SIBI,

Juli Ann Rosette M.

BAMC IV

PI 100

Jose Rizal (Film) Reaction Paper

Heroes are often portrayed as one-dimensional characters in many platforms of
entertainmenthumans who appear so selfless and invincible, to the point that they are
mystified. We enjoy these versions of heroes and view them as ideals. But when heroes are
painted as normal humans with flaws and sharp edges, they are immediately seen for only that.
Instead of being humanized, they are antagonized.

Acclaimed director Marilou Diaz-Abayas three-hour film on Jose Rizal tries to strike a balance.
The film, back in 1998 when it was released, was then viewed as revolutionary for Philippine
cinema, as Diaz-Abaya tries to present a more realistic view of Rizal, and was said to have set an
example for many historical films.

Rizal is portrayed as the hero we know him to be, with his literary works inspired by the
burgeoning liberalism in Europe. Rizals work ignited spirits of Filipinos who are stuck under
leaders in a conservative (and abusive) frame of mind. At the same time, Abayas
characterization of Rizal manages to include many distinct details that highlight his humanity
his being short-tempered and even his insistence of getting his way almost all the time.

What I would like to highlight is how the film allows Rizals character to explore the ideas of
vengeance and violence, which many teachers who discuss Rizal prefer to gloss over. The very
presence of Simoun in the film, and the selection of certain scenes from El Filibusterismo and
Noli Me Tangere shows that Diaz-Abaya wants to show that Rizal did have extremist points of
view, and had every reason to feel that way.

Although it was really cheesy and clichd, Rizals hallucination scene in which Simoun tries to
gaud Rizal into changing the climax of El Filibusterismo, showed that Rizal also experienced
conflict and doesnt just play the annoyingly peaceful advocate that remains collected in the face
of violence, in contrast to Bonifacios strong personality that appears to be agitated in many of
his portrayals.

In my experience, majority of my high school Filipino teachers preferred to paint Rizal as the
immaculate hero while Bonifacio was his complete opposite. Three out of four of the Filipino

teachers I had in high school always began discussing Rizal with the quote he never even said
The pen is mightier than the sword. And from there, they start discussing the importance of
pacifist methods with bold implications that we should be subservient to our administration of
nuns in school, saying we should emulate Rizal, and view Bonifacio as a lesson learned
Violence is never the answer. Not that highlighting peace in progress is wrong, but what is
wrong is presenting only one side of a situation and claiming that that is all there is to it.

Rizal was angry, hurt, and conflicted in many parts of the film, just as much as Bonifacio, or any
average human being can be. And such is a side of Rizal we hardly get to see in many
interpretations of him in past films. Diaz-Abaya later redeemed Rizals aggrieved side by
presenting a calm and collected Rizal from trial to his execution, but stayed true to Rizals
humanity through certain nuances of nervousness, doubt, and fear. Diaz-Abaya presented a
deeper image of the national hero, for in the film, we also got to see how Rizal swallows his own
weaknesses to be strong for his mother and siblings who feared the day of his death.

The film is powerful, compared to other historical films made in that time. It managed to retell a
story that has been told over and over again, with fair enough acting and visuals. Yet, there is
still a need for modern retellings of Rizals story.

First, Diaz-Abayas film did not succeed in tying Rizals fight for democracy to the modern-day
fight against corruption and violence that act as shackles of modern democracy. The 18-year-old
film is what it is, a historical film, but hardly as inspiring as it should have been.
Also, the younger generations demand for change and revolution can only be evoked through
brutal and gritty visualizations, which was the case of Heneral Luna with its chopped heads,
bloody wars and Antonio Lunas crass yet genuine form of leadership.

In order for Rizals story to rouse a generation born into peacefulness and democracy, it must be
more powerful than Diaz-Abayas version. The challenge here is how to balance the need for
stronger and more impactful visuals that can stir and shock a sleeping generation, deliver a
message, and retell Jose Rizals story that doesnt paint him as the hero without a single flaw
but as a human being, that through a series of mistakes, sacrifices, managed to begin a revolution
that ended a 333-year regime.