astillfilm

 

 

(a promotional still from the movie “Masahista” as published in the flyers distributed by the U.P. Film Institute, used here for educational and non-commercial purposes.)

 

 Summary:

        It is doubtful however whether the MTRCB has jurisdiction to review educational materials, such as films and digital materials, used in U.P. in pursuit of its objectives of providing higher education. In particular, the films screened at the U.P. Film Institute are selected by the Film Department of the U.P. College of Mass Communication for the purpose of raising film literacy in general and fulfilling all of the course requirements and curricular objectives of the film school in U.P. And for that, it is the faculty of the Film Department that has jurisdiction to choose what films would be screened and how;  the Chair, the Dean, and maybe on policy questions, even the University Council, the highest academic policy making body in U.P. , all as authorized under the U.P. Charter (as amended, Republic Act 9500).  The MTRCB can come and watch the movies but they cannot in any official capacity be made to believe that they can exercise their monitoring function at the U.P. Film Institute any more than they can monitor the lectures and multi-media presentations used inside classrooms in U.P.

 

        I was informed yesterday that the MTRCB (Movie and Television Review and Classification Board) wrote U.P. stating that henceforth they will be “monitoring” films being screened at the U.P. Film Institute and that if they “see” that any movie is “pornographic”, they would file complaints in court. Good. Any person is welcome to educate himself/herself by watching films shown at the U.P. film Institute – films that are also shown in classrooms and film schools as in fact the U.P. College of Mass Communication Film Department administers the activities of the Film Institute.        It is doubtful however whether the MTRCB has jurisdiction to review educational materials, such as films and digital materials, used in U.P. in pursuit of its objectives of providing higher education. In particular, the films screened at the U.P. Film Institute are selected by the Film Department of the U.P. College of Mass Communication for the purpose of raising film literacy in general and fulfilling all of the course requirements and curricular objectives of the film school in U.P. And for that, it is the faculty of the Film Department that has jurisdiction to choose what films would be screened and how;  the Chair, the Dean, and maybe on policy questions, even the University Council, the highest academic policy making body in U.P. , all as authorized under the U.P. Charter (as amended, Republic Act 9500).   The MTRCB can come and watch the movies but they cannot in any official capacity be made to believe that they can exercise their monitoring function at the U.P. Film Institute any more than they can monitor the lectures and multi-media presentations used inside classrooms in U.P.

         Of course, anyone is  free to file a complaint in court, as among the standards, oft-quoted, for what constitutes obscenity are: if the material “appeals purely to the prurient interest” and has no utterly “redeeming social value” or “no literary, scientific, artistic, merit.”

Apparently, the move of the MTRCB stemmed from a columnist’s comment that the Film Institute had become a “haven” for “gay porn”.

Here’s a bit of advice to the MTRCB: 1) Maybe, just maybe, it might be useful, before being pushed by a knee-jerk reaction, to ask the columnist or your “informer” to specify what movie or movies are being referred to as “gay porn”. Because…some of the movies there star Judy Ann Santos; and Boots Anson Roa; and Tommy Abuel; and Anita Linda. It might be big movie news to find out whether these actors have suddenly made a career shift to porn. And second:

2) It might be useful too, to watch the films first before judging them.

Since the “informer” of the MTRCB did not specify which films shown at the Film Institute were gay porn, i looked at the flyers and just concentrated on those that fall under the genre “gay and lesbian films” . As i understand it, this is an entire genre in international film festivals.

Now, one of your standards for judging whether a movie is pornographic or obscene is that it has no utterly redeeming artistic, literary merit or social value. This maybe is  a subjective standard but one could go by watching the film itself;  the next best thing,maybe, is to look at how the film had been adjudged in  international screenings . Here are the films shown at the Film Institute.

Tell me, which one or which ones are gay porn? Are you about to tell me that the MTRCB can tell U.P. what it can and cannot show as educational materials within the University?

1) “Serbis” Centerstage Productions, Swift Productions (France.)Direction: Brillante Mendoza: Official selection for the Palme d’Or – 2008 Festival de Cannes; Winner, best director, best actor for Gina Pareño, Vladivostok International Film Fest of Asian Pacific Countries; Best Southeast Asian Film – 208 Bangkok Int’l FF; Official Selection, 2008 New York Int’l FF

2) “Masahista”. A Gee Entertainment Presentation of a Centerstage Production. Direction: Brillante Mendoza. Grand Prize, Golden Leopard-Video – 2005 Locarno Int’l FF; Winner of Audience Prize – 2006 Torino Int’l Gay and Lesbian Film Fest; Winner of Interfaith Prize – 2006 Brisbane IFF;

3) “Sikil” (“Unspoken Passion”). New Life Cinema. Direction: Ronaldo Bertubin. Official Selection – 2007 Valencia Film Festival/ Cancun IFF; Official Selection 2008 Palm Springs IFF/ 2008 Frameline FF/ 2008 San Diego Asian FF

The other films in the category of “gay and lesbian films”, and their synopses, are: 4)“Quick Trip” – Director’s Cut. “A blue-collar bi-sexual dumped by his gay lover wanders about and ends up hanging out with a new acquaintance he’d wish to be the right guy to heal his wounded heart.” 5) “Lovebirds”. Pro Productions. Direction: Ronaldo Bertubin. “A secretive bachelor turns the lives of his conservative parents upside down as his romantic other-half he found by way of the worldwide web is revealed to be a he.”

Which one or which ones of these have utterly no redeeming social value or utterly no artistic, literary merit? More important, does the MTRCB have jurisdiction to tell U.P. what it can teach and how to go about it?

asikil

 (a promotional still from the movie “”Sikil” as published in the flyers distributed by the U.P. Film Institute, used here for educational and non-commercial purposes.)

 

And finally, here’s a review of one of the movies shown in the category “gay lesbian film” written by columnist Mario Bautista, on the film “Masahista”.

Quote “Digital films take over mainstream movies

 Quote “ FREEHAND By Mario Bautista, People’s Journal

Quote”WINNER OF THE best picture award in the video category of the Locarno International Filmfest, “Masahista” (“The Masseur”) is the directorial debut of former production designer Brilliante Mendoza. After watching it, the first thing that strikes you is that it has a very Filipino sensibility, particularly the scenes involving the wake of the lead character’s father. The Filipino orientation becomes even more pronounced when compared to another digital film, “Mga Pusang Gala,” which has a very Western sensibility.

Quote “The story revolves on Iliac (Coco Martin), a masseur in a gay massage parlor called Maharlika, and his session with a customer who dubs himself as Marina Hidalgo (Allan Paule), who uses this as his pen name in writing romance novels. While Iliac renders service on Allan (this is a very long sequence and the film returns to it repeatedly until film’s end), the film’s narrative also moves on and shows him going home to his family in San Fernando, Pampanga.

Quote “The film’s structure is divided into two specific milieus: inside the sleazy massage parlor and the wake of Iliac’s dad in Pampanga. The director says they did extensive research in Manila’s massage parlors and they discovered that more than one half of its masseurs hail from Pampanga. He himself is from San Fernando so he thought it best to set one-half of the film’s story there.

Quote “The film has many quiet sequences that manage to be very moving, like the juxtaposition of the scene showing Iliac undressing his client while, in the province, he is also shown helping to dress up his late father on the embalming table. All throughout, you’d see that Iliac does not seem to be affected at all by the things he does, like when he allows Allan to enter him and he is just shown seemingly detached while staring at a lizard on the ceiling. This makes his breakdown scene very touching, sobbing uncontrollably as he looks at the things his father left behind, including the shoe sizes of him and his siblings that his dad kept so he can buy them some footwear.

 Quote “The film’s documentary style allows the juxtaposition of explicit sex scenes with the wake and burial scenes in an almost objective but chilling manner. What the film lacks is a major conflict in the story that needs to be resolved. It just shows the life of Iliac in the massage parlor and with his family. He is perfectly aware of his duties to his customers and to his family and fulfills them all without any complaint. The film succeeds in showing what transpires exactly inside a gay massage parlor and demonstrates the depraved things that masseurs and customers do in the confines of their narrow cubicles and we’re glad the MTRCB allowed these scenes to be shown uncut. But no doubt the gay sex scenes are part of the reason why the film was bought by foreign distributors, just like other local films of this kind: “Macho Dancer”, “Burlesk King” and “Midnight Dancers” that are all about sex workers who cater to gay patrons.

Quote “Very little is required of Jaclyn as the mother other than to provide her grieving presence. She has minimal dialogue here. It’s Allan and Coco who have the most important roles and they are both good. We won’t be surprised if Allan would be nominated as best supporting actor for his portrayal of the client who betrays his gay nature through little nuances in his facial expressions and the way he speaks while he is butt naked almost all throughout the movie.

Quote “Coco’s innocent good looks perfectly suits his role as the poor provinciano with a dehumanizing job in Manila. He is very natural even in the way he delivers his lines, like when he tries to persuade Allan to buy him a new pair of rubber shoes.

                Quote “Our heart goes out to him when Allan refuses to pay him the amount they’ve agreed upon after using his body. He reminds us of Leandro Baldemor who’s also chinky-eyed like him. They both have a clean-cut projection on screen, looking like they’re not really suited for bold roles that require them to do lascivious acts. We just hope Coco will not end up like Leandro whose career never progressed beyond doing such sexy roles.

       Quote “”Masahista” is definitely one of the better local films we’ve seen so far this year.

        Quote “Technical credits are above average, particularly the cinematography by Timmy Jimenez and Monchie Redoble that’s surely much better compared to those of other digital films shown this year. Also commendable are the spare but effective musical score by Jerold Tarog and the production design by Benjamin Padero that convincingly recreated the claustrophobic confines of a massage parlor cubicle.

       Quote “Admittedly, the film is also a commentary on the gripping poverty in our country that forces a lot of young people to throw dignity into the wind and go into the oldest profession just to earn a living.

        Quote “We have a feeling that in next year’s awards derby, most of the films that will compete are digital films as we have yet to see a mainstream movie this year that can qualify as best picture. Even in the forthcoming Metro Manila filmfest, most of the entries are fantasy and horror flicks. So, in all probability, “Masahista” and other digital films like “Roomboy,” “Sa North Diversion Road,” “Ilusyon” and “Big Time” will get the most number of nominations.” Closed-quote.

 From http://www.journal.com.ph/news.asp

 

13 thoughts on “(2nd Update) Overriding jurisdictional questions: The censors (MTRCB) to “monitor” U.P. Film Institute screenings.

  1. ang mga ipinalabas sa UPFI nitong mga huling buwan ay talaga namang maaari ng tawaging PORNO!! mga pelikulang nagkukunwaring mga indie film sa layuning maipalabas ng un cut sa UPFI!!

    katulad ng BUTAS, SAGWAN, SHOWBOYS AT BOOKING!! lahat ng ito ay ipinalabas sa loob lamang ng dalawang buwan..

    sa mga pelikulang nabanggit mo(masahista, sikil etc..) , walang mga babad na FULL FRONTAL NUDITY (erect at flaccid state) ng mga male sex organ.. walng eksena na na tsinuts_ _ _ (sinusubo – blog admin) ng isang bakla na talagang kitang kita at naka focus pa ang penis na labas masok sa bibig nung bakla( sa pelikulang sagwan-ang bakla sa movie na may ka sex na dalawang lalake ay ang DIREKTOR mismo NG SAGWAN, SI MONTI PARUNGAO).. sa BOOKING, ISANG MENOR DE EDAD ANG NAGPAKITA NG ERECT NA T_ _ _ (ari ng lalaki – blog admin).. KAILANGN BA ITO SA KUWENTO, HINDI!!

    SA SHOYBOYS AT BUTAS, GANOON DIN!! MGA EKSENANG HUBARAN FULL FRONTAL NUDITY NG MGA LALAKING ERECT AT FLACCID!! AT NAKA FOCUS ANG KAMERA DITO.. HINDI NADAANAN LANG NG KAMERA, KUNDI NAKABABAD ANG KAMERA SA KANILANG JEWELS, BUONG TELON YUN LANG MAKIKITA MO..

    ang mga eksena/pelikumlang bang ito ay makakatulong upang maibangon ang movie industry, sa palagay ko ay hindi!!!

    Like

  2. great post. thank you for coming to our defense. i am one of the filmmakers who have had screenings of my films in the upfi before it was submitted to the mtrcb. i think mario bautista should have read first the provisions on the constitution regarding up and ccp not being under the jurisdiction of mtrcb.

    salamat uli.

    Like

  3. Dear “shugar”: Salamat sa iyong post, paumanhin na tinanggal ko ang ilang letra ng ilang salita na iyong post pagkat may mga bata at menor-de-edad na tumitingin sa blog na ito ( ang mga flyers at reviews na nilabas ay for general patronage, and mga pelikula mismo ay ni-“rate” na “for mature audiences” ng U.P. Film Institute (bawal ang mga bata manood). Ang paksa namang jurisdiction o kapangyarihan ay para sa lahat- marichu

    Like

  4. dear sugar something, paano mo na judge ang isang pelikula bilang porno o hindi…ha actually these are works of art that are prevented by some people to come out because they don’t know what these are……these are realities and these scenes happen in our lives dont they? ano sa yo pala ang di porno yung mga pagpapanggap…….i mean hindi ka well informed kung saan ka maglugar…iyong porno ay scenes which you overreact what is happening….look at the story of the movie and try comprehending it and you will see why there is a need to put nudities there……anong sinasabi mong porno sa erect na penis ng isang lalaki ………its natural it is shown as a way of limitation though…………………….ano ngayon kung isinoshow yan sa u.p….i mean this is not an institution for limitations for liberty for the sake of learning…….try enrolling in sexual politics subjects ha and you will learn to open up your eyes on what is education and reason compared to belief……………..and to quote a certain author….to learn and to be educated …unveil all inhibitions for it is in absolute liberty that things are seen as what they really are…..in the end education can only ba attained fully by covering areas of learning that religion and other beliefs doomed to tackle for it is the reality that one should face……………..kung di mo gusto ang show wag kang magwatch but if you want to learn………..dont imagine what is in the movie that would arouse you know the story and you will know what is art in relation to everyday living……….

    Like

  5. ano bang problema sa porn because it attracts attention? Good or bad yan po ang trabaho ng UPFI to produce better films in the future………….bakit ano ba ang porn na yun di ba yun pelikula the upfi should not meddle tanga lang taga mtrcb para pumunta jan its not in their jurisdiction mga isko at iska pigilan niyo ang mga tang_ _ _ _ _ pumunta jaan!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Like

  6. Dear anonymous,
    Salamat sa sulat; tinanggal ko lang ang ilang letra ng isang salita (maikling anyo ng isang pagmumura na ginamit sa sulat mo) kasi may mga batang nagbabasa ng blog na ito. Regards. -marichu

    Like

  7. shugar– tsk tsk. napakakitid ng utak mo dear.
    1. bakit ka nanood kung hindi mo ma-handle? obvious naman from the flyers pa lang na may nudity at sex ang mga movies na to.
    2. hindi lahat ng may–kahit explicit–sex scenes ay porn.
    3. direktor ka ba? paano mong nasabi na hindi kelangan yung mga close-up sa penis? call nila yun. sa tingin ko (based on the way you talk) na hindi ka qualified na magdecide.
    4. at paano mo naman nasabi na hindi makakatulong ang mga iyon sa Fil film industry? it’s not your call either, lady.
    5. sa tingin ko ay dapat kumuha ka muna ng film appreciation class, para making mas open-minded ka sa mga ganitong bagay.

    Like

  8. Aminin natin, may ilang gumagamit ng label na “indie” para magmukhang “artistic”, “alternatibo”, “seryoso”, at “matapang” ang kanilang pelikula (in terms of subject matter, production, treatment, etc), pero ang totoo ay mga basurang winisikan lang ng pabangong dala ng indie.

    Nakakangitngit ang mga screenplay ng mga manunulat na nagpupumilit na maging poetic at walang idea sa ibig sabihin ng “show don’t tell” (hal., “Ang Lihim ni Antonio”). Nakaka-high blood ang mga mala-kahoy na akting (hal., “Ang Lalaki sa Parola”). Nakakatawa ang pagpapanggap ng ilang pelikula na maging socially relevant at artisitc (“Hoy, artistic at may social relevance ang pelikula ko. Pansinin mo naman”). Ang iba’y ini-exploit (ini-exoticize) ang danas ng kabaklaan para bumenta ang pelikula (na taliwas sa isinusulong ng kilusang indie).

    Pero di ako sang-ayon na manghimasok ang MTRCB at i-monitor ang mga pelikulang ipinalalabas sa UPFI. Katangahan ‘yun. Problema ko ang mga chakang pelikula, pero mas problema ko ang sensura.

    Like

  9. works of art? utang na loob!! wag na tayong magbulag bulagan sa pagsasabi na ang mga pelikulang ipinalabas sa UPFI nitong mga huling buwan eh mga tunay na gawa ng sining!! gumawa sila ng mga soft porno, ok fine!! wag lang gamitin at ipangalandakan na ito ay isang indie film! dahil alam ko na alam nyo na hindi.. ginagamit lamang at nililihis ng mga taong ito ang usapin tungkol sa matino at di matinong pelikula! ang showboys ba o sagwan ay isang gawa ng sining! maaari, lalo na sa taong gumawa ng basurang ito, pero ako bilang isang lehitimo at masugid na tagasubaybay ng pelikulang pilipino, buong tapang at hindi ako magdadalawang isip na sabihin na ang mga “indie film” na ito daw ay walang kalatoy latoy, pangit, hindi makakatulong upang maibangon ang naghihingalong industriya ng pelikulang pelipino!

    Like

  10. parang ano lang yan, art or pornography?

    ginawa lang na educational or pornography?

    sa art stud class namin, minsan ang isang art form whatever its social contexts may mean e nawawala when it is viewed as art for art’s sake. Pag tinignan mo daw ang isang artwork, alisin mo cultural orientation mo, beliefs and tradition. Pero, sa panonood ba ng ganitong mga pelikula, masasabi mo ba na it is only a film for education’s sake e kung ang nakahalo dito ay could heighten the viewer’s senses into such degree? Pwede mo bang alisin ang human nature? Whatever the intentions of the film maker maybe, may it be purely for educational purposes or the film he/she mades could contribute in learning higher film literacy, e di naman ganun ang dating lagi sa viewers. it could be interpreted in a different way.

    maybe ang kontesta naman ng up people is that manghihimasok ang MTRCB at isscreen lahat ng films dun.

    Well if its going out of control… Or if it is still going on…

    I know UP is an institute of higher learning, of the best academic and nationalistic intelligence. It is also a liberal community of learners. But does liberalism + knowledge gives you the right to violate or not to practice morality?

    I am a UP student, and I am not pro government/gloria/mtrcb. pero kung mali’t sa mali lang naman…
    dapat din tayong magpasaway kung alam natin mali tayo..

    in one point, naiintindihan ko din yung MASSCOMM students concerning UPFI..
    pero isa din kasing nagfifeed sa films dito, lalo na yung mga may porn like scenes ay yung mga __
    majority yun…

    hayyy…. tao talaga oh…..

    [malamang maraming magcocomment dito. ngayon lang ako nagcomment ng ganito ever. masaya pa la. ciao.]

    Like

  11. ah gets. Yung censorship pala in general ang problem ng taga masscomm. Well, oo, against ako sa censorship concerning all other issues except to pornography.

    well sana yung censorship na yun e para lang sa pornographic content ng film. Pero the rest, like reflecting the realities in our country… ayun dapat di finifilter yun…

    Like

If the comment posted does not appear here, that's because COMMENTS WITH SEVERAL HYPERLINKS ARE DETAINED BY AKISMET AT THE SPAM FOLDER.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.