Author:
relevant news on line
| [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 07:46:23 03/18/06 Sat
Author Host/IP: 58.69.251.215
Are Filipinos ready for gay flicks?
By Deni Rose M. Afinidad
IS the Philippine cinema coming out of the closet?
This seems to be the case as gays gradually advance in movie
portrayals—from being punching bags in slapstick comedies or
secondary agents of comic relief—to becoming sophisticated
protagonists that scuffle with serious situations and dilemmas.
Not only that gays are taken into higher ground through mirroring
their lives and ideals in the lead role. Homosexuals are given
emphasis because the characters that depict them in films such as
Brokeback Mountain and Ang Pagdadalaga ni Maximo Oliveros were
performed by “straight,” if not established, actors. Does this mean
that more and more actors are breaking free from machismo to pave
way for acting flexibility or professional maturity?
If yes, then versatility must be an effective psychological
conditioning mechanism, or should we say, a “bitter pill,”
that “straight” actors swallow to set aside their disgust for making
out or making love with a similarly “straight” male co-star.
This is what Jake Gyllenhaal and Heath Ledger of Brokeback Mountain
reasoned out in an interview with Oprah. With the Golden Globe or
the Oscars on focus, these actors temporarily blurred their vision
for masculinity, and even shut their eyes close as they do what the
scenes “ask for”—even if this entailed 13 takes of torrid smooching.
Before them, actors Brad Pitt and Colin Farrell have taken
subliminal gay roles. Achilles, Pitt’s character in Troy, avenges
his slain “best friend/lover” Patroclus, while Farrell, playing the
hero in the movie Alexander, ended his conquests with the death of
childhood “comrade/sweetheart,” Hephaestion. But since Pitt and
Farrell’s movies are grounded on historical and not on homosexual
subject matter, the two were spared from doubts on their sexuality.
These films that Pitt and Farrell starred in also traces their
grassroots to Ancient Greece; and Greeks that time, according to
philosopher Michel Foucault and other historians, do not have a
concept of homosexuality. For them, a “complete” man engages in
bisexual relationships; and the more their male paramours are,
the “richer” and more powerful men seemed.
Nevertheless, homosexuality and sodomy did not escape criticism
since the Ancient Greeks’ era. Philosophers such as Socrates,
Aristotle, and the later Plato have condemned these “malpractice,”
as most moralists do today. In fact, Brokeback Mountain, despite
having a Chinese, Ang Lee, as its director, is banned in Communist
China and in Chinese communities in the Philippines.
Henry Sy, a Filipino of Chinese origin and a member of the Catholic
group Couples’ for Christ, has banned the movie in his SM cinemas as
well. But why didn’t he forbid the locally produced indie Ang
Pagdadalaga ni Maximo Oliveros in his cineplexes? The reason is that
though Maximo is anchored on a gay theme, there are no man-to-man
couplings in the movie as opposed to Brokeback. Maximo only deals
with same-sex infatuation, with no hardcore details that can make
conservatives run wild.
Despite censures from the private sector, Brokeback and Maximo
received high commendation in most media entities in our country.
This is astonishing since the media in the late ‘90s was not as
liberal when Leonardo DiCaprio had a kissing escapade with a co-
actor in the film Total Eclipse (1995), almost at the same time
Titanic had turned him into an international star.
Fortunately, Gylenhaal, Ledger, and Maximo’s Nathan Lopez did not
have to undergo such kind of bashing when it comes to their sexual
orientation. The harshest treatment they got aside from being banned
in several movie houses is to get a PG-13 (for Maximo) an R-18 (for
Brokeback) from the Movie and Television Review and Classification
Board, which is still favorable since this opened an opportunity for
them to go mainstream unlike other gay films that have been confined
to special screenings like the Pink Film Festival.
With the warm appreciation that Maximo and Brokeback received from
Filipino audiences, it could only mean that Filipinos are ready for
gay films.
Even before Pitt declared open season for producers to offer him gay
roles, local actors or at least some of them have already embraced
the idea.
Dennis Trillo, Ricky Davao, Christian Vasquez, Luis Alandy, and Eric
Quizon are “straight” or at least that’s what they claim. However,
they dodged the threat that could be typecast in gender-bender
roles. These actors do not seem to care. Davao and Quizon continue
to do countless portrayals of the “third” kind.
Vasquez and Alandy, on the other hand, were successful in boosting
their hunk image to cover up the lip lock they made in the play,
Penis Talks. Trillo, for his part, even managed a double actors
award—best supporting actor award and best actor after fitting in
the shoes of a transvestite who fell in love with Jay Manalo’s
character in Aishite Imasu 1941.
But for how long can actors and directors continue to feed their
audience with gay flicks?
Maybe, for as long as they can disguise their homosexual themes in
good screenplay, with strong presentation of conflict and social
relevance, and under the guiding hand of reputable directors such as
Brokeback’s Lee and Lino Brocka of Macho Dancers.
This, on the other hand, brings into question of whose interest is
presented in the film—that of the society or of the movies’ gay
directors? Are not the judges of award-giving bodies who granted
distinctions to these films gays as well?
Perhaps, too, directors can run away with their dream gay production
as long as they can handle the Herculean task of convincing film
producers such as Regal’s Mother Lily Monteverde and Star Cinema’s
Charo Santos—the remaining producers we now have who are disinclined
to gay movies because of their Catholic and pro-family bearing, as
seen in their respective movies Mano Po and Tanging Yaman.
Independent films are alternative outlets, perhaps, but since most
indie movies hardly have the budget for marketing and bringing gay
flicks into the mainstream, they would remain anonymous unless
foreign producers buy them.
Generally speaking, there is no doubt that our local film talents
and directors are ever ready for gay movies. Nonetheless, their
works would remain obscure among Filipino audiences and producers
who value the natural heritage of heterosexual relationships. For
these watchers and film financiers, it’s a definite “NO” to
homosexual teen love teams.
If ever that gay films were given applause and tolerance by
spectators, it is because these movies are novelty; they are
offshoots of an experimentation in cinema that invigorates the
interest of audiences hungry for visual delight. As long as these
motion pictures do not “idealize” homosexual unions or contain
graphic features, they can enjoy reaping the rewards of
experimentation.
But of course, everything has a tipping point. Mainstreaming gay
flicks would make such movies lose their magnetic power; once they
overcrowd the cineplexes, people would start to become saturated.
This is the reason why such films are better shelved for special
screenings; the enigma of homosexuality would retain its freshness
if remained kept inside the closet.
http://www.manilastandardtoday.com/?page=goodLife02_mar18_2006
rv_thebirdnest · Regine Velasquez Fans Bird Nest Group!
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] |
Feedback: 