Comments on: Brillante Mendoza, “Kinatay” (2009).

By: Kinatay Ang Critics « ORBIS

Kinatay Ang Critics « ORBIS — Mon, 21 Nov 2011 13:14:43 +0000

[...] (from filmeyeballsbrain.com) [...]

By: richard d.

richard d. — Sun, 11 Sep 2011 11:37:30 +0000

i just finally watched the movie having only seeing reviews about it, and i have to say it was very honest and i don’t think people give the credit it deserves. you’re not going to see images as real as this movie brought it’s viewers. maybe some viewers are in denial about the realities of life. it’s like the lion that kills the baby calf. we all know it happens and it’s part of living, but we would rather not watch. how about the soldiers coming from wars suffering from ptsd? will those soldiers ever be truly understood by the people who they will be begging money from in the future? kinatay is sickening, but so is life. don’t forget that. well, maybe it’s too late. go watch another “300″ or “gladiator” and call it art.

By: jamal ashley

jamal ashley — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:45:11 +0000

Kinatay is such a mediocre film. It follows the formula that’s sure to catch the attention of foreigners (Westerners) – poverty, a dash of nudity and sex, a bit of local culture and denigrating one’s society. See my post: http://jamalashley.wordpress.com/2010/11/19/kinatay-2009-canness-best-or-worst-film/

By: Richard Bolisay

Richard Bolisay — Wed, 23 Jun 2010 03:32:14 +0000

but isn’t the fact that the film is divisive leaps its status from “repulsive” to “important”? i have read an awful length of discussions on Kinatay and almost everyone has their point (it’s hard to quote and react to them one by one), but from the point of view of someone who has lived in Manila all his life, i believe the film has captured the madness of being here. issues that string from moral to socio-economic, as well as spiritual, which Mendoza himself may not be aware of having while shooting the film, in a sleight of hand, all lead to his aesthetic predilections. it gripped me, particularly the sense of awe brought about by its atmosphere. i am not so fond of ebert but he’s entitled to his own opinion, however bland it may be.

By: Benito Vergara

Benito Vergara — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 23:09:44 +0000

@ C.A.J. — I’d like to think I did understand the context, since a section of my blog entry was devoted to how Mendoza was pointing out the contradictions between all this violence and corruption and the society’s purported Christian values. I did like how Mendoza situates the main event — of course it’s “the murder per se” — between these “routine” scenes (riding public transport, cooking, eating breakfast, the radio reporting yet another murder), suggesting that the violence itself has become normalized and ordinary. It’s become part of the daily flow of things, and relegated to background noise — and Mendoza reminds us of how the latter shouldn’t be ignored by upping the volume.

By: critic after jizz

critic after jizz — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 14:05:02 +0000

it seems you didn’t understand the context of the film hmmm. Its not about the murder per se its about our apathy to this madness.

By: valeriesoe

valeriesoe — Tue, 22 Jun 2010 06:26:54 +0000

Great breakdown of the movie–thanks for watching it so I don’t have to ; )