|
|
Post by labrador on Feb 17, 2011 18:07:08 GMT -5
Got this from the inquirer:
After successive screenings in Cebu, Davao, Manila and Pampanga, “Amigo” will be shown in Baguio tomorrow and on Sunday; in Bacolod on Feb. 21; and at the UP Diliman Film Center on February 22.
|
|
|
|
Post by legionnaire on Feb 17, 2011 19:47:07 GMT -5
Thanks for the tip I hope it will still be showing in theater till April
|
|
|
|
Post by VeeVee on Feb 18, 2011 14:14:44 GMT -5
|
|
medic
New Member
Re-living Philippine history with a passion.
Posts: 37
|
Post by medic on Feb 19, 2011 2:21:02 GMT -5
Screening time at UP Film Center is 5:30 pm. I'd like to go in a denim uniform if I can borrow one, heh heh.
|
|
|
|
Post by VeeVee on Feb 19, 2011 8:41:42 GMT -5
Trailer...
|
|
|
|
Post by pedroscollection on Feb 22, 2011 22:55:26 GMT -5
Comments on the film "Amigo" : 1. Ranking the STORY versus other Filipino Historical Film : 1st - "Sakay" of Julio Diaz (By Raymond Red) of "Rizal" of Ceasar Montano 2nd - "Baler" 3rd - "Amigo" The story ended very flat & I do not like it. This is very common to "independent Films". I have a feeling that I'm watching a movie, then brown out came in. I have a feelnig that I'm watching a documentary film, no emotion, all focus on facts (But documentary film has different purpose & its made to be like that). Its like you take a video of the unscripted life of a person in actual & then decided to end the film or video because it reached its time limit. The moral of the story has not given a strong emphasis. People may be mislead that main character (Joel Torre as the Cabeza del Barrio) is a GREAT LOSSER & MUST not be imitated because his sacrifices & heroism to protect his town people are not justified in the end of the film. Sakay, Rizal & Baler films also ended with the main character died tragically, but it ended very well, especially "Sakay", even they lost the war, he died a HERO, unlike Amigo. 2. Ranking the ¡§MILITARY part of the STORY versus other Filipino Historical Film : 1st - "Sakay" of Julio Diaz (By Raymond Red) 2nd - "Baler" 3rd - "Amigo" With regards to story related to "Military" which we all love, Sakay film ranks 1st, having greater combat action. Followed Baler film. Last is Amigo since it only focus on the specific life of a small Barrio occupied by a more superior enemy force (US) & combat engagement is fewer. 3. Ranking the MILITARY PROPS / ACCURACY versus other Filipino Historical Film : 1st - "Sakay" of Julio Diaz (By Raymond Red) 2nd - "Amigo" & "Baler" Since the combat engagement is very few & very small scale, the soldiers in Amigo are fewer, but the uniforms of both Filipino & US Army is accurate. I appreciated the Filipino soldiers impression of how the Revolutionary soldiers look like ¡V wearing the accurate Rayadillo, but mixed with rag-tag belts & pouches, ethnic items like Salakot hat, bolo, & period civilian cloths. For the US Army, I like the accurate cartridge belt, buckle, hat, insignias, the tents, old office equipt like Morse Code,¡Kof the US Army. Only minor errors & think like : „« the cuffs of the Rayadillo uniform have bottons like polo shirts (instead of a coat) „« the Filipino ammo pouches are not based from Spanish Remington or Mauser models „« Over-use the white suspenders of the US Army wich is common to Cavalry, but its acceptable. „« ammo placed on ammo belts of the US Army used to be like a thin stick with white topings on the top. The film shows long ammo like a 30 cal. ammo. „« The rank on the shoulder of the colonel is placed horizontally. I wonder why they did that since the rank of the Leutenant is correct placing it vertically. Maybe they intentionally made it, but don't know why. „« The guns, like used in Sakay & Baler are not accurate, but better than the guns used in Rizal film. I ranked Sakay 1st even the ranks used on both Phil. Constabulary (PC) & US Army were the current AFP ranks (not correct) & the Rayadillo used is very wide (Like a pajama), because I appreciate & give weight to the over-all impact & effort having a "Gutling Gun" which is very hard to produce, the old PC uniform which is not common & lots of soldiers involve & larger scale of combat engagement. 4. REFLECTION : Joel Torre as Cabeza del Barrio¡¦s heroism & martyrdom is the actual experience of real hero in the eyes of God. He tried his best as a leader to seek the welfare of his town people. He was blamed & punished on any situation that was screwed. For the eyes of man, he is a GREAT LOSSER & a MUST NOT to be imitated. But in the eyes of God, he is a REAL WINNER. Why?  The measure of man¡¦s success is always wealth, power & fame. While for God, He expects us to be in the side of GOOD even you win or loose. People think you are in the side of good if you succeed. That¡¦s why we believe ¡§Victors¡¨ & popular people in history & follow them as model. Failure of man is we never think that our lives on earth is just a gateway to heaven. Real heroes for me are not those who won Great Battles & strong Fame in history like Alexander the Great, Napoleon, etc¡K But rather those who stick to their moral values. When I study who are the real heroes for me, I study their heart. Their moral values cannot be compromised. When I study their life, almost all of them lived & died tragically & many of them are losers in the eyes of man like Bonifacio & Joel Torre as the Cabeza del Barrio in the Amigo film. People are mislead thinking you are in the side of ¡§Good¡¨ if you¡¦ll win in the end. ¡§NO¡¨, not all the time!!! It follows also that not all the time ¡§evil¡¨ always lost. Study our society. Who are the rich? The Famous? The WINNER? The corrupt isn¡¦t it? Actually the ¡§evil¡¨ prevails the world. Crime is very organized. When you go to politics, many system are designed for you to be in the dark side. Try it. Ask Dearth Vader. Question is, if to be in the side of good will cost your life, fame, wealth & welfare of your love ones, will you still be on God¡¦s side? Honestly, even me cannot say yes. I need to think twice. But few brave souls chose this path & one of them is the character of Joel Torre in the Amigo film, who in the eyes of man ¡V the LOSSER. Heroes are losers is to lose is not what I meant. For me, the real hero is the one who chose the path of righteousness, without compromise or have a mental reservation if he¡¦ll win or not in this world. For the price of real victory is not here on earth. What will a man gain if he won all the richness on earth, but losses his soul? Watch the film "Amigo" Mabuhay; Perry |
|
|
|
Post by VeeVee on Jul 3, 2011 8:28:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by legionnaire on Jul 8, 2011 13:36:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by VeeVee on Jul 8, 2011 23:26:24 GMT -5
Thanks Philip. Looks good. err... why is everyone left-handed and where are the bolt handles ;D  |
|
|
|
Post by flo777 on Jul 24, 2011 2:02:19 GMT -5
Will this movie be shown regularly in theaters? What are the playdates?
|
|
|
|
Post by bumblebeee0 on Jul 27, 2011 21:42:55 GMT -5
yeah!!!
not too bad
|
|
|
|
Post by legionnaire on Aug 27, 2011 20:58:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by 79thfoot on Sept 19, 2011 3:21:32 GMT -5
WOW! I finally got to see it - I'm reviewing it for one of my classes too and I'll post my review when it's done. I noticed a few quibbling things which were minor annoyances but on the whole I liked it.
Left handed shooters - I'm wondering if they flipped the film in editing. There were WAY too many instances of left handed rifle shooters particularly during the ambush scene.
Guardia Civil uniforms - very obviously taken from Los Rayadillos site. AFAIK since these two guys were stationed in what looks like a VERY isolated barrio somewhere in Luzon they should have been regular Guardias (ie. no white sardinetas) rather than Guardia Civil Veteranas. Also they both had identical rank chevrons - it would have been nice if they had differing ranks (ie. corporal and private).
The '73rd Cazadores' - this kinda got my goat, in a minor way. Cazadores is fine, 73rd is fine but those two just shouldn't go together. It would have made sense that the two Spaniards were from the Cazadores (Expeditionary Rifle Battalions) as the soldados at Baler were but then one of them says he's from the 73rd... that should be a Native Regiment, the Regimento Fijo de Jolo. Then again, maybe he's a Spanish sergeant in the regiment. Still, it was confusing.
The American uniforms in general - most of the shirts look like they came from the ukay ukay. Every INFANTRYMAN was, for some weird reason, wearing cavalry suspenders. There's no way to explain away that they're 'dismounted cavalry in garrison' since they specifically mention the US 12th Infantry Regiment. The corporal and sergeant rank chevrons kinda looked cheap and a bit hokey. At least Lt.Compton wore his ranks properly. Col.'Hardacre' (what a name!!) trying to 'do a Custer/Patton' by wearing his ranks in an utterly weird and unprecedented way is utterly mindboggling (Patton would have chewed his hard acre out, that's for sure!) Also the mismatched colors of the signal corps insignia on the lighter 'divisoria t-shirt blue' of the American uniforms was weird. Wish they'd gone for a darker blue than what they had.
Historical quibbles aside, I think it did a pretty darn good job of introducing the 'Splendid Little War' that America conveniently (and with a certain amount of embarrassment in remembering) forgot.
|
|
|
|
Post by 79thfoot on Sept 20, 2011 7:18:22 GMT -5
My movie review of AMIGO:
AMIGO is the story of what an American statesman called “a splendid little war” – the occupation and conquest of the Philippine Islands by American soldiers following the Spanish-American War to liberate Cuba. The war resonates in history, particularly in our present day, as it was undertaken ostensibly to free a people from tyrannical oppression as well as to avenge American deaths from a surprise attack but ultimately became a bloody and protracted conflict between the American ‘liberators’ and a people who did not want to be liberated by them. The war had particular religious overtones as well as America optimistically embraced the concept of ‘Manifest Destiny’ that led them not only to total dominion over their own lands in North America but across the Pacific, to the doorstep of China as well where missionary ventures and trading adventures could flourish hand-in-hand. No less than President William McKinley declared that God told him, during his prayers, to take the Philippines and civilize, Christianize and educate the ‘poor, benighted heathens, half devil and half child’. When the war turned ugly, it was William Jennings Bryant, the stalwart Christian statesman who would later become immortalized as the antagonist in the ‘Scopes Monkey Trial’ who attempted to convince Americans that imperialism was neither the Christian nor the American way. By the end of the war – which at the time was not recognized as a war but as an ‘insurrection’ or police action – several thousand American soldiers and about a hundred thousand Filipinos were casualties.
It is against this backdrop that maverick American director John Sayles sets the narrative of AMIGO. The AMIGO (Spanish for “friend”) in question is the barrio (the Filipino term for ‘village’) headman, Rafael Dacanay, played by veteran Filipino actor Joel Torre, who must negotiate the treacherous tightrope between the American garrison and the local revolutionary command, led by his own brother Simon. As various incidents lead to escalation, Rafael suffers the torments of Job as he is blamed and distrusted by both sides while trying to protect the villagers who are under his patronage and ensure that they survive the war. Various characters within and without the barrio of San Isidro, from a tragic young mother who loses her child to a sniper’s bullet, to the aptly named Colonel Hardacre, played by long-time Sayles collaborator Chris Cooper, function less as human characters and more as aspects of historical narrative, embodying the different ‘types’ that populated the archipelago, circa 1900.
The film does an excellent job of bringing the sleepy barrio to life through delightful little set-pieces that show the culture and social interaction between the denizens of San Isidro. Indeed, this is less a war film than it is a colorful cultural excursion into a moderately hostile landscape. There were – perhaps thankfully – no My Lai or Balangiga massacres in this film and the local revolutionary force is less interested in retaking the village than it is ambushing isolated American mule trains or massacring Chinese laborers in American pay. The American soldiers find themselves fighting off boredom more than they fight the insurrectos. A solution is found, River Kwai style, in their building a house for an aged Filipino woman and this brings the American soldiers and Filipino civilians closer together, much to the chagrin of the hard-nosed Colonel Hardacre and guerrilla chief, Simon. When the Americans are finally ambushed by Simon’s guerrillas the narrative winds down to its expected conclusion with a tragic twist that, while not unexpected, is still heartbreaking in its irony.
We are made aware of the importance of religion in the narrative from the very beginning as the village is preparing for the feast day of its patron saint. God is constantly on the lips of the devout Filipino populace. The village itself, San Isidro, is named after a Roman-Catholic saint and the saint’s feast day is a highlight in the narrative. At the start of the film, a curious situation exists where the Catholic Filipinos must hear confession from their local priest, a proud and ultimately self-serving Spaniard, who has been incarcerated with the local native police of the Guardia Civil and a Spanish soldier under guard by the local revolutionaries. The friar’s ability to speak English as well as Tagalog (the dialect of the Filipino populace) makes him a linchpin between the occupiers and the occupied and he has no qualms about manipulating the situation for his own advantage, all in the name of Spain and Roman Catholicism. A discussion that he has with Corazon, Rafael’s wife, about murder and war provides the religious and philosophical center for the film. The priest declares that while murder is evil, war – specifically – holy war, is justified. How he defines ‘holy war’, however, is either Christians slaughtering non-Christians or Christians who are on Spain’s side. Rafael, for his part, disdains the priest and his sentiments are shared by many of the remaining (and elderly, as most of the young men have gone to fight with the Filipino revolutionaries) men of San Isidro. Rafael’s brother , Nenong, is a noticeable exception as he functions as the trusted lapdog of the priest to the point that he is willing to betray Rafael so he can get ‘a front seat in heaven’. Then there is Simon, the revolutionary chieftain who, we later learn, was a seminary student. For Simon, God is a god of justice who fights on the side of the oppressed, not the Latin speaking, land-grabbing oppressive deity of the Spaniards. It is liberation theology, circa 1900.
In terms of narrative structure, the film is adequate but ultimately unsatisfying. There is very little actual tension as there is very little death or, despite the war situation, the fear of death. Even the arrival of Hardacre does not escalate the action by much – just a single ambush and little else. While one can sense Sayles’ desire to humanize the different sides and characters, perhaps everyone was a bit too nice. This is not Schindler’s factory with an Amon Goeth shooting prisoners at random. Granted this was the experience of a single platoon of American soldiers in an area that was technically under their control as opposed to a platoon in the vanguard of the hunt for the Filipino leader, Aguinaldo, but still, this is more 'Bridge over the River Kwai' in structure - without the tension of William Holden and Jack Hawkins' counter-mission reminding everyone that, despite the momentary detente between prisoners and conquerors, there was still a war going on. I wonder if, in his desire to keep the film accessible even to younger audiences, Sayles deliberately refrained from showing graphic images of violence - the violence in this film is about the same level as a 1950's war movie - squibbs, blood paint and lots of acting. While I do not think that graphic violence is necessary to convey the horror and tension of war, they should still be there in some way, shape or form, through pacing, editing, or shot choice, through the faces and reactions of the actors, through the finished work of destruction and death. Sayles' minimalist approach to violence was the wrong call here.
The problem is Sayles’ overwhelming desire to bring out ideological and philosophical concerns through his characters instead of letting his characters really live. Everyone seemed to be a walking statement, not quite a stereotype, but more the embodiment of an ideology or social reality. The audience cannot really come to care for them deeply, since they are more idea than person. That is, ultimately, the greatest weakness of Amigo – it is more an intellectual exercise than a human experience. The characters act the way they do not because of strong motivations but because they must as embodiments of an idea. Case in point - when Hardacre comes to the village and decapitates the wooden statue of San Isidro there are no repercussions or reactions, not even from the priest and these are people who treat the statue as if he was the saint himself. Surely something as profane as the Gringo Colonel shooting the head off ones patron saint would get a rise of a person. Aside from this, other narrative threads are begun but either left unfinished or finished in an unsatisfying manner - the young mother whose daughter is killed during a night raid, who seemed to be going mad like Sisa (a major character in Philippine national hero Jose Rizal's epic novel, Noli Mi Tangere), is left unfinished. The romance between DeHaan's baby faced recruit and the young Filipino girl should have been a source of more tension as she, like the Boer women in Breaker Morant, uses his attraction to her to distract him from Filipinos sneaking in and out of the village - but this does not really go anywhere either. Granted, it is important to keep one's eye on the main character but Sayles had such a rich canvas of personalities that are ultimately wasted as character types in pursuit of the grand statement.
In conclusion, AMIGO is a good historical drama, satisfyingly understated in its tone and an important text, particularly for an American or Fil-American viewer who has never heard of this forgotten part of Philippine-American history. It's a pity that it was not as powerful as it could have been.
|
|
|
|
Post by VeeVee on Feb 3, 2012 8:30:11 GMT -5
|
|
The measure of man¡¦s success is always wealth, power & fame. While for God, He expects us to be in the side of GOOD even you win or loose. People think you are in the side of good if you succeed. That¡¦s why we believe ¡§Victors¡¨ & popular people in history & follow them as model. 
