Does Charice have what it takes to play Kim?

RIVERA. Epitomized the unique appeal of the popular musical’s lovely protagonist.

For starters, take the “news” that Charice may be tapped to play Kim in the much awaited filmization of the hit Cameron Mackintosh musical, “Miss Saigon.”

At first, the report sounds more than just possible, because the character of Kim has to be young and Asian and needs a belting voice that can do rock and pop-rock, and Charice fits the bill on all three accounts.

However, the role has other requirements that may prove to be more problematic. For instance, as written and as played by many, many young performers, like Lea Salonga, Monique Wilson, Jenine Desiderio and Jamie Rivera, Kim is an exceptionally lovely oriental.

More to the point, she should epitomize and vivify westerners’ perception of oriental beauty—meaning petite, small, sloe-eyed, oval-faced and delicately lovely, like a flower newly in bloom, and sensual in a soft, vulnerable sort of way.

That’s why, of all the Kims we’ve seen in performance, the singer-actress who had the most breathtakingly palpable effect on the theater audience in London was Jamie Rivera.

Technically speaking, Jamie is more mestiza than oriental, but we’re talking western viewers’ perception and preference here. Being really petite and truly lovely, when the stage lights first revealed Jamie in performance, her face indeed “bloomed” like a lovely flower, fulfilling westerners’ fantasy of fragile oriental women’s “waiflike seductiveness.”

That strange combination doesn’t exist in real life, but it does in westerners’ perfervid imagination. So, that’s the unique appeal of Kim. Logically, therefore, the movie Kim will have to possess that unique quality and attribute, which Charice unfortunately doesn’t have.

Will our hopefully educated guess be proven right? If not, we’ll be resigned to eating humble pie and wearing remorseful sackcloth and ashes for a week—but, what do you think?

No big deal

Other “breaking news” reports that need “light of day” analysis involve “awards” that some local movies win in “international” festivals. Some honors are legit, and should indeed be celebrated.

But, there are others that are grotesquely inflated and exaggerated, especially “honors” won in minuscule and even discredited “festivals” that play in only one small venue, etc.

Some filmmakers are so hungry for any and all kinds of “global” recognition that they latch onto these wee citations and promote them to excessively “gynormous” proportions and importance.

They are feeding on our national Colonial Mentality that makes any “international” achievement a really big deal—even when it isn’t.

So, reality check, folks: There are festivals and festivals, and make sure you know the ones that really count before you go gaga—and gago—over them.