Philippine Cinema After Martial Law

Films in the Philippines after martial law took on a new turn as the country searched for its identity in light of its new-found “freedom.” To understand film during this period, we look into the 1989 Lino Brocka work Orapronobis (Pray for Us). The intention is to situate this film within the post-Marcos dictatorship discourse and relate the film’s content to the present political situation.
It is imperative for us to look into the political arena, especially in this period, for the films after Marcos’ dictatorship can reveal much about the relations of production and consumption of the form as they are (the films) direct products of the lifting of PD 1081 and the consequent curtailment of freedom that the artists experienced during that time. In essence, this period promised a widening of parameters as to what films may contain. How the filmmakers responded to it and explored these parameters would sure be interesting to identify.

Orapronobis

Lino Brocka was commissioned by foreign producers to make Orapronobis (1989) for the Cannes Film Festival. This, of course, gave international stature for Brocka as a director and is a clear indication of the international thrust that the film industry was geared towards during this period (and up to today). This attempt is situated inside the globalization discourse of borderlessness. This may be (I’m not too sure) the first time that Filipino filmmakers went out to actively search for support and recognition from international community. The film industry, much like any other industry in the Philippines, is too dependent of foreign funding and recognition. This becomes a problem when a cultural product as potent as film depends its production and judgment in the hands of the west. As it is situated in those terms, so shall the product be in those terms.

However, Brocka’s Orapronobis is a cutting-edge take on a Filipino experience. It exposes the human rights issues of the post-Marcos era in an ironic turn of events as the country is supposed to have been “liberated” from oppression. The main importance of this film is the recognition that the EDSA revolution of 1986 was a shift not from a bad political situation to a good one, but a turn of leadership from one representative of the ruling class to another.

The film is also characterized by the intelligent use of appeal to emotions that lends a hand to the demonization of the anti-communist discourse. The attempt at realism and details is superb and helps in the appreciation of the underground movement’s importance in the resolution of human rights issues and how the military can play the vicious villain.

The universality of the human rights issues discussed by the film may be intentional as the film is geared towards a global eye. It is strategic, in this sense, for the film’s local take on a historical perspective and the ambivalent global appeal pins down the film’s acceptance and celebration.