Welcome reminder and less agreeable dissenters
Some of our columns last month got more than the usual feedback, indicating that more reader-viewers are joining the conversation—and debate:
Our recent piece on the Filipino movie industry’s “golden ages” was regarded as a “welcome reminder” for local film buffs to not go by “accepted” evaluations.
Specifically, some readers said they would henceforth be “more aware” of the contributions of pioneering Filipino filmmakers in the 1930s.
Fact is, some of the insights we shared about films in the ’30s didn’t come from personal viewing (we’re not that decrepit!), but from interviews with senior people in the know, like Eddie Romero.
We were most fortunate for having become friends with the iconic filmmaker, and he invited us many times for meals at his home, and we were struck by his glowing comments about the quality of the movies made by his elders, which have now been forgotten and are no longer extant.
We made a mental note to add to our knowledge in that rare regard, and were thus able to catch a retrospective screening decades ago of the 1939 film, “Giliw Ko.”
Also controversial was our column on the “re-re-reextension” of some hit TV series, to the point of repetition and utter predictability.
A “rebutter” pointed out that the bottom line is economics—if a show keeps making money, can you blame its producers for keeping it alive and earning on the tube?
Yes, but how far or low should “scraping bottom” in terms of freshness go?
Our campaign against “too many” TV awards groups has also been rapped. It’s a free country, so everybody should have his say!
Yes, but “awards” are supposed to set standards of quality, so when too many people disagree and multiple shows win in different award derbies, what “standards” are we talking about?
It would really be more productive if all those award-giving schools set up TV viewing groups, instead, to watch programs and single out good work and expose shoddy shows.
Yes, that would deprive them of the thrill of “meeting and greeting” the stars they give awards to, but the genuine “watchdog” service they would thus provide would be immense.
