Film Review: Let the Love Begin

Taking the Ride on Let the Love Begin
by Rianne Hill Soriano

"Let the Love Begin" is GMA Films’ comeback movie after four years of hibernating. The film outfit’s last movie was "Death Row" in 2000. Before it came out three other films "Jose Rizal," "Sa Pusod ng Dagat" and "Muro Ami," all given their due credit by a number of award-giving bodies. But this time, GMA Films comes back with a light love story. How far has it been compared to the past films of the outfit?

Same old story, overused dialogues, heart attack after a father-daughter argument, typically situated weirdo characters to surface the major characters more, the resurrection of the airport scene at the climax of the story (plus the rain effect)… those same elements… that same old formula… What happens is totally expected from start to end, only the actors and actresses have changed. The film yields to the tried and tested formula. Overused and recycled, yet the fans keep shouting in those “kilig moments.” GMA’s top bankable stars Richard Gutierrez and Angel Locsin get their followers whooping for their romantic tandem on screen. One problem posed on the storyline is how to make a worn-out vehicle more interesting for the fans.

The film traces the characters' story from their high school years to the corporate world. It is actually a fan movie reminiscent of the 80's romances, a glossy romance with a dose of "masa, crowd-pleasing" commercial elements. It is a simple straightforward love story about he usual poor boy meets rich girl. Eric (Richard Gutierres) is a brainy orphan raised by his grandmother (Glroia Romero). They live in a crowded class D type of rented room. He works as janitor in his school where he attends night classes. Pia (Angel Locsin), s a "Legally Blonde" character minus Elle's intelligence. She is a rich and spoiled girl more interested in gimmicks than her studies. This "socialized kikay" in the usual pink girly outfits (in par with her girl friends) has grown up with her gather (Tonton Gutierrez), motherless without establishing anything to anwer the how's and why's.

The story, dialogues, camera shots, treatment, acting and overall blocking reminds you of a typical “kilig” teenybopper TV show. In considerably big scenes, like Eric’s chaotic-looking neighborhood, a keen eye could notice a great number of bit players/extras going to and fro, back and forth, on the frame. It is understandable that the setting presents a rather crowdy, below middle class look. But the movement of these people is like an effortless walking and showing of themselves on screen. There is a problem with the blocking especially when the shot is already running around more than ten seconds. You may see a man walking to his house, then goes out, and goes from one side of the frame to another at every cue probably given to him. And not just one but a couple of them are seen like this. Another scene inside the church shows a conscious backgrounder with a quite confusing and kinda funny expression while attempting to look cute on screen. It is quite distracting to a spectator’s sharp eyes. Such things are all dependent on how the film is envisioned and what priorities are there in the process of filming. But what difference can a film have with that of TV? On a more personal note, a film should always aim for the best, a luxury not very much enjoyed by a number of TV shows since the latter is usually running for time of broadcast, and overall, the format is quite not the same (but fortunately, there are some attempts for a more cinematic look on some TV programs now.) With this movie, the major actors and actresses are the main priority, of course; but the minor characters (bit players) and other little details for the film seem too much ignored. It could have been better if all the ingredients are of best quality to provide the best outcome for it, especially to those ones who like a feel good story, and yet are hungry for more creative stuffs along with it.

From nowhere comes the text shown on screen: after five years. Time has quickly passed. No creative transitions. This time, Eric, still nursing a wounded heart when Pia studied in the US, is still a janitor working Pia’s company. The film’s second love story concerns Luigi (Mark Herras), a playboy who ignores his high school tomboyish best friend, Alex (Jennylyn Mercado). After college, Alex blooms into an attractive young lady photographer (a great character change in a click of a hand). This time, she wins the heart of the former womanizer Luigi.
The Tagaytay breather gives a light relief. The “kilig factor” for the savior Eric and his beloved Pia fuel this officially saccharine sweetie movie particularly on the latter part of the story. The chemistry between the love tems come in full force as shrieks reverberate in the moviehouse. The typical mainstream ingredients engineered to make them swoon and scream with the good looks of the love teams on screen.

On another personal note, I just noticed a very similar scene between this film and Star Cinema’s own Valentine offering. The scene of Bea and Piolo spilling mineral water over each other for the kicks is just way the same as that scene of Angel, Richard, Jennylyn and Mark spilling mineral water over one another as well. If you’re able to watch both films, it’s quite noticeable. Could this be out of the network rivals’ spying endeavors or just a mere coincidence?
The credibility of the narrative hangs on such a simple plot scripted into a contrivance (having a long time frame for the whole story) is probably the millionth version of the same old storyline, plotpoints, dialogues, framing, elements, treatment, and everything else – except those fresh faces utilized to mask the ever basic recycling. Aside from the great looks of the major actors and actresses complementing the camera shots and those slow motion effects for that additional “pa-cute factor,” the movie is a rather predictable series of events from start to end. It has some script lapses. With the acting, everything starts so lousy as the characters have concentrated too much on the “pa-cute and pakilig effects” that they tend to lose touch on any possible acting prowess to show up. They are almost merely uttering the dialogues. Tension-filled and dramatic scenes don’t even make an over-sensitive viewer get a faster heartbeat. Good thing, on the latter part of the story, some good developments happen.

It seems to be a youth-oriented TV program shot in 35mm film. Nothing much for the evolving tastes of some demanding moviegoers. Nevertheless, as the movie resorting to the “cheesy, pakilig effect” to please the fans, the intentions to hit the target market is effective enough to take them for the ride.