El
Presidente rises (and falls)
by rick olivares
This is a case of art imitating life.
Emilio Aguinaldo could very well be
the father of the republic yet the film, like its subject, rises and doesn’t
reach the summit.
I went to see El Presidente on the
last day of the old year filled with equal parts excitement and trepidation. I
have always been a fan of period pieces so I wasn’t going to miss this.
I have to admit that I do not really
watch local films but being a history buff myself and one with a fascination
for the revolutionary wars, I had to see this film so that’s the part about my excitement.
The trepidation part is because I
hoped that they would get it right and not fall into what I think are the
pitfalls of Philippine cinema – a tendency for the actors to overact and to do
so much.
After watching the film, I can say
that my fears were well founded as El Presidente has its hits but also has its
misses.
The movie begins with Emilio
Aguinaldo’s capture by the American forces in Palanan, Isabela. And from there
the film unfolds in a series of flashbacks.
The film started out with the feel of
Edward Zick’s ‘Glory’ the depiction of Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry
regiment during the US Civil War (love the color grading to give it the feel of
a historical documentary film). Like ‘Glory’, ‘El Presidente’ features sweeping
battlefield scenes and great attention to detail. However, ‘El Presidente’
would have been better served had it gone the route of ‘Glory’ where there was
a less tendency to over-aggrandize the action.
I dislike the standoff part during
Aguinaldo’s capture where he and one of the Macabebe scouts point a gun at one
another ala some Jackie Chan/Jet Li movie. It’s a period piece let’s not have
nods towards modern day action films or Hollywood-ized versions of Thermopylae.
There’s a part where Aguinaldo, sword
in hand, cuts down several soldiers as if he were Leonidas in Frank Miller’s
and Zack Snyder’s 300. And then there’s the Chan/Li action standoff. Uh. No. It
doesn’t work.
In the film, Aguinaldo’s messenger
Cecilio Segismundo was caught on a mission to send out a letter for
reinforcements. Segismundo brings along his son who is ill and in an act of
desperation, steals medicines from an American encampment and is caught. Let me
digress for a moment, would any army general (Aguinaldo) send out his messenger
with his son knowing there are American soldiers and spies everywhere?
Back to the film, this is where the
story diverges. Aguinaldo, in his memoirs, claim that Segismundo was tortured
and thus gave up his whereabouts.
The Americans claim otherwise and
Segismundo gave them up willingly as he was war weary. Prior to Funston’s
daring raid Segismundo surrendered to him in Nueva Ecija. Personally, I tend to
believe the latter as Segismundo took part in the raid that captured Aguinaldo.
Even former officer, Tal Placido, who knew Aguinaldo personally was a part of
the raiding party. For me that meant that they had turned. They only had five
American soldiers with them and all – including Funston – were officers. There
were over 70 Macabebe scouts in the party and I do not believe for one minute
that they were not doing this of their own volition as could have very well
just sent Funston and his fellow officers to their deaths or turned them over
to Aguinaldo. They turned plain and simple maybe believing the they were just
delaying the inevitable – the fall of Aguinaldo’s shadowy cabinet and
government in hiding.
The capture of Aguinaldo did not
involve much action. After receiving Placido and other Macabebe officers, there
was some shooting outside. There was nothing about some officer not being able
to speak Spanish or some sort. Aguinaldo thought it was more of a salute until
he had the guns pointed at him. Two of his guards were killed with one officer
severely injured. As for Aguinaldo, upon the prodding of Felipe Buencamino, he
surrendered.
I felt bad watching the creative
license taken where Aguinaldo shot and killed a few of the raiding party.
As for the deaths of Andres Bonifacio
and Antonio Luna, I’ll skip the part where they’re supposed to have engaged in
certain atrocities the movie claims. On the other hand, the film ‘exonerates’
Aguinaldo of the culpability in their murders showing that it was his generals
who prodded him to sign the order of their execution or whatever.
Remember, one reason why Aguinaldo was
elected president was because of his string of victories in Cavite while
Bonifacio’s troops oft lost. Now what I find lacking in the film is how it was
not mentioned that with the loss of Luna, the Philippine Army disintegrated as
Aguinaldo himself lost a series of battles before he decided to wage guerilla
warfare. Even the Americans acknowledged that Luna was the lone genius in the
Philippine Army.
It is the same with Gregorio del
Pilar’s death up in lonely Tirad Pass. His loss hurt Aguinaldo and was a blow
to the morale of the remaining Philippine units. This is not even portrayed or
even mentioned.
The flight of Aguinaldo in the film
should have taken on a more urgent tone. He was dogged by the Americans every
step of the way hence the rear guard action by Del Pilar’s troops. Aguinaldo’s
flight was a big thing for both the Filipinos and Americans. It was even widely
reported in the American press about El Presidente’s capture.
I guess that’s the problem with trying
to do so much in so little a time. Even with a long film it will still work.
Aguinaldo’s life can be divided into
three parts --- the war against Spain, the war against the Americans and his
retired life. The film, in my opinion, should have just featured the first two
with the last part being mentioned on text ala the end of ‘Glory’ following the
tragic end of the 54th.
And so there were parts that were
totally unnecessary such as the Inang Bayan scenes (that could have worked but
looked silly in the end as Aguinaldo lay in his death bed) as well as inclusion
of Nora Aunor in the film as his second wife who really does nothing for the film
but lovey dovey eyes for Aguinaldo. It comes across as using star power to
attract moviegoers to this film.
The same too with Cesar Montano who I
like as an actor but he is miscast as Bonifacio. Montano looks far too good looking
and eloquent for Bonifacio who wasn’t exactly educated.
Baron Geisler reprises his role in
‘Baler’, another Meily period piece where he gives the epic stand of a Spanish
garrison inside the church the James Cameron Titanic treatment (a real event
against the backdrop of a love story), as a Spanish officer albeit a more
brutal one. There is no difference. You can insert Geisler’s on-the-edge Capt.
Enrique de las Morenas in ‘Baler’ with his brutal officer’s role in ‘El
Presidente’. Will we see a third? Maybe Geisler would have done well to watch
sociopathic Jason Isaacs in the role of Col. Tavington in the wretched period
piece ‘The Patriot’ (starring Mel Gibson). But then again, had Geisler done so,
he might have stolen the spotlight from Jeorge ‘ER’ Estregan’s portrayal of
Aguinaldo that are at times stirring and convincing.
The nascent Philippine Army during the
Cavite uprising was woefully ill equipped and Aguinaldo’s leadership and
derring-do was crucial at this time as they held off the Spanish Army. Estregan
does this well with his regal presence in the film.
And oh, I love the battle scenes. Short
though they were.
‘El Presidente’ maybe should have
started with the restoration of the actual date of Philippine independence
rather than his capture by Funston because in the last 15 minutes or so, the
film begins to drag as we go through a collage of his life from his retirement
to his failed run at the Philippine presidency to his eventual last hours.
Maybe even it should have started out
from the Philippine Centennial with all the events that were done at his home
in Kawit, Cavite.
I know that Mark Meily tried to be as
accurate as possible with his depiction of Aguinaldo and the events surrounding
him. And thus, I salute his attempts to rekindle an interest in Philippine
history that is rich and a largely unexplored goldmine because of this
fascination with unrequited love stories in Philippine cinema. But the faults
kept me from thoroughly enjoying the film. Of course, I understand creative
license.
Nevertheless this is a step up from
the usual Pinoy cinema fare. I salute the film as it does make bold statements
and the production is good even with its misses. Maybe the third (period piece
in what is looking like a colonial history trilogy by Meily) time will be the
charm.
No comments:
Post a Comment