image: Facebook/Darryl Yap
After the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board’s (MTRCB) notice regarding his Pepsi Paloma film’s “incomplete requirements” for review, Darryl Yap reposted a remark about the agency’s supposed “censorship.”
Through his Facebook Stories on Thursday, Jan. 30, the director shared a series of posts from poet-writer Jerry Gracio wherein the latter stressed that one should be consistent in standing against censorship.
“Papanoorin ko ba ang pelikula ni Darryl Yap? Maaaring hindi. Pero kung paanong naninindigan tayo tungkol sa censorship at sa paggamit sa PD 1986 para supilin ang mga pelikula na hindi pumapabor sa panlasa ng Estado o kung sino man ang nakaupo sa MTRCB, ganoon din dapat ang tindig natin sa iba pang mga pelikula na nakararanas o makararanas ng censorship, sino man ang may gawa nito,” Gracio said.
“Ang isyu ay censorship, hindi si Darryl Yap,” he continued. “Hindi puwedeng manawagan tayo na buwagin ang MTRCB tuwing ginigipit ang mga pelikula na ang tema, politika, at ideolohiya ay malapít sa atin; at kalimutan ang panawagan kapag ang sangkot ay hindi natin gusto.”
Gracio further noted that he believes that MTRCB should be “abolished”—a remark that was also reposted by Yap.
Yap, however, did not add any caption on his repost.
Image: Facebook/Darryl Yap
Image: Facebook/Darryl Yap
Image: Facebook/Darryl Yap
The issue came on the heels of the MTRCB’s denial that his movie about the late ’80s star Pepsi Paloma was already under review.
The agency said that the movie has yet to comply with a requirement to show proof that there is no pending criminal, civil, or administrative case against it, citing the sub judice rule.
Yap is currently facing separate cases of habeas data and 19 counts cyberlibel filed by actor-host Vic Sotto in connection with Pepsi Paloma movie, which supposedly depicted him as one of the rapists of the sexy star in the movie’s controversial trailer.
A ruling by the Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court, which is handling the habeas data case, partially granted Sotto’s petition directing Yap to take down the controversial trailer, and allowed the respondent filmmaker to proceed with the production and release of the movie. Earlier, it also issued a gag order on the parties regarding the case.
Yap’s lawyer Raymond Fortun said they are no longer appealing this decision of the trial court. In a separate interview, he said that he is not the one in charge of submitting the requirements to the MTRCB.