The things, the people, the ideals, that we value in life affect our decisions and dictate whatever action we make. It is this same values orientation that draws the line between the goodness and badness of our decisions.
This week I saw the film On the Job; a film directed by Erick Matti, and I guess this is the best movie I’ve seen this year; not because it is political but mostly because it is real in a sense that real-life people behave similar to how characters in the film do.
On the Job is a movie about hired gunmen who are actually prisoners being pulled out of jail to kill people as requested by their employer’s clients. The scheme was effective for even if witnesses attest to seeing the gunmen, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to prove that the crime was committed by prisoners who are of course assumed to be locked up in jail. The scheme is a conspiracy that goes up to higher ranks in politics.
Yet, like most other conspiracies, the one in the movie On the Job was bound to crumble as people involved were starting to talk; even some of the hired gunmen. Of course, again, like in most conspiracies, these people inclined to talk are gunned down.
The theme of On the Job is quite controversial and though quite timely, this is not what captured my interest. On top of the political issue is a story of people torn between doing wrong and right.
On the Job presents scenes in a way similar to how real-life situation in similar setup would be like. The language is vernacular or that which is used in everyday speaking. There are relentless cursing that to some might seem offending but let’s admit it, many Filipinos, especially those in similar situations as the movie’s characters, would actually say putang ina whether happy or sad.
What interest me most about the story of “On the Job” are the forces influencing the characters’ life decisions. The movie may be fictional, but the motivations, the decisions, and the actions are all real and not exaggerations as what most other movies would show.
Of the many significant characters in “On the Job” there are three whose nature very much caught my attention, for they are the ones I have often seen, or read about.
Mario ‘Tatang” Maghari (Joel Torre) for one, admits that he agreed to be a hired gunman to get back together with his wife who has left him for being irresponsible and jobless; not to mention he has to support his daughter who is ironically taking up law. A father, a husband, locked in prison yet very much wanting to keep his family intact would most likely say yes to the first offer of income generation no matter the immorality of its nature.
Atty. Francis Coronel, Jr. (Piolo Pascual) is an investigator torn between his ideals and his love for his wife, who is the daughter of a congressman. Wanting to satisfy his wife’s desire of him being truly a part of the family, Coronel has willed himself to do his father-in-law favors.
Sgt. Joaquin Acosta (Joey Marquez) is a local police whose years of service in the force never have earned him a decent promotion. He is, however, happy with his position saying that at least he could sleep well at night. Acosta is very involved in drug busts not only because it is his job, but mostly because he has personal interest in it considering that he is slowly losing his son to drugs. But his decisions are mostly influenced by doing what is right, even if it means sacrificing a loved one.
In the film, the motivation of each character’s decision seems to boil down into one—family. It is Tatang’s, Coronel’s and Acosta’s motivation. It is even the motivation of Nicky Coronel (Shaina Magdayao), wife of Atty. Coronel. She bluntly expresses her acceptance of his father availing the services of gunmen to hunt down the killer of his wife—Nicky’s mother. This is the same acceptance she hopes for Atty. Coronel to have so as to prevent him from putting his own life in the line.
Yet, no matter how family so much affects a person’s decision, his or her desire to satisfy his personal needs still rises in the end. Like Tatang, finding out that his wife has been having an illicit relationship and that he no longer has a family to return to after his parole is served, figures out a way to stay in prison (Whatever it was that he did, I will not disclose, find it out by watching the film); and Coronel, regardless the love he has for his wife, decides to do what he believes is right.
Tatang values his family that he was willing to do anything for their survival; but he then shows more value to himself as he is willing to take a life just to keep his current position in the crime world. Sgt. Acosta, on the other hand, values righteousness that he is willing to bring his own son to justice. Atty. Coronel values both, that he is torn between family and righteousness causing him to suffer and eventually sacrifice one of these two things he value. (Again watch the film to know what he sacrificed and what he got in return)
The movie deals with how people decide when in a tight situation; what they consider, who they consider.
Who are we to say that a person’s values orientation or motivation is wrong? We can only judge the outcome. One thing is for sure though: We as humans often either do the wrong things for the right reasons or suffer for a just cause.
Originally published in Rizalhenyo
