There is still a cloud hanging over Dear Satan.
ONE of two recent films to be given an
After a second review of the documentary Alipato at MuogAfter director JL Burgos appealed the X rating, the MTRCB yesterday overturned the decision and rated the film R-16, allowing it to be released in Philippine cinemas.
Ahead of the government body’s decision on September 5, Mr. Burgos led human rights activist groups in a protest outside the MTRCB office in Quezon City, calling for an end to censorship and demanding justice for the victims of enforced disappearances. He said in a Facebook post that five of the MTRCB’s reviewers had met personally to announce their new decision.
‘We request your good office to look into it again Alipato at Muog with an open mind and an open heart,” he wrote in a letter to the MTRCB the week before. “Our documentary is not fiction. It is the story of a family searching for their missing loved one. It is about human rights and the pursuit of justice,” he added.
The review board had previously justified the
Alipato at Muog focuses on the forced disappearance of Burgos’ brother, farmer activist Jonas, and follows the paper trail of military officials involved in the case.
The Burgos brothers are the sons of the late anti-Marcos newspaper publisher Jose Burgos Jr. The younger Burgos was kidnapped in 2007 and never seen again. The Burgos family has been searching for him ever since and has accused elements of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) of being behind the kidnapping. The AFP denies its involvement.
The film was successful at the 2024 Cinemalaya Independent Film Festival in August, where it won a Special Jury Prize. The film was screened at the University of the Philippines Diliman on August 30, when the film was still X-rated. State universities and colleges do not fall under the jurisdiction of the MTRCB.
OWN LETTER
Together with the documentary, the comedy Dear Satan was also classified as unfit for public viewing.
The film is still under review, following a similar call for a reconsideration of the X rating it received last week.
The comedy centers on Satan, played by Paolo Contis, who accidentally receives a children’s letter intended for Santa Claus and his subsequent failed attempts to corrupt the child, played by Sienna Stevens. The planned release was set for September 18.
During the Senate censor budget hearing on September 3, MTRCB Chairman Diorella Maria “Lala” Sotto-Antonio explained the rating given to the film: “I have seen the film. I have joined the board. As a Christian I am offended. It is not demonic, but it gives a different representation of Satan becoming good. But Satan will never be good.”
Mr. Contis told the press that same day that their film’s trailer shows that his character of Satan “tried to influence [co-star Sienna’s character]but it never happened because her faith was strong.”
The film’s production company, Mavx Productions, stated that they will change the title of the film in the hope that the MTRCB can give them another chance. This move comes two months after a similar film by Quark Henares made the transcentric film Marupok AF released in theaters after the title was changed to Marupok A+.
As of the time of writing, Dear Satan is still being assessed.
CENSORSHIP
In addition to internet users’ accusations about the increasing censorship of films, the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers (NUPL) released a statement about the initial X-rating of Alipato at Muog.
The group pointed out that Presidential Decree No. 1986, which grants MTRCB its authority, “is a martial law decree that broadens the power of the state censorship apparatus.” Based on this, the board may disapprove the showing of films and television programs that, based on contemporary Philippine cultural values, are “considered immoral, indecent or harmful.”
“The decree furthermore invokes the doctrine of the ‘dangerous tendency’, a flexible standard that allows the restriction of expression if it has a likely effect of causing a substantial harm, even if the danger is not imminent. This standard is inconsistent with modern case law that favors the ‘clear and present danger’ test, which requires the presence of a serious and imminent threat before speech can be restricted,” NUPL said. — Bronte H. Lacsamana