Our bloody history
EARLY ON in the film “Heneral Antonio Luna,” in the opening scenes, in fact, we are told that the movie is a blend of fact and fiction, with dramatic license taken to enhance the story-telling.
By film’s end, the audience should realize why the filmmakers had to take such precautions. It is unflinching in its view of the infighting that took place at the highest levels of the Philippine revolutionary government and its military forces. The movie may hedge a bit when pinning the ultimate blame for the hero’s assassination, but the sentiment is clear on who the “traitors” and “patriots” are.
And once again we Filipinos are left realizing that indeed, as Luna himself declared, our greatest enemy is not the colonizer but ourselves. On the way out of the theater during the local preview at the SM Megamall theaters, I overheard other moviegoers engaged in earnest debates, with some bringing up the commonalities between the time covered in the movie, the Philippines during World War II, and then after Edsa, and today, in the midst of the preelection fever.
I thought: If a movie could so provoke us as to take second and third looks at our recent past, the present, and maybe the future, then it must have been compelling and powerful, indeed.
And that “Heneral Luna” is.
Director Jerrold Tarog is said to have been looking for material for a movie on Luna’s life and death when he discovered an original screenplay in English titled “Whirlwinds of Dust: the Fall of Antonio Luna,” written by Henry Francia and E.A. Rocha which won in an historical scriptwriting contest in 2010.
Tarog takes cowriting credit for the final film version (he also edited the movie), and I wonder if his input is the use of not just Filipino but of salty Filipino that lends the otherwise ponderous material a welcome dose of humor and hard-nosed reality.
In “Heneral Luna,” the hero is portrayed not only as a noble warrior but also as a hot-headed military leader who is quick to threaten recalcitrant troops with outright execution. When he is able to “recruit” thousands of ordinary folk to help dig trenches for the revolutionaries’ defense, a farmer explains that Luna had cited his military authority to execute anyone who refuses to help the cause, contained in the first article of the rules of war. “We call him General Artikulo Uno,” the farmer says.
* * *
LUNA is just as blunt and overbearing with his fellow members of the Aguinaldo Cabinet. Among them are businessmen who cite economic “realities” to advocate compromise with the Americans, who had stepped into the middle of the revolution waged by Filipinos against the Spaniards to “buy” the Philippines for $2 million.
Presiding over these stormy meetings is Emilio Aguinaldo, “El Presidente,” who is, for most of the time, cryptic and silent. A revolutionary who wrested leadership from the Katipunan’s founder Andres Bonifacio by ordering his execution, Aguinaldo had already surrendered the cause by fleeing to Hong Kong, only to return to resume the fight with what he hoped would be American support.
Luna remains suspicious of the intentions of the interlopers, advocating a preemptive strike against the Americans, and then a guerrilla war when armed conflict breaks out.
Despite his sentiments, Aguinaldo reposes military responsibility on the volatile Luna, even sitting by as Luna arrests Felipe Buencamino and Pedro Paterno, the leading voices of appeasement. Although he releases the two after just a day, one wonders: What game is Aguinaldo playing?
* * *
THANKFULLY, the filmmakers see no need for objectivity or fairness in portraying the life and times of Luna. The movie clearly takes the hero’s side, and is unequivocally harsh on the role of those who could have been responsible for his terrible death. (No one was ever arrested or named in Luna’s killing, and Aguinaldo to the very end denied any role in it.)
The very choice of actor to portray Luna telegraphs the filmmakers’ intent. John Arcilla is noted for the intensity he brings to any role, even as an indifferent husband in the TV commercial where he utters the line: “Coffee na lang, dear,” which catapulted him to popular attention. It helps, of course, that Arcilla bears an uncanny physical resemblance to Luna, and humanizes the hero in all his weaknesses and vices without giving in to the temptation to satirize him.
Arcilla receives excellent support from the rest of the cast: Archie Alemania and Joem Bascon as Luna’s closest aides; Epi Quizon as Apolinario Mabini; Nonie Buencamino as Felipe Buencamino and Leo Martinez as Pedro Paterno; and Arron Villaflor as a fictional young journalist, Joven Hernando, through whom Luna tells the story of his life and struggles.
Mylene Dizon portrays “Isabel,” another fictionalized character who stands for Luna’s “secret love,” a symbol of strength and composure in the revolutionary struggle. Mon Confiado is appropriately enigmatic with traces of treachery in his portrayal of Aguinaldo.
* * *
THERE isn’t much to quibble with about “Heneral Luna.” It is clear the production staff went to great pains to recreate the era in as authentic and credible a manner as possible. My only reservation is that the uniforms seem much too new and clean for clothing used in muddy trenches and bloody encounters.
But the movie as a whole is “clean,” no jarring contradictions or silly shortcuts taken.
The final scene of Luna’s assassination at the hands of Caviteño soldiers is sufficiently bloody and messy, though. Though a well-known story, the intensity of the attack, its savagery and the cowardice of the assassins nonetheless shock and dismay. Ours is a bloody history, indeed.
