in the 90s, after Hollywood brought down their industry.
Yeah and all their films had been been funded by the government. With the exception of some from the private sector like Samsung.
They had their quotas revised 20 years ago. A good 5 years before the spread of internet popularity, 10 years before the spread of piracy. And they were only able to produce their first landmark hit Shiri in 1999.
If South Korea had done it 9 years after, what makes you think embarking on protectionism at this late stage right in the presence of torrents and pirated moves would benefit local cinema. It won't Your best bet is for those new breed of directors winning internal film fests to be tapped by hollywood to make films for international distribution. That is, if local producers won't tap them.
And that's what I'm calling for--a start. Turn down that volume, and let's start.
I'm sure Bong Revilla has his sights on the Presidency. If ever he becomes President, you'll get what you want.
Besides, I have the impression we're already taking the cultural exception in GATT. We have tax rebates on movies. Congress has a pending legislation on exempting local GP and PG13 movies from the 30% amusement tax and the 12% VAT for movie making equipment.
They still have a quota.
Of course, once you have it, why give it up. The French had it for the last 70 years and they still won't give it up.
It's all about money, folks. Hollywood has money, we don't. We do, however, have the power to legislate. That's the function of government.
There are already legislative action pending in congress short of making quotas to help the movie industry. These are considered subsidies that are already in violation of GATT unless we have invoked the cultural exception principle. And since we're on the topic of legislation, why not ask the government for funding as well, like what South Korea had done?
The cinema is just like any industry where you need investments for it to really flourish. Attracting investments won't happen if new businessmen don't find the industry lucrative enough. The problem is the small domestic market. You can only squeeze out so much from a local market. Protectionsim is a local market solution as it enables local producers to maximize revenues from a market that has little choices. But there's never a guarantee you'll be able to churn out products with a global world class appeal. There's a higher chance that because producers would be making more profit with mediocre films under a protected industry, they'd be content with it and not risk venturing out into world class quality products that cost more to make.
Like I said, it's too late in the age of internet and piracy. You stand a much better chance of attracting people who watch Titanic to watch Iskul Bukol if you had started protectionism as late as the 80s. Marcos should have done it with his MIFF. And coupled with the great films created at that time like Scorpio Nights and Oro, that could have really ignited a lasting golden age of our cinema with an international flavour. The benefits of movie protectionism would have been felt in the next generation of movie goers who would not have been weaned with Hollywood crap. And more importantly, local producers would have been well exposed to global competitiveness to rise above mediocrity. I have little quarrel with partially closing your market to foreign products, but only if you couple that with sustained drive towards world-class product excellence. And timing is of the essence.
But now, forget it. What makes you think the people who watch Harry Potter or Transformers can be weaned away to movie houses showing Wapakman and Shake Rattle and Roll. With protectionism, they'll just download the Hollywood torrents and watch happily their Hollywood crap in the comfort of their homes. Or go to their nearest tiangge to buy pirated copies. Cheaper besides. With unabated piracy and torrents with home increasingly getting their hands on cheaper PCs, the next generation of movie goers will still be exposed to them.
Nope, whatever promise a protectionist economy model has is now forever lost in the overarching presence of the internet and an unyielding global intellectual piracy. Sure, South Korea et al, still have it. But like I said, they won't give that up and it's just another remnant of an old world order when economies were more fragmented.
Your real hope lies in having those new breed of directors we have to get noticed by Hollywood filmmakers to make movies for international marketing and distribution. Or any businessman who are avid film enthusiasts. Like Samsung in Korea. Unfortunately we don't have anything similar to Samsung. Perhaps if Gokongwei, Lucio Tan, Henry Sy or the Ayalas and Ortigas can be persuaded to finance some of these good directors, we might get there faster. The real advantage of Korea is their highly evolved nationalistic psyche which has made them what they are. But that's another topic.
-
I have gay friends. Who doesn't?
Classic! "I'm not an anti-Semite--all my best friends are Jews."
Joey's Quirky World - Should be a very educational and informative program, especially for kids. But who the hell knows why they had to put 2 straight men to commentate using gay lingo and intonation (http://Joey's Quirky World - Should be a very educational and informative program, especially for kids. But who the hell knows why they had to put 2 straight men to commentate using gay lingo and intonation)
Some people find swardspeak fun. I do.
And if the show was targeted for the younger audiences (http://And if the show was targeted for the younger audiences)
I don't see anything wrong with exposing younger folk to homosexuality. I know gay couples that raise kids and they do a better job than most straight couples do, their kids are more squared away too.
"If it is, then that says a lot of what you're going to expect with these network producers who are also into film making. (http://If it is, then that says a lot of what you're going to expect with these network producers who are also into film making.)
My problem with this is the broad brushstroke. If you snipe at TV producers (and I do think most of them deserve it) and commercial film producers (and I do think they deserve it), you need to point out that there is good work being produced out there. Otherwise, you're stereotyping and dismissing out of hand.
-
Every country is experiencing the global recession. But nowhere near the calamity of a WW II.
I'm not all that compelled by a need to obey the spirit and letter of GATT, mainly because this free market thing is part of what pulled the world economy over the brink.
Nope, whatever promise a protectionist economy model has is now forever lost in the overarching presence of the internet and an unyielding global intellectual piracy.
Yeah. So what's the percentage of internet use in the Filipino population? People seem to think the whole country revolves around the middle to upper classes of Metro Manila. Need to remember that a majority of the population is still at the poverty line, and that majority of the people live in the provinces, where movies make a good chunk of their income.
Incidentally, in the period of 2003 to 2004, we did 97 films to Hong Kong's 92. In 2008 we made 89 films to Hong Kong's 53. We're still outproducing them, for all the wrong reasons, sure, and using crap, but there's still a considerable market out there.
Sure, South Korea et al, still have it. But like I said, they won't give that up and it's just another remnant of an old world order when economies were more fragmented.
That's the old new world order you say is taking over the old world order. There's a new new world order coming around thanks to the meltdown and it has a lot in common with the old world order. Less globalization, more localization. Checks and regulations on trading, and the selling and buying of stocks. Smaller companies, catering to local markets. GATT is already the detritus of that old new world order. Old news, folks.
The economies that escaped or are recovering fast are those that aren't fully globalized, or have a large domestic market to build on (China is the biggest example, India is doing fine, and actually the Philippines isn't too bad off, compared to the US--or it's been down for so long it didn't have far to fall).
Your real hope lies in having those new breed of directors we have to get noticed by Hollywood filmmakers to make movies for international marketing and distribution.
We've had this argument before. Remember all those J-horror remakes? That's the basic result.
The real advantage of Korea is their highly evolved nationalistic psyche which have made them what they are. But that's another topic.
Not really; it's the heart of another pet peeve of mine. What is it about our envy of other countries? Why do we think this or that country has a superhuman psyche able to solve economic problems and turn water into wine? Why do we look to other countries, shrug our shoulders helplessly, and say 'it's in our and their nature"? We've done it before, we can do it again. Heck, I look at our young filmmakers--and really, you naysayers should meet them, they are an awesome bunch--and they move mountains, perform miracles out of almost nothing. They're incredible, and they're the source of my inspiration, my 'secret weapon' so to speak, only I don't want to keep them secret.
Talk to them. Watch their films. If you can, help them (I try, whenever I can).
-
I'm not all that compelled by a need to obey the spirit and letter of GATT, mainly because this free market thing is part of what pulled the world economy over the brink.
That's the line of capitalist naysayers who immediately impugn what is wrong with capitalism. But it's very superficial. Nobody said that a free market economy was perfect. What caused the current global crisis is the ABUSE of the liberties afforded by free market economy. Not because of it. China is a example of a socialist capitalist economy that's well managed.
Yeah. So what's the percentage of internet use in the Filipino population? People seem to think the whole country revolves around the middle to upper classes of Metro Manila. Need to remember that a majority of the population is still at the poverty line, and that majority of the people live in the provinces, where movies make a good chunk of their income.
Unfortunately these PC owning people are the ones you want to watch local films, not those who are happy with Iskul Bukol. Mediocrity is not what you want even if it means local box office success. You want an international market for your films, and that means world class quality. And the people best poised to recognize what world class quality is are rarely your teeming masses, unless they get the right education.
On the otherhand, the teeming ruk will not want to watch your arthouse films either. They like to see their idols on the big screens. The problem is aggravated when you foster the divide. Why is it so difficult to make arthouse-quality films with their favorite stars in them? Because producers want quick profits so they make quickies. With or without a hollywood film ban or quota, these same people will be watching pinoy films. And producers will continue to pander to their taste. So where's the advantage?
That's the old new world order you say is taking over the old world order. There's a new new world order coming around thanks to the meltdown and it has a lot in common with the old world order. Less globalization, more localization. Checks and regulations on trading, and the selling and buying of stocks. Smaller companies, catering to local markets. GATT is already the detritus of that old new world order. Old news, folks.
Globalization remains on tract. It's irreversible. The global crisis has actually hastened the creation of mega corporations that bought out or absorbed other companies in financial distress. They are now better poised to pursue a much more vigorous and unified global penetration of their products. You see airlines, financial institutions, car makers merging or consolidating. Globalization has never been stronger. Business outsourcing is blurring geo-economic boundaries. With the internet as its distribution and marketing channel, it's almost impossible for a small company to remain small. Once you have the whole world as your market, you'd have to have the muscle to supply growing global demand. Amazon and eBay couldn't help getting big even if they wanted to remain small.
Hollywood now make films using the cheapest resources - actors from China or Australia shooting in New Zealand and being edited in Bratislava. Using motion sensors, they can capture human acting nuances in a backlot somewhere in China and processed by CGI facilities in India, etc etc. The entire world is one small business community now.
The economies that escaped or are recovering fast are those that aren't fully globalized, or have a large domestic market to build on (China is the biggest example, India is doing fine, and actually the Philippines isn't too bad off, compared to the US--or it's been down for so long it didn't have far to fall).
Just like in the Asian financial crisis of 97 when we survived unscathed, we're not in any height to get hurt falling.
China and India are among those at the center of globalization. Their outsourcing business for western companies epitomize exactly what globalization is about. China is now a socialist free market economy with global reach after Japan and the US. Your examples are exactly what properly managed capitalist economy with global reach is about.
We've had this argument before. Remember all those J-horror remakes? That's the basic result.
That's globalization, film ideas can come anywhere. Just as it can be made anywhere where's it's more cost effective to make.
The benefit is not so much if the remake is good or not. Of course, better if it s good. But more on the fact that they get a wider international audience. Ringu was the highest grossing film in Japan and promptly got noticed by Hollywood who was fast getting bankrupt of film ideas. It's interesting to note that its Hollywood remake actually grossed more in Japan than the original and brought the film to a much wider audience. This started the trend for Hollywood remaking local films that have done well in their respective countries. Our own Sigaw was remade as the Echo.
It's a good start and eventually the reputation can precede you if you sustain it with really good movies from your own, not hollywood remakes. The problem is that we make films for pinoys, very few with an eye for the international market. When you start thinking GLOBAL, that's when you rise above mediocrity.
Not really; it's the heart of another pet peeve of mine. What is it about our envy of other countries? Why do we think this or that country has a superhuman psyche able to solve economic problems and turn water into wine? Why do we look to other countries, shrug our shoulders helplessly, and say 'it's in our and their nature"? We've done it before, we can do it again. Heck, I look at our young filmmakers--and really, you naysayers should meet them, they are an awesome bunch--and they move mountains, perform miracles out of almost nothing. They're incredible, and they're the source of my inspiration, my 'secret weapon' so to speak, only I don't want to keep them secret.
Different peoples have different mental make-up and predispositions defined by their tradition and culture. While it doesn't mean that some races are superior than others, some just have a more productive attitude collectively as a nation than others. The Japanese, the Jews and the Koreans have a level of nationalistic consciousness that is superior to many other peoples. Self sacrifce is a national trait. In the early years after the Korean war, Korea had young people studying and working overseas only to RETURN and bring their new found knowledge for the improvement of their country. The Japanese also did the same, they bought Swiss watches and Grundig radio in their European visits and promptly reversed-engineered them when they went back home. Not to mention the cars. And they improved on them. They have governments that care about their people and have the least corruption. They can even bring their erring heads of state to jail without getting pardoned. The Koreans are a bit better, they actually paid Japanese technocrats and engineers to work in their factories during weekends, all expenses paid. The history of Samsung is the history of a people's struggle to put their country in a position of industry leadership and excellence. It is also a story of how nationalism can be harnessed to bring a people into prosperity. It's all about putting the love of your countrymen above anything else.
If people don't recognize that there are other people worth emulating to correct their weaknesses, then they are bound to suffer their own weaknesses.
-
Besides, I have the impression we're already taking the cultural exception in GATT. We have tax rebates on movies. Congress has a pending legislation on exempting local GP and PG13 movies from the 30% amusement tax and the 12% VAT for movie making equipment.
Is this for real? Tax rebates based on film classification and not on quality. It's simply idiotic!
-
The tax rebates are based on quality. It's the pending exemption on the 30% amusement tax that's based on classification.
-
What caused the current global crisis is the ABUSE of the liberties afforded by free market economy. Not because of it.
By this definition, a non-capitalist or managed economy is bad, a free market economy good? Now that's simplistic.
China is a example of a socialist capitalist economy that's well managed.
And living hell for people who think or say different.
Unfortunately these PC owning people are the ones you want to watch local films, not those who are happy with Iskul Bukol.
Why not? What's wrong with the CD crowd? Is there something wrong with poor people, or people from the provinces? Are they somehow unworthy?
You want an international market for your films, and that means world class quality.
Y'know how Japanese cinema developed? Ozu did films for the Japanese. Mizoguchi did films for the Japanese. Same with Kurosawa--when offered the chance for an international production, Kurosawa as much as professed regret he couldn't sell said production first to his own people.
The key to a successful cinema is a domestic market, not an international one. Study all the histories, get back to me. In the case of Hong Kong, which did cultivate an international market, it was an international market of diasporic Chinese. Read David Bordwell.
And the people best poised to recognize what world class quality is are rarely your teeming masses
Brocka? O'Hara, who never finished college? What's wrong with these people, I keep wondering?
Globalization remains on tract.
Not only has globalization not remained 'on track,' it's derailed and taken the global economy with it. All those mega corporations are carefully being looked into and regarded with suspicion; more regulations are being put into place. China, that economic powerhouse, is looking inwards. The bloom is off, the boom is over. Listen to NPR, read The New York Times.
The benefit is not so much if the remake is good or not. Of course, better if it s good. But more on the fact that they get a wider international audience.
And a lot less respect because they're so bad. Seen any J Horror remakes lately? The trend is dead, and they killed it with garbage.
If people don't recognize that there are other people worth emulating to correct their weaknesses, then they are bound to suffer their own weaknesses.
Be aware, sure, but also be aware of one's virtues. That's pretty sad if you don't watch the best that our own country has to offer.
-
See here what northern wrote about a Filipino film (http://cinefilipinas.blogspot.com/2010/01/melancholia-lav-diaz-2008.html).
We ARE a great people, we should stop the self-hatred, or at least self abuse, and move forward. Realistic steps, sure, recognizing our flaws, sure, but the direction is on, not down. And appreciate what is our own.
-
By this definition, a non-capitalist or managed economy is bad, a free market economy good? Now that's simplistic.
There's nothing being defined in that statement so don't imagine one. Also check your logic, Just because one is good, doesn't mean the other is bad.
But to be blunt, there's nothing better than a capitalist economy. China is a socialist capitalist economy. And it's interesting to note that despite all the crises and storms that beset a capitalist economy, the societies behind them have weathered and went on to new heights. Whereas non-capitalist societies have withered and died, like the soviets who have promptly adopted a capitalist one, and you see it in Cuba. Not to mention China which easily embraced it.
And living hell for people who think or say different.
Did that prevent them from creating world class products?
Why not? What's wrong with the CD crowd? Is there something wrong with poor people, or people from the provinces? Are they somehow unworthy?
You tell me. When they start flocking to see films in local film fests.
Y'know how Japanese cinema developed? Ozu did films for the Japanese. Mizoguchi did films for the Japanese. Same with Kurosawa--when offered the chance for an international production, Kurosawa as much as professed regret he couldn't sell said production first to his own people.
The key to a successful cinema is a domestic market, not an international one. Study all the histories, get back to me. In the case of Hong Kong, which did cultivate an international market, it was an international market of diasporic Chinese. Read David Bordwell.
You overlooked one fundamental thing. Japan's domestic market, even as early as the 19th century, is quite mature, sophisticated and demanding because of high literacy rate. Any country with a mature domestic market with a large middle class demographics like the US, Japan, Korea and UK can easily compete on a Global scale. What I am saying is for third world countries like the Philippines, the only way to transcend their product mediocrity and compete globally is to think global. They can't rely on the low standards of catering to an immature domestic market to match global standards, especially one with a very small middle class content.
Now you go back and read your economics and the roots of globalization. The domestic market WAS critical to a cinema. Actually it WAS critical to ANY industry. It dictates the level of a country's production quality, be it cars, appliances or movies. And in a global economy, a country with a highly sophisticated market with a highly evolved product line dictates and leads the level of economic activity for that product line. That's why you have hollywood leading the pack. So now with a global economy already thriving, competing globally means your products have to match the level of sophistication of those in these countries, and transcend the limiting infantile needs of your domestic markets that is pulling you down if you don't. It's now late in the day for many third world nations to make domestic markets the springboard to global prominence. You have to leapfrog it by targeting the international audience.
Brocka? O'Hara, who never finished college? What's wrong with these people, I keep wondering?
More exceptions than the rule.
Not really. All those mega corporations are carefully being looked into and regarded with suspicion; more regulations are being put into place. China, that economic powerhouse, is looking inwards. The bloom is off, the boom is over. Listen to NPR, read The New York Times.
Dream on.
Be aware, sure, but also be aware of one's virtues. That's pretty sad if you don't watch the best that our own country has to offer.
I have no problem with that. The question really is whether what's good in you is good enough to make you what Korea and Japan is today, or even a Taiwan and Malaysia. The problem is that 70 years after WWII, it hasn't proven itself good enough. It's not even about appreciating your own. A global economy is quite ruthless and unforgiving. You can appreciate your own all you like but if it can't pass global standards, you're screwed.
-
Y'know how Japanese cinema developed? Ozu did films for the Japanese. Mizoguchi did films for the Japanese. Same with Kurosawa--when offered the chance for an international production, Kurosawa as much as professed regret he couldn't sell said production first to his own people.
The key to a successful cinema is a domestic market, not an international one. Study all the histories, get back to me. In the case of Hong Kong, which did cultivate an international market, it was an international market of diasporic Chinese. Read David Bordwell.
Or for that matter India - ever wonder why Bollywood releases almost always crack the UK top ten cinema rankings????
-
Both India and China have a very large market base. In the case of India, even if they have an inordinately large poverty line population, their highly educated middle class is large enough to sustain a thriving high quality domestic cinema that can compete in international markets. They have a sophisticated middle class population of about 300 million that's even larger than all of UK combined or equal to the entire US population. It is not surprising that India is actually the world's largest film producer with nearly 1000 movies annually that get shown in nearly 100 countries. Hollywood only produces about 600 annually.
Indians take advance studies in the UK, their former colonizers, in much the same way Pinoys love to get an education in the US, their former conquerors. It's actually interesting to see Indian films being highly popular in the UK, not that it has Indian immigrants as the largest ethnic minority community there.
-
parang mahirap nga i-limit ang hollywood films to one a month...what about 2 a month? i'd be ok with that. tapos dapat sa MMFF, dapat yung mga best indie films of the year, palabas din nila. i'm hoping there'll be better films next december with bayani fernando gone.
-
Nothing will prevent a country to impose quotas on film importation if it really wants to, with or without the cultural exception principle in the GATT. There's also the UNESCO Convention on the protection of cultural diversity any country can invoke for putting quotas. I am just not convinced it will solve the ills of the local cinema. Not in this age of internet video streaming and torrents. It's really a myopic solution for weaklings to hide under the skirt of a protective mother because he can't slug it out with the bullies. Unfortunately, it won't be a lasting solution unless the weakling rises above his weakness and learns to slug it out. And I don't see that happening unless the weakling cinema starts to think global and start producing word class films. That's the only way to fight the bullies in their own turf.
-
It's typical for us Filipinos to blame others for our deficiencies and faults. "Our local cinema is dying", says us, "...and it's Hollywood's fault."
-
Both India and China have a very large market base.
And is ours peanuts? We're in the top ten line of film producing countries, and our market is the largest in Southeast Asia.
It's really a myopic solution for weaklings to hide under the skirt of a protective mother because he can't slug it out with the bullies.
You could argue it's a weak thing to hide under the skirt of a protective fiction like free markets, taking the Americans at their word that all they want is a level playing field.
Remember, under the Bush years America had eight years of free markets. Was there abuse? You bet. Would it have been corrected by market forces--what do you think? Free markets are supposed to be self-correcting--I didn't see much self-correction in those eight years.
Free markets had eight years--count them--to prove its case. Well it did--the world economy went to the toilet and millions of people were put out of work. We need a different paradigm.
Actually, I'd call a complete faith and utter faith in the free markets delusional to a monstrous extreme. Free market? Level playing field? Are you kidding me? America's local movie market is the most protective of all--they block book their theaters for Hollywood hits, and woe to the independent that doesn't have the backing of a major Hollywood studio. I can see it, in all the malls and multiplexes here. Not to mention the American audience is if anything less demanding and more ignorant of world cinema than Filipinos ever were. They're sheep, consuming product from an assembly line.
As Harry Tuttle of Screenville (http://screenville.blogspot.com/) put it:
What is scary is that the domestic American market is the most profitable in the world : more screens than in India or China! Yet they still make the most of their money abroad. And every year they complain about being on a slump... As if any country in the world could not have their cinema industry survive on a smaller budget than theirs!
The aggressive hegemony of the Hollywood culture overtakes the biggest revenue shares in almost every country, leaving peanuts for the local films to pay off their costs. It's not fair.
And these Hollywood blockbusters don't even deserve to take the largest share of the cake, in most cases, because they are not always better films (whether it is better for the entertainment factor for the widest crowd, or better aesthetically) than the local production.
In these conditions, it is perfectly justified to halt the "free market" (which is skewed by the economic pressures coming from Hollywood distributors who sell their products in bundles to saturate the market and turn local exhibitors into dependent addicts) with protectionist laws. The domestic American market is itself THE most protectionist among the "democratic world of industrial countries". Non-American films sell less than 5% of admissions to the American public!
I don't see my proposal as hiding under anyone's skirts, or laying the blame at other countries--there is a real enemy out there, and it has to be dealt with.
Just because one is good, doesn't mean the other is bad.
So a managed economy isn't bad? Then we agree. That's good.
China is a socialist capitalist economy. And it's interesting to note that despite all the crises and storms that beset a capitalist economy, the societies behind them have weathered and went on to new heights.
Yeah. Got the US employment figures a few days ago for December. Eighty five thousand jobs lost. New heights, all right.
Whereas non-capitalist societies have withered and died, like the soviets who have promptly adopted a capitalist one, and you see it in Cuba. Not to mention China which easily embraced it.
Europe? India? China is freewheeling, but don't think for a moment they're not managing the importation of goods, film in particular. And as pointed out above, don't even believe for a moment America isn't protective about its domestic film market.
Did that prevent them from creating world class products?
Talent comes out no matter what the political system. Iran, China, the old Soviet Union--all had world class filmmakers.
You tell me. When they start flocking to see films in local film fests.
And you think they don't? Why hasn't Cinemalaya and the Cinema One Originals closed down long ago? The organizers see an emerging market, they're developing it as best they can. Talk to Ron Arguelles, talk to Laurice Guillen.
You overlooked one fundamental thing. Japan's domestic market, even as early as the 19th century, is quite mature, sophisticated and demanding because of high literacy rate.
And you think we don't? We were under the American educational system till 1946, remember, and it persisted for years afterward. Japan had its first film screening a year after the Lumiere brothers projected their first film, in 1896; we projected our first film in 1897, produced our first feature in 1912, and had our first Filipino directed film by 1919. Our audiences have been supporting the industry until recently, when Hollywood started its expansion on foreign markets. But I've written about this before, here.
Any country with a mature domestic market with a large middle class demographics like the US, Japan, Korea and UK can easily compete on a Global scale.
Japan was a basket case coming out of the war. It was a basket case again during the Asian economic crisis, and it doesn't have the vigor it used to have right now. The UK has had it's ups and down; the USA too. When we were under American rule and some years after the war we were in very good shape economically.
Don't buy into the myth of foreign superiority. They've had their ups and downs, and so have we. Check your figures, and your own history.
What I am saying is for third world countries like the Philippines, the only way to transcend their product mediocrity and compete globally is to think global. They can't rely on the low standards of catering to an immature domestic market to match global standards, especially one with a very small middle class content.
Who says we need a big middle class? The Filipino industry was living off its own market for decades, since before the war.
Now you go back and read your economics and the roots of globalization.
Thing about economic theories, they can change. Globalization has a very sorry reputation at the moment. Check your recent news articles. Textbooks can go out of date.
That's why you have hollywood leading the pack.
Now Harry--who's American, by the way, and very knowledgeable about their film industry--tells you exactly why Hollywood leads the pack.
Brocka? O'Hara, who never finished college? What's wrong with these people, I keep wondering?
More exceptions than the rule.
O'Hara, Brocka, Bernal, Bernal, Ad. Castillo, Jarlego, Posadas, Guillen, de Leon, de Leon, Reyes, delos Reyes, Silos, Conde, Nepumoceno, Diaz, Velasco, Ilarde, Henares, de la Cruz, Torres, Martin, Tahimik, Red, Romana, Ermitano? And that's just off the top of my head?
I'd say there are over a hundred exceptions., and more every year, thanks to Cinemalaya, Cinemanila, and Cinema One Originals That's a lot of exceptions.
Not really. All those mega corporations are carefully being looked into and regarded with suspicion; more regulations are being put into place. China, that economic powerhouse, is looking inwards. The bloom is off, the boom is over. Listen to NPR, read The New York Times.
Dream on.
Now that's an argument. ;D
Really, read them. That's reality knocking on your 'globalizing,' free market world.
I have no problem with that. The question really is whether what's good in you is good enough to make you what Korea and Japan is today, or even a Taiwan and Malaysia.
The myth of the superior foreigner.
A global economy is quite ruthless and unforgiving.
Now THIS we agree on. But believing in some fairy tale of an idealized free market where friendly countries let products go in and out through their borders with just a wave hello or goodbye isn't going to make that market any less ruthless, or more forgiving.
-
It's typical for us Filipinos to blame others for our deficiencies and faults. "Our local cinema is dying", says us, "...and it's Hollywood's fault."
It's not all Hollywood's fault. Our film producers need to step up, sure, and our indie producers need to sell harder. But they're fighting an uphill battle with the 800 pound gorilla in the room, and they need a more level playing field (as it is, the field's skewed towards Hollywood--not just here, all over the world). The government (and this is how a lot of Americans feel about their government too, nowadays) has a role to play here.
-
Not to mention the American audience is if anything less demanding and more ignorant of world cinema than Filipinos ever were. They're sheep, consuming product from an assembly line.
I have read somewhere that during the 1940's, 1950's, 60's even in the early 1970's, the Hollywood movies of Ford, Hawks, Wilder, Hitchcock, etc. were shown side by side with the works of Truffaut, Bergman, Fellini, Kurosawa, etc.
These days, with very few exceptions, foreign-language films never make a dent in the U.S. market outside of the art house circuit. Those with the potential to become breakout hits are usually bought by Hollywood and remade rather than just allowing them to have a wider release.
-
I have a friend who saw Truffaut's films here in Manila back in the 70s, on commercial screening (art houses? What art houses?). Also King Hu, Liu Chia Liang, Chang Cheh.
Things have simplified since then. What happened? Hollywood did.
-
Do you guys think that the increased availability of Hollywood movies for home viewing as marked by the dawning of the VCD era (and eventually DVDs), could have contributed to the decline of viewership of Filipino movies in theaters?
I ask this question because in the 70s and the 80s we were the world's largest film-going audience. It's a distinction that has even been cited in Guinness. I just noticed that the numbers started to dwindle in the mid 90s when VHS rentals became more accessible, and which continued with the influx of VCDs and DVDs.
-
The market has dwindled, but there's enough of it to sustain a production rate of almost ninety films--more than Hong Kong.
-
Do you guys think that the increased availability of Hollywood movies for home viewing as marked by the dawning of the VCD era (and eventually DVDs), could have contributed to the decline of viewership of Filipino movies in theaters?
I ask this question because in the 70s and the 80s we were the world's largest film-going audience. It's a distinction that has even been cited in Guinness. I just noticed that the numbers started to dwindle in the mid 90s when VHS rentals became more accessible, and which continued with the influx of VCDs and DVDs.
One of the factors probably....count also piracy and cable viewing. People are now tired of going to the movies, instead they just watch at home.
-
the comfort and convenience of watching DVDs, VCDs and cable channels compared to the hassle of enduring the traffic going to a theater, not to mention hassle of looking for a space to park a car if you are using one to go there.. i say yes, these modern ways of enjoying movies affect the number of people going to theaters these days
-
Not only that.. With the so many hollywood movies in our respective homes via the different media sources, medyo naging "BADUY" at walang kwento ang ating sariling pelikula. Kitang-kita kasi ang inferior quality ng ating mga gawa almost in all aspects. So if you really want to enjoy and be entertained, bakit ka pipili ng gawang Pilipino? But of course, maliban na lang kung ang inspirasyon mo sa movie watching mo ay yung pagka- Pilipino mo. ;)
-
Not only that.. With the so many hollywood movies in our respective homes via the different media sources, medyo naging "BADUY" at walang kwento ang ating sariling pelikula.
It's not that simple. Commercial movies--yeah, I agree. But have you seen, say Last Supper No. 3? Check it out if it gets released on video. Very accessible, and very true, released just this year.
-
The number of Filipino films made each year; Jean Simmons, 1929 - 2010 (http://criticafterdark.blogspot.com/2010/01/number-of-filipino-films-jean-simmons.html)
Sherlock Holmes (Guy Ritchie, 2009) (http://criticafterdark.blogspot.com/2010/01/sherlock-holmes-guy-ritchie-2009.html)
Plus the blog has a new look--check it out.
-
The number of Filipino films made each year; Jean Simmons, 1929 - 2010 (http://criticafterdark.blogspot.com/2010/01/number-of-filipino-films-jean-simmons.html)
Sherlock Holmes (Guy Ritchie, 2009) (http://criticafterdark.blogspot.com/2010/01/sherlock-holmes-guy-ritchie-2009.html)
Plus the blog has a new look--check it out.
Nice site redesign...also nice article about the Cinemalaya and its inclusion of established directors.
BTW I liked Sherlock Holmes, at least this one is watchable compared to Guy Richie's more recent movie outings. Other of his that I like are Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch.
-
Check out The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes, Seven Percent Solution and Sherlock Hound, rse.