The Representation of Poverty in Selected Films of Brillante Mendoza: A Semiotic Reading

Kriztine R. Viray

Abstract


This paper interprets the works of Brillante Mendoza, a prominent figure in the Philippine independent film movement, through a semiotic analysis. The study aims to explore the conditions of poverty and the related factors that sustain and intensify this social phenomenon by examining Mendoza’s films. By analyzing the aesthetic elements of his movies—such as narrative structure, technical presentation, character development, and overall flow—the author seeks to uncover the connotative meanings that contribute to prevailing socio-cultural myths. The paper focuses on four of Mendoza’s critically acclaimed films, recognized at international film festivals. Through an analysis of their narratives and thematic content, the study identifies recurring themes such as crime, institutionalized violence, resource scarcity, inequality, sexual exploitation, and overpopulation in impoverished settings. Mendoza’s films offer a critical reflection on societal issues, particularly poverty, challenging viewers’ perceptions of morality and ethics in situations marked by extreme adversity. By approximating Mendoza’s objectives, thoughts, and perspectives on poverty, the author formulates key concepts and myths about poverty as portrayed in his films. The study argues that Mendoza’s body of work serves as a powerful critique of societal conditions and underscores the need for collective action to address these persistent challenges. It emphasizes that apathy and indifference are major barriers to eradicating poverty. This comprehensive analysis enriches the discourse on Philippine cinema, underscoring its potential as a medium for social critique and a mirror of complex, multifaceted societal issues.

 

Keywords: Brillante Mendoza’s films, Kinatay, Masahista, Serbis, Kahirapan.

 

https://doi.org/10.17576/JKMJC-2025-4102-20


Full Text:

PDF

References


Arriola, J., & David, J. (2019). Film criticism in the Philippines. Unitas, 93(1), 1–16.

Barthes, R. (1977). Elements of semiology. New York: Hill and Wang.

Baskett, M. (2008). The attractive empire: Transnational film culture in Imperial Japan. University of Hawai’i Press.

Bautista, A. (2015, April 14). History of Philippine cinema. National Commission for Culture and the Arts. https://ncca.gov.ph/about-ncca-3/subcommissions/subcommission-on-the-arts-sca/cinema/history-of-philippine-cinema/

Castro, A. D. R. (2014, June 12). *368. Julian Manansala, The Father of Philippine Nationalist Films. Views from The Pampang. https://viewsfromthepampang.blogspot.com/2014/06/368-julian-manansala-father-of.html?m=1

Garcia Jr, R. F. (2021). The end of modernity: Temporalities of nation, indigeneity, and the anthropocene in the contemporary independent cinema of the Philippines [Doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon].

Kurniaji, S. A., & Clareta, D. (2022). Representation of the conflict of the working class and the slaughter class: Roland Barthes' semiotics analysis in movie "TURAH". JOSAR (Journal of Students Academic Research), 8(2), 156-164.

Hébert, L. (2006). Elements of semiotics. Signo. http://www.signosemio.com/elements-of-semiotics.asp

Philippine Journeys. (n.d.). History of Philippine cinema. Aenet.org.

Philippine Star. (2017, June 10). The first Golden Age of Philippine cinema. https://www.philstar.com/entertainment/2017/06/10/1708864/first-golden-age-philippine-cinema

Rodriguez, A. D. (2021). Urban lowlands: A history of neighbourhoods, poverty, and planning. The University of Chicago Press.

Suharto, A. M. T. M. (2023). Nor from the second level: Multilayer juxtaposition and the two social reality approach. Short Film Studies, 13(1), 59-67.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


e-ISSN: 2289-1528