Summary
Highlights
The film introduces its premise: making a movie about Jose Rizal, where nothing, even his heroism, is taken for granted. It questions the perception of Rizal as a national hero and hints at exploring controversial aspects of his life.
The film explores how Jose Rizal is perceived—as a national hero, the Great Malayan, the First Filipino. It touches on different facets of his public image, from being depicted on currency to being revered as a saint by some groups like the Aglipay Church in 1904, and even as a box office attraction in early Filipino cinema.
It highlights early American filmmakers racing to produce movies about Rizal, focusing on his execution. The discussion then shifts to the significant 'retraction controversy,' where Rizal allegedly renounced his anti-Catholic sentiments. The film questions the authenticity of the retraction document and the signature, setting the stage for deeper investigation.
The film notes the irony of the Catholic Church's paranoia regarding Rizal's heroism, while various cults deified him. It portrays Rizal as a god-like figure for some, emphasizing the problematic nature of such hero-worship and suggesting Rizal himself would be dismayed.
The narrative takes a turn, proposing the film is a 'detective story' investigating Rizal's heroism. It directly addresses questions about his stance on the revolution, his relationship with Josephine Bracken, and rumors about his sexual orientation. The film particularly focuses on the controversy surrounding Rizal's alleged marriage to Josephine Bracken and the validity of his retraction in connection to it.
Rizal's sister, Narcisa, and others offer their perspectives on Josephine Bracken and the retraction. Narcisa expresses complex feelings towards Josephine, acknowledging her care for Rizal but also criticizing her perceived scandalous behavior within the family. She also shares her disbelief in Rizal's retraction, citing the lack of a verifiable document.
The film revisits the retraction document, noting its mysterious disappearance and later reappearance by Jesuit Father Manuel Garcia in 1935. It questions the credibility of this discovery, especially given the varying accounts and the timing of its finding.
The film presents differing accounts of Rizal's final hours, particularly from Padre Balaguer and the Rizal family. Balaguer claims Rizal confessed twice and embraced Catholicism, while the family's narrative focuses on hidden messages in a lamp and shoes, and his last poem, "Mi Ultimo Adios," as a true testament to his unwavering convictions.
The film directly challenges Rizal, embodied by an actor, on his alleged retraction and his stance on the revolution. It questions if he was truly a hero or if his status is merely a construct. The discussion delves into the meaning of heroism and whether Rizal's actions align with the conventional understanding of a national hero, especially given the controversies.
The film concludes by acknowledging Rizal's enduring status as a national hero, despite the ambiguities and controversies surrounding his life and actions. It suggests that his heroism, whether flawed or constructed, is deeply interwoven with the identity of the Philippines, making him a permanent monument on currency and in national consciousness.