A List of My Favorite Films (Part 1)

I think it's about high time that I post a list of my all-time favorite films, and I'll present them by not saying too much about the film so you discover on you own why I find these films worthy of my list. Plot summaries were mostly taken from Rotten Tomatoes, with a short side note after each summary.

Films are not ranked because I found it absolutely hard ranking one over the other, but my all-time favorite is without a doubt "the one." There are forty films so far, and I'm pretty sure the list will continue to grow. I have barely gone through the pages of my 1001 Films to See Before You Die!

Argo (2012)

Plot summary: Based on true events, Argo chronicles the life-or-death covert operation to rescue six Americans, which unfolded behind the scenes of the Iran hostage crisis-the truth of which was unknown by the public for decades. On November 4, 1979, as the Iranian revolution reaches its boiling point, militants storm the U.S. embassy in Tehran, taking 52 Americans hostage. But, in the midst of the chaos, six Americans manage to slip away and find refuge in the home of the Canadian ambassador. Knowing it is only a matter of time before the six are found out and likely killed, a CIA "exfiltration" specialist named Tony Mendez (Ben Affleck) comes up with a risky plan to get them safely out of the country. A plan so incredible, it could only happen in the movie.

You Should Watch This Because Of: Ben Affleck and him leading the nail-biting and mattress-gripping escape of the six Americans out of Tehran.

The Usual Suspects (1995)

Plot summary: "The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist."

You Should Watch This Because Of: (Mainly because of) Kevin Spacey's brilliant performance, and the ending. It doesn't get started at around 1h35 minutes (running time is 1h45, mind you), but the ending will totally make up for it. Hey, we all watch a movie to see the ending.

Se7en (1995)

Plot Summary:  A diabolical serial killer is staging grisly murders, choosing victims representing the seven deadly sins. First, an obese man is forced to eat until his stomach ruptures to represent gluttony, then a wealthy defense lawyer is made to cut off a pound of his own flesh as penance for greed. Somerset (Morgan Freeman) initially refuses to take the case, realizing that there will be five more murders, ghastly sermons about lust, sloth, pride, wrath, and envy presented by a madman to a sinful world. Somerset is correct, and something within him cannot let the case go, forcing the weary detective to team with Mills (Brad Pitt) and see the case to its almost unspeakably horrible conclusion. 

You Shouldn't Watch This If: Anything related to the seven deadly sins easily makes you sick.

You Should Watch This Because Of: The vividly-depicted seven deadly sins. And Kevin Spacey (again).

Cidade de Deus (City of God) (2002)

Plot Summary: Fernando Meirelles' City of God is a sweeping tale of how crime affects the poor population of Rio de Janeiro. Though the narrative skips around in time, the main focus is on Cabeleira who formed a gang called the Tender Trio. He and his best friend, Bené (Phelipe Haagensen), become crime lords over the course of a decade. When Bené is killed before he can retire, Lil' Zé attempts to take out his arch enemy, Sandro Cenoura (Matheus Nachtergaele). But Sandro and a young gangster named Mane form an alliance and begin a gang war with Lil' Zé. Amateur photographer Buscape (Alexandre Rodrigues) takes pictures of the brutal crime war, making their story famous.

You Should Watch This Because Of: The compelling narrative nature of the film as it based on real-life events. The violence and brutality was magnificently depicted without skipping the emotions that wrap the poverty-stricken Rio de Janeiro.
 

Poor for all the Wrong Reasons

In the 1950s and early 1960s, the Philippine economy was ranked as the second most progressive in Asia, next to that of Japan. Back then, South Korea after the Korean War was  as battered and poor as Manila was after the Second World War – but look at Korea now. In the Fifties, the traffic in Taipei can be attributed to the bicycles and army trucks clogging the roads, the streets flanked by tile-roofed low buildings. Kuala Lumpur was a small village surrounded by a jungle and hectares of rubber plantations. Bangkok was criss-crossed with canals, with only Wat Arun dominating the city’s skyline. Visit these cities today and weep — for they are more beautiful, cleaner and prosperous than Manila. In the Fifties and Sixties we were the most envied country in Southeast Asia. Why is it then that we were left behind? Why is it that we are somewhat stuck in a warp where we are to be held helpless for the coming years? Why is the Philippines poor?

But what does it mean to be poor exactly? As Edilberto Alegre describes it, to the common tao (ordinary people) it means the “condemnation to life-long hunger-never enough rice, never enough corn, never enough kamote, never enough kamoteng kahoy and bagoong and leaves. It means wearing torn clothes and going barefoot. It means schooling, if at all, stops at Grave IV. It means bearing pain because medicine is expensive. It means working in the rain, in the heat of the sun, in the mud, in the refuse of the rich, in the offal of the middle class. They are Other. They look different. They are dressed differently. They smell differently. They move differently.  They speak differently.  They are totally unlike us. At most, they are an abstract-a hazily floating ephemeral image. They are just a mass, a conglomerate of bad smelling offal, a percentage of our total population, poverty similar to the cockroaches and ants which are always there in the dark — a given, a condition, a presence which we need not deal with.” Replace every single “they” I have said, and I just described the Filipinos and the country in general.

So why then are we poor? F. Sionil Jose emphasizes on the following reasons: 

1. Social and moral malaise on colonialism is partly to blame, as we inherited from Spain a social system and elite that, on purpose, exploited the masses. 

2. We are poor because our nationalism is inward looking. Under its guise we protect inefficient industries and monopolies. We did not pursue agrarian reform like Japan and Taiwan. It is not so much the development of the rural sector, making it productive and a good market as well. Our nationalist icons like Claro M. Recto and Lorenzo Tanada opposed agrarian reform, the single most important factor that would have altered the rural areas and lifted the peasant from poverty.

3. We are poor because we have lost our ethical moorings. We condone cronyism and corruption and we don’t ostracize or punish the crooks in our midst. Both cronyism and corruption are wasteful but we allow their practice because our loyalty is to family or friend, not to the larger good.

We can tackle our poverty in two very distinct ways. The first choice: a nationalist revolution, a continuation of the revolution in 1896. But even before we can use violence to change inequities in our society, we must first have a profound change in our way of thinking, in our culture.

The second is through education, perhaps a longer and more complex process. The only problem is that it may take so long and by the time conditions have changed, we may be back where we were, caught up with this tremendous population explosion which the Catholic Church (I am using the term Catholic Church loosely here, as I may refer it to religions in general) exacerbates in its conformity with doctrinal purity. We have developed a fatalistic attitude as expressed in statements such as “bahala na ang Diyos”, “ginusto ng Diyos”, “oras na”, etc. This fatalistic attitude pervades our poor countrymen and even the so-called educated. We are afraid to question such long-held beliefs since we think that it is tantamount to committing sin. We need to outgrow these childish beliefs which are destructive to ourselves and society and have to learn and understand more deeply our inherited religion and thus develop a more mature faith. The aggregate and adverse impact of fatalism are for a populace to throw out their hands in despair, helplessness, inaction and to seek solace in wishful prayers which in effect only gives credence to the oft-quoted remark by Karl Marx that “religion is the opium of the people.”

We are a rich country, resources-wise and manpower-wise. We are a society of a hundred-million, and it is taking us forever to look at the fact that we are a hundred-million strong! We are a country with vast natural resources, and we are all using and abusing them for all the wrong reasons! It all boils down to us. We are our own enemy. And we must have the courage, the will, to change ourselves.

References:

Alegre, Edilberto (2001). What Does It Mean To be Poor? Retrieved from http://pimephilippines.wordpress.com/2001/03/11/what-does-it-mean-to-be-poor/

Constantino, Leticia (2003). What is Filipino Nationalism? Retrieved from http://sundalo.bravehost.com/What%20Nationalism.htm

Jose, F. Sionil (2006). Why Are The Filipinos So Poor? Retrieved from http://liberaleconomy.wordpress.com/2006/11/23/fsionil-joses-why-are-filipinos-so-poor/

Scott, William Henry (1994). Barangay : sixteenth-century Philippine culture and society. Quezon City : Ateneo De Manila University Press, ix, 306 p. : ill.

Scientists: Breaking Stereotypes (and protocols)

For those keeping track of my life (as if someone does, with the exception of my family), you would know that I'm currently pursuing graduate studies in some East Asian country while doing laboratory work involving cells and tissues. I think choosing this path rather than going to medical school was a good decision, even though there's the occasional "I just want to strangle everyone here" moments. I easily get over such moments though.