spot_img
27.3 C
Philippines
Sunday, November 24, 2024

‘Oro, plata, tuta’

The producers of Oro deliberately killed a dog during the film’s shooting.

This was confirmed by Film Development Council of the Philippines Chairperson Liza Diño, who, with members of the Metro Manila Film Festival executive committee, met the other day with representatives of the film’s producers.

- Advertisement -

The Oro team had initially told Diño that the animal killed was a goat “wearing prosthetics,” and that the slaughter was done by a professional butcher. Later they admitted that it was indeed a dog, and that for verisimilitude, it was slain for a scene that showed a dog being killed and gutted because “it was within the bounds of culture in that area where dogs are eaten as food.”

The scene, which Diño described as “very disturbing” and “very graphic,” disgusted many of the film’s viewers, who remarked that the dog showed “sadness” and “knowledge that he was about to be killed.” Outrage erupted on social media, with many netizens posting angry comments on the film’s Facebook page.

On Dec. 31, the Philippine Animal Welfare Society asked the MMFF execom to conduct an investigation into the incident, saying no animal should be hurt nor killed in the making of a film.

On Jan. 3, the MMFF execom withdrew the Fernando Poe Jr. (FPJ) Memorial Award given to the film Oro after Senator Grace Poe, daughter of FPJ, released a strong statement asking the MMFF to probe the animal cruelty issue and condemning the butchering of the dog.

Actress Japo Parcero, in a long Facebook post titled “An exposition about the dog that was brutally murdered for a film” narrated how she was chosen for a small part in Oro. Although she was not around for the dog scene she was later “made aware that A DOG WAS KILLED IN THE SHOOT [emphasis hers]. In fact, two dogs died, one accidentally and one deliberately.” [The first died after the supplier tied it in a sack and unknowingly smothered it.]

“The actor was asked to bludgeon the [second] dog to death,” Porcero said. “Someone said he was even reduced to tears by the end of the scene because he also didn’t want to do it… I know there was a great delay to the shoot because the lead actress…stood her ground and threatened to refuse shooting if they killed an animal.

“I don’t know how they are able to convince the ENTIRE CAST AND CREW to ever agree to such an unspeakable act, but the words often used that night were ‘for authenticity’ and ‘we believe in the vision.’…in a few moments, they gathered us and inconspicuously asked us to never tell anyone about the incident. That we have to LIE about it. It was unacceptable.”

Oro writer and director Alvin Yapan, in a post on the film’s Facebook page on Jan. 2, stated “Hindi po totoo na pumatay kami ng aso para lang sa pelikula…Hindi rin totoo na inutusan ko ang isang actor para lang pumatay ng aso…Hindi rin totoo na kinain iyong aso sa set. Sa pagkakatanda ko bang araw shinoot iyong inuman scene doon sa mismong pagkatay ng aso. Baboy ang ginamit nila. Nasa pag edit po iyon.”

Oro executive producer Feliz Guerrero, in that same post, also denied that the film’s team killed the dog. But he said, “Ikinatay ang aso at pinagsaluhan. Umasa ang produksyon na manindigan ang animal welfare advocates na magsalita at turuan ang sambayanan tungkol sa tamang pag-alaga at proteksyon sa mga hayop.”

Yapan and Guerrero, in short, said no one on the team killed the dog. But they also admitted a dog was killed and eaten to illustrate the subject mining community’s culture. So who did kill the dog?  

It seems that falsehoods were spun about the dog’s death, perhaps in an attempt to cover up actions that had moral implications, legal consequences, and ethical considerations for the filmmakers.

Yapan also said in his post that it is not his place to educate the mining community about their cultural habit of eating dog meat. He said focus should be placed instead on the story of four massacred miners as told in Oro.

But the miners’ story is not the point here; it is the way by which Yapan and the rest of the Oro team chose to tell that story. And that story, however worthy of scrutiny and public awareness, has now been overshadowed by the scandal brought about by the killing of a dog.

The issues that emerge now from Oro are not the ones that the film’s team chose to surface, but rather their own decisions on how to bring the miners’ story to the public. In choosing this particular path to bring their artistic vision to the screen, they have, unwittingly, drawn attention to filmmaking and the values that guide it.

Dr. Ortuoste is a California-based writer. Follow her on Facebook:  Jenny Ortuoste, Twitter: @jennyortuoste, Instagram: @jensdecember

LATEST NEWS

Popular Articles