Thursday, November 24, 2005

Replacing old cinema with the new (3)

One big X-factor: How many filmmakers are going into this kind of work and making a living out of it?

I don’t have exact figures, but I will bet my squirrel’s hoard of streetware VCDs that there are a bigger number of them doing video projects now than conventional movies on film.

The number is sure to increase year by year, not only because the costs are generally going down, but also because demand is going up.
###
Small-scale video outfits are all around us more than we realize. Just stroll through a major city’s university belt area, and count the number of shops offering digital video services. It should give us an idea of how large the technical base is for this new medium.

The “DV geeks” only need to team up with local culturati who are not intimidated by digital video technology and are brimming with good ideas and story lines.

Fortunately, the world of NGO-PO’s, media-cultural circles and academic institutions are teeming with such groups and initiatives. Their annual output is increasing by leaps and bounds. They have common problems of funding, packaging, quality control, distribution and marketing, but such problems are not insurmountable.

Even as I write this, UP Baguio is holding Arubayan ni Oble - an Amateur Video Film Festival by BC130 students (“the first-ever,” according to the brochure), featuring 25-minute narratives with such delicious titles as Aniniwan, Payong, Kalso, Litany, Lakad, Banyo Thoughts, Taghoy sa Dilim, Talingkas, Montiniosa, and Fedrang Falad. Like I said, I’m no movie buff, but I will gladly shell out my lunch money to view one or two of the festival choices.
###
Is it hard to learn videography (the new term that means film-making in the era of digital video)? Not really.

As in other new media like wireless and the Web, some people who have mastered the medium might at first tend to monopolize their knowhow and mystify the technology with mouthfuls of mumbo-jumbo. But, in the long run, skills will diffuse quickly and widely, like using cellphones, among a wider public who have access to the technology.

The biggest X-factor, however, remains that of content: Where are the filmmakers - the writers, directors, photographers, sound engineers, editors, actors, musicians - who will shape the materials of this new cinematic vehicle, not just by mastering the medium and indulging their egos for self-expression, but more importantly, by ensuring that it contains relevant social messages that the broad public will support?

And who will create those messages?

Will it be another generation of profit-oriented media capitalists who will of course glorify the capitalist lifestyle while catering to our most decadent fantasies? Let’s hope not.

Let’s hope that they will be, for the first time in our history, ordinary folk with cheap cameras and computers, helped by grassroots cultural and media activists. These are people who don’t want to merely make money, but rather to turn common lives into powerful social images, and maybe, in the process, help conscientize and overhaul society.

Dare we hope for a new cinema? Abangan sa susunod na kabanata. #

Northern Dispatch Weekly, Sept. 12, 2004

Replacing old cinema with the new (2)

In the meantime, a new type of cinema is evolving based on digital technologies. The factors shaping this new creature remain in flux. But just consider the possibilities:

Today, you can buy a Digital-8 or Mini-DV video camera and basic accessories for less than P50,000. There is even an excellent-quality Digital-8 handycam priced at P22,000. The quality is not as good as 35-mm or 16-mm films shown in most moviehouses. But it is good enough for CD players and TV broadcasts, even if some professional videographers tend to belittle this cheap CCD camera since it doesn’t pass muster as “broadcast quality”. A good quality Digital-8 blank tape now costs only P105, a Mini-DV tape a bit more.

You can save and edit your video footage on an ordinary PC platform, so long as you install a Firewire-compatible video I/O card, a large-capacity hard disk, and any of the more well-known editing software such as Adobe Premiere or Ulead MediaStudio, or Final Cut.

(It’s a dream come true if you are lucky to use a Mac G4. But it’s not an absolute must. In the mid-1990’s, I worked with a group that edited analog video footage, using what would now be considered as semi-obsolete junk: a Pentium II PC with a Miro card, 64 mb RAM and a 2-gigabyte SCSI hard disk. We sometimes experienced a few dropped frames, but no complaints otherwise.)

Based on current Manila prices, you can buy a basic PC platform at about P30,000, and for another P30,000 install all the other add-on hardware and software needed for a complete video and audio editing and CD-copying equipment.

In short, for less than P100,000, and after a patient canvass of ordinary computer and camera stores, you can acquire the basic equipment to produce all kinds of digital video - from 1-minute spiels and 5-minute MTV and videoke pieces to full-length, 60-minute features.
###
Your next concern would be the actual production. To simplify things, let us assume that your first project is not the kind of film that requires a cast of actors, but a plain 60-minute documentary or thinly-fictionalized account of real people’s lives - perhaps a true-to-life story that you are already familiar with.

If so, you need not spend a fortune on cast and crew, elaborate sets, and travel to exotic locations. You could just form a group of two or three, and distribute among yourselves and other interested volunteers the work of research, script-writing, directing, actual camera work, dubbing and editing.

I won’t go into details, and each project will widely vary, but let’s estimate that your first full-length project will require 30 days’ work (from writing the script to final edited master copy) and cost you P25,000. If you are dedicated, skilled and resourceful, a whole month and P25,000 should be more than enough.
###
Finally, you will need about P60,000 to mass-produce and package 2,000 copies of your obra maestra in VCD format. You can estimate marketing costs yourselves, but it should not exceed P10,000.

Suppose you sell all 2,000 copies at P50 per. If so, you might not exactly become the next Mother Lily of indie film, but you have just proven the potentials for a sustainable and socially significant business.

You can find ways of including ads in your VCD, or broadcasting it on TV, or producing a DVD version, to maximize income. On the side, you might want to do weddings, graduations, birthdays, funerals, MTV’s, videokes and commercials to ease your cash flow. Don’t laugh! You’d be surprised at how much some people are willing to pay for a personalized 30-minute video package.

With enough bravado, you could even invest in an LCD projector so that you can conduct video showings in schools, offices, and communities to help promote and distribute your work and those of others. #

From Northern Dispatch Weekly, Sept. 5, 2004

Replacing old cinema with the new (1)

I have an idea: why don’t we just abandon the Philippine film industry, as it exists now, and grow something else more vibrant in its stead? Something that’s been sprouting from the mudholes and gutters of the desolate Philippine cultural landscape anyway?

I’m not exactly an avid movie buff. But on my way to Manila and back the next day, with nothing else to do on the road but read two newspapers and watch the onboard video, I realized that the local film industry is being choked to death by forces beyond its control. Scrutinize the newspapers’ movie skeds, take stock of what video stores sell, and you’ll realize the same thing.

According to an article by Jude O. Marfil in the Aug. 25, 2004 issue of Manila Standard, the number of locally produced films steadily dropped from 164 in 1996 to 80 films in 2003. Film industry leader Esperidion Laxa said the industry may not exceed 60 films this year.

Yes, some films still enjoy top-grosser box office success, such as those shown during the Metro Manila Film Festival, but they are too few and far in-between to turn the tide.
###
As I read the Manila Standard article, the reasons for the local film industry’s impending collapse clicked into place.

First, local films are being swamped by foreign films, which are coming in like crazy due to the liberalized import policies imposed by GATT-WTO. Local films cannot compete based on the Western standards and expectations, which are set by Hollywood and ingrained among wider sections of the local audience.

Second, film production costs have shot sky-high, now ranging from P5 million to P20 million per full-length movie. This is not to include very costly digital effects (estimated at P2 million per minute), which some producers consider as de rigeur if local films were to compete with Hollywood.

And third, the industry is burdened by exorbitant taxes. Supposing that the cost of a theater ticket is P50. About P24 or P25 of that are divided between theater owners and producers. The rest goes to taxes: a 30% amusement tax, a 35% corporate income tax, miscellaneous VAT’s, a 5% withholding tax, and an MTRCB fee of P8,500 per film.

The amusement tax (which goes to local governments) is particularly onerous, considering that it is the highest among Asian countries. In comparison, Japan charges only 5%, Taiwan 7.62%, South Korea 6.5%, and Singapore 3%; Hong Kong and Thailand do not charge amusement taxes at all.
###
The article implied without stating at least two more reasons for the malaise of Filipino cinema. So I’ll include them here:

First, the worsening economic crisis is forcing local moviegoers to change their habits. A big percentage of them no longer go to the movies as frequently as before, but content themselves with daily TV fare. Those who can afford rent or buy VCDs, now available on the streets at varying qualities, and at prices less than that of a movie ticket.

In this regard, the local film industry has failed to adapt to the digital revolution. Nowadays, a high-school kid using a PC with a CD-RW drive could recopy a VCD in less than 20 minutes, at the cost of P15 or less. In short, digital video is changing the basic rules of the game.

The industry should have viewed the CD pirates as its allies in redefining the economics of film-making and distribution. But instead, it unleashed the likes of Bong Revilla, Edu Manzano, and the CD-crushing bulldozers of MTRCB. The CD pirates’ operations simply became more sophisticated.

Second (and this is the hardest lesson for movie folk to swallow): The local film industry has long thrived on a defective structure, which employed highly-priced stars and formula stories (read: crap) to ensure box-office success. Those days are gone.

Now that TV networks can offer more glitz with the help of big advertisers, local film producers are left with few options, such as churning out fantasy films for the annual MMFF or sleazy sex films for provincial runs.

In short, the Filipino film industry is being killed by our flawed economy and its own internal defects. # (Next week: Evolving the new cinema)

From Northern Dispatch Weekly, Aug. 29, 2004

Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Romancing the sword (4)

I hope that you, most patient readers, have followed me thus far. Maybe you sense what I’m trying to say but can’t pin it down. Some might suspect that this is merely a nostalgia trip that meanders from one hazy idea to the next. So let me try and summarize the whole thing in one short paragraph:

War is too important to society to be left only to the professional soldiery. It must be the serious and routine business of the whole citizenry. Let us learn from our rich military legacy, not just through films and books, but by preserving and using what is still of practical use.

###

To be sure, the country has a citizens military training program. Our high school military training (then PMT, now CMT), for example, required junior and senior male students to drill on Saturdays. Did that make us capable citizen-soldiers? You bet it didn’t.

We merely trained with mock Springfield bolt-action rifles (of World War I vintage – in the era of M16s and AK47s)! We were taught parade drill basics, like the ABC’s of carrying arms – you know, Kanang balikat, ‘Ta! Handa, ‘Ta! Parangal, ‘Ta! Baba, ‘Ta! – as if those skills were more helpful for a young citizen-soldier than learning how to load, aim and fire a rifle properly.

###

When I joined the cadet officer candidates corps (COCC), I half-expected to learn a bit about real weapons and tactics. Instead, we spent hours drilling with airy goose steps, fancy rifle routines, tiger looks and snappy salutes. As cadet officer-wannabes, we also brandished chrome-plated sabers bought cheap from a military supply store.

“Oh, I’m sure you loved to twirl your saber, huh, while you strutted on the parade grounds. And in front of the adoring girls too!” Kabsat Kandu ribbed me with his double-edged, hinalong-sharp wit.

Being popular with girls was a big incentive, I admit. Only, I didn’t get to reap the benefits since they dropped me near the end for joining an anti-Marcos protest and boycotting the Cadets’ Ball.

###

To be honest, I liked the rigorous training that improved our postures and stamina through plenty of push-ups, squats, and double-time marches around the campus. But I didn’t learn anything that could be of good use in a real war situation.

Most of my classmates felt that our play-soldiering was a waste of time. Campus protests demanded to scrap PMT or replace it with more useful activities. I was reluctant to drop out, but looking back, it was inevitable.

I learned more about first aid and jungle survival in three years of Scouting, than in my entire high school PMT plus a short stint with the UP ROTC. The few arnis routines taught by an uncle gave me a better sense of hand-to-hand combat than the fancy sword moves displayed by cadet officers.

###

If the CMT and ROTC authorities would not allow us to even hold real guns, they should at least train us in martial arts and survival skills, which goes back deep into our nation’s past.

In an Internet interview, Cass Magda, a California-based martial arts teacher and researcher, said he considers Filipino martial arts a most valuable self-defense system. “It is a weapon-based system that evolved uniquely because of the resistance to the Spanish occupation of the Philippines for nearly 400 years.”

It is said that kali, our ancestors’ comprehensive martial arts, was taught to all boys as a course with 12 subjects: olisi (single or double stick, sword, axe), olisi-baraw (long and short sticks, sword and dagger), baraw-baraw (double short sticks, daggers), baraw-kamot (dagger and empty hands), kamot-kamot or pangamut (empty hands), panuntukan (native boxing, which includes the use of elbows), panadiakan or sikaran (kicking, including kneeing and use of the shin), dumog or layug (grappling, wrestling), olisi dalawang kamot (two-handed stick style), sibat or bangkaw (use of spear, staff), tapon-tapon (use of hand-thrown darts and projectiles), and lipad-lipad (use of blowguns, bow and arrow).

Later, Magda says, “elements of Spanish swordsmanship were absorbed and modified to fit [our ancestors’] needs for effective countering attacks and used reciprocally against the Spanish and European invaders.”

###

Magda notes: “Other martial arts have forms that look pretty but Filipino martial arts have the understanding of how the weapon structure of combat really works. Once the principles of this structure are understood then anything can fit into the structure.”

“You see, the Philippines was a blade culture. In ancient times everyone carried a blade, by the time you were 14 years old you could be wearing a sword. It meant that you were now respected as an adult in the society. You were capable of preserving or taking a life. You had a great responsibility as a preserver and protector of the society. You became the servant of the people of your tribe.”

###

Historians are agreed that our ancestors had a mastery of weapons and warfare skills, and a deeply-rooted tradition of combat heroism and mass mobilization. This military capacity could have equalled those of foreign invaders, had we been more politically united.

It wasn’t any superiority of Spanish swords and cannons that conquered most non-Moro areas of the country, but the successful use of “divide-and-rule” tactics combined with Christian missionary zeal. It wasn’t Krag and Gatling guns that finally defeated the Filipino Revolutionary Army, but the warring and wavering factions that wore down its political-military leadership and worked in the US’s favor.

###

Sifting through Philippine history textbooks, I am frustrated not to find a well-documented answer to a simple question: What happened to the native weapons of our people after they were subdued by the Spanish colonizers?

There are scattered reports about the conquistadors collecting spears, axes and swords from dead and captured warriors. Were these weapons destroyed, perhaps remelted into musket and cannon barrels and ship fittings? We don’t know exactly.

Repeatedly, though, we read about expeditions into pagan territories launched by handfuls of Spanish troops armed with muskets, lances and artillery, and accompanied by hundreds of “native allies” armed with the usual spears, swords and axes.

###

So my guess is that the confiscated arms simply changed hands. The colonizers could not quickly impose a general ban on indigenous weapons – at least during the first two centuries of conquest. While Spain’s control over the major islands remained tenuous, it had to rely on the military strength of “friendly and pacified tribes” led by their respective warrior-datus to augment the small number of its own troops.

In such an environment, even after subjugation, our ancestors would have retained and developed their combat skills, formations, tactics, and training methods.

This is a modest layman’s theory that has to be validated by historical research.

###

I speculate a change of Spanish military policy after the British invasion (1762-64), the subsequent, near-simultaneous revolts in wide areas of Luzon (e.g. the Palaris, Silang, and Cagayan uprisings), which also saw the height of the Dagohoy revolt and Moro wars. The colonial regime suppressed the armed groups under the native principalia, cracked down on native weaponry, and relied on direct native recruitment into the colonial infantry and later into the guardia civil.

This would have driven indigenous martial practices underground or into the unpacified territories.

###

In colonized territories, the prohibition gave rise to ostensively harmless activities that the Spanish authorities allowed or even encouraged. For example, in the popular practice of moro-moro and sinulog, our forefathers preserved at least the most basic martial skills using mock swords and spears, in the guise of perfecting theatrical or ritualized plays.

Others, not content with theatrics and rituals, practiced real combat skills secretly in nearby caves and mountain lairs, using real kalis and kampilan (which were banned), as well as shorter utility blades such as badang, itak, or bolo (which were allowed as all-purpose tools) and sword-length rattan sticks.

Later on, towards the end of Spanish rule, the various efforts to preserve indigenous martial arts in covert and overt forms gave rise to more sporty, Spanish-influenced martial arts such as arnis de mano (from “harness of hand”), eskrima (from “fencing” or “skirmish”), and baston (from “cane”).

Thus, our native combat skills continued to evolve from father to son, from master to apprentice, from one generation to the next.

###

Although the new American colonial authorities must have frowned on combative forms of kali and arnis, it is said that other forms limited to sticks and empty hands went mainstream in the 1910s after the remaining pockets of anti-US armed resistance were wiped out.

The various regional forms began to blend by the 1920s and 1930s, as landless Luzon and Visayas farmers resettled in Mindanao, and even spread overseas as Filipino migrant workers trooped to farms and canneries in California and Hawaii.

But we are getting much ahead of our story.

###

In the wide uncolonized areas of Mindanao and the Cordillera, the old warrior traditions continued in full, despite (or probably because of) repeated Spanish punitive expeditions.

Unlike many Native American tribes who became expert horseback gunfighters, the Moro and Igorot resistance fighters continued to rely on indigenous arms even during the 19th century, when the rifle was already a common weapon that they could have seized in battle or bought from gunrunners.

They too were eventually marginalized. US imperialist troops, after defeating the main Filipino revolutionary forces at the start of the 20th century, proceeded to conquer the Moro, Igorot, and other minoritized peoples. The ban on indigenous weapons became more thorough and strict. Confiscated swords, spears, daggers and axes eventually turned up in public museums and private collections.

###

Whether it was a matter of indigenous preference or simply due to lack of firearms and bullets, Moro warriors and other native fighters adopted do-or-die tactics that unnerved Spanish troops and later US troops. There was, for example, the legendary sword assault by suicide warriors, variously known as huramentados, pulahans, or tadtads.

Suicide volunteers had their limbs and torsos tightly bound in fibrous cloth or leather strips. Then, on signal, they assaulted the enemy lines with kampilan, kalis or bolos tied with thongs to the wrist of each hand, as they shouted “Allah’u akbar!” or “Mabuhay ang Pilipinas!” or simply “Tadtad!”

The wrappings would not stop a hail of Krag bullets, but they deadened the impact and slowed down blood flow. This enabled most attackers to reach enemy lines, perhaps mortally wounded but still with enough strength to take some dozen unfortunate souls with them on their way to martyrs’ heaven.

###

Such suicide attacks struck terror in the hearts of the bravest American soldiers. That is, until some wise guy invented a magazine-loading semi-auto pistol called the Colt cal. 45, which had tremendous stopping power exceeded only by machine guns of that same period, and which proved crucial in close-quarters combat.

Modern automatic firearms eventually decimated the kalis-wielding juramentado rebels. But they did not kill the Filipino faith in the native sword. As late as World War II, the armed strength of guerrilla units in Northern Luzon were doubled or tripled by so-called bolo battalions.

The last Filipino samurais went down to their glorious deaths when the Lapiang Malaya quasi-religious rebels were gunned down with M16 automatic fire by Metrocom troopers on Taft Avenue in 1967.

After the LM massacre, the next generation of rebels throughout the land decided to retire their swords and fight back with their own M16s, AK47s and FALs.

###

“Don’t write off Filipino martial arts just yet,” blurted Kabsat Kandu. “We arnis enthusiasts will yet have a role to play in the next revolt.” Hmm. Sometimes my pesky friend has some interesting notions up his sleeve.

True, we are now on the verge of another People Power revolt, and most analysts say it won’t succeed unless backed by the AFP and PNP. I say, our people should not wait for the AFP and PNP to move.

If war is too important to society to be left to the professional soldiery, then more so in the case of politics – especially People Power politics. I say, our people should be out there in the streets in their hundreds of thousands and millions to oust an illegitimate regime.

“I say, it’s time for Oust-GMA rallyists to fit their placards and streamers with sturdy rattan and bamboo handles,” Kabsat Kandu exclaimed.

“Is that an appeal to arms?” I asked.

“You bet it is,” he glowered. #

---
From Northern Dispatch Weekly, 21 August 2005