Baniaga, Jeandy A.

CEAT-03-502E

BAYANING THIRD WORLD

Direction: Documentaries are a type of storytelling that explores factual stories and issues using
film or video. By conveying the difference between fact, fiction and opinion, express your
judgement on the film in five sentences each number based on what is being asked in the
questions.

1. To what extent did the documentary engage you, interest you and captivate you? Why?
Overall, I can say that the film was indeed compelling but lacked in terms of providing
new information to the student and audience. The film was compelling in its own unique way
by providing an alternative way of re-telling certain aspects of Rizal's life and legacy. I’m quite
surprised on how the actors portray their role. It’s somehow interesting because it has a twist
of comedy that results to the audience not to feel bored. The art style and genre of the film was
the compelling factor, and I hope the less historically-inclined Filipino audience could have
access to these kinds of films.
2. What themes, issues and conflicts are represented in the documentary? Why do you think
those have been chosen?
The film highlighted the following issues in Rizal's life: his reluctance or involvement in
the Revolution, his alleged retraction, and his marriage and relationship with Josephine
Bracken. These issues were certainly highlighted because historians have been debating these
questions for more than a century. It seems no consensus can be agreed upon in the near
future. There is no certain proof to claim the said issues that’s why it’s still questionable up until
now.
3. Which persons are highlighted as major subjects within the documentary? How and why?
The film chose Rizal's family as major subjects in the film: Teodora Alonzo, Paciano Rizal,
Trinidad and Narcisa Mercado, and Josephine Bracken. The only outlier was Padre Balaguer to
whom Rizal wasn't related in terms of family. These people were selectively chosen because
they were present (besides Paciano) during Rizal's final days which should have shed light on
the burning questions above.
4. Would you describe the major issues and stories as essential and important? Why? / Why
not?
The issues raised were the primary focus of this film and of course they were relevant in
this film. This was a conscious choice of the filmmakers in an attempt to provide an alternative
re-telling of certain aspects of Rizal's life. In that regard, the filmmakers executed this feat
wonderfully. In the study of history, however, these issues could be considered minor details in
the life of Rizal despite the ongoing debates. These questions could probably go unanswered
forever. But whichever answers to these questions may provide will not damage nor diminish
the influence and impact of Rizal in the history and collective consciousness of the Filipino
people.
5. What kind of essential areas, topics and perspectives are missing in this documentary (if
any)? Why?
The film focused on Rizal's reluctance to the revolution, his relationship with Bracken,
and the authenticity of his retraction. The film seemed to shed more light on the latter two
questions and less so on the first. This might be due to lack of contemporary scholarship of
interest during the time of the film's production. More recent works such as Floro Quibuyen's A
Nation Aborted could provide more insight with regards to Rizal's involvement in the
Revolution.
 
6. Did the film tell “the truth”?  Can a clearly-biased perspective be as “true” as a more
balanced treatment of a subject?
The film did not tell the truth but portrayed the attempt in the pursuit of the so-called
truth. It ended without providing a resolution to the questions it presented in the beginning. Is
there a way to realize the truth? A life as colourful as Rizal's and the wealth of his written legacy
seem to provide more questions than answers. Much like the film, we can only do so much as
an honest pursuit of the truth rather than absolute discovery of the truth.
7. To what extent did the documentary leave you with a sense of involvement, hope,
excitement, indifference, despair – or maybe with a mixture of such feelings? Why?
It left me with a feeling of exasperation that these burning questions remained
unanswered to this day and we can only choose which historian to believe and hold it true in
our hearts; it's like choosing your own denomination within the same religion and holding
others as false interpretations. The film also gave me joy and hope the questions in Philippine
history can be told in this way through film art without falling into the traps of mainstream
consumerist media. The Filipino people should be shown their history not just in schools but
through other media as well. The question of Filipino identity could only be identified if the
Filipino people collectively are given these means to discover their past in-dept. This way we
can better judge our present situation and wisely direct our future.