Image source: Rappler

In 2024, a documentary about the enforced disappearance of an activist was given an X Rating by the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRB). Alipato at Muog was effectively banned from commercial establishments due to its alleged undermining of the “faith and confidence of the people in their government.” This sparked great controversy, with director JL Burgos expressing that the decision was an act of censorship. Because of the film’s political themes, he believes the rating was an attempt to prevent the truth from reaching the public.

While the Philippine film industry has been undergoing a renaissance, it faces significant threats from state control. The democratization and diversification of Filipino films in recent years have made the medium more operative for political calls, but this very nature led the government to surveil. Films may often be devalued for its entertainment function, but it also holds significance for political learning. Thus, restricting this role carries significant implications for Philippine democracy

The History of Film Censorship in the Philippines

Film censorship is not new to the Philippines. As early as 1937, the newly established Board of Censorship for Moving Pictures faced its first controversy when it ordered the withdrawal of the film Batang Tulisan from cinemas. During this period, censorship was heavily influenced by concerns over religion and morality. The film was banned due to its evil portrayal of a clergyman and the use of a hypodermic needle for murder, both of which were deemed unacceptable at the time.

In the post-war era, film censorship shifted focus to monitoring political ideology, particularly after the reorganization of the Board in 1961. This led to the involvement of the military and the police in the process, further controlling the industry in the state’s proliferation of its political motives. One notable incident was the brief ban of Iginuhit ng Tadhana, a film defending Ferdinand Marcos, who was then accused of murder. However, the issue took a turn with Marcos gaining public support, while President Diosdado Macapagal’s popularity declined.

The early years of Ferdinand Marcos’ Martial Law ushered in even stricter film censorship. Films with subversive themes were quickly banned, and scripts had to be approved before production, further suppressing free expression. The Board of Review for Motion Pictures and Television (BRMPT) became effectively an extension of the dictator’s control, with final decisions on films vested in him.

Nevertheless, filmmakers such as Ishmael Bernal, Marilou Diaz-Abaya, and Mike de Leon defied the regime by creating politically charged films that played a crucial role in exposing the injustices and atrocities committed by the Marcoses. However, many of their works, namely Himala, Moral, and Batch ‘81, were cut to meet the administration’s standards. Lino Brocka’s Bayan Ko: Kapit sa Patalim was outright banned, but this particular film managed to challenge the system, with its producers suing the Board in the Supreme Court.

Film Censorship Today

Censorship continues to limit creative freedom in the Philippines today. The current regulatory body, the MTRCB, is mandated with reviewing and classifying films based on their alignment with Filipino cultural values. However, a concerning pattern has emerged regarding which films face censorship. Beyond the authority of the MTRCB, there appears to be increasing censorship within independent film festivals as well.

One recent example is Food Delivery: Fresh from the West Philippine Sea. The documentary about the struggles of Filipino fishermen was unexpectedly removed from the lineup of the 2025 Puregold CinePanalo Film Festival despite already gaining traction. A similar controversy unfolded at Cinemalaya 2024, where screenings of Lost Sabungeros, a documentary exploring the disappearances of over thirty sabungeros, were cancelled. Additionally, A Tale of Filipino Violence, a film documenting the violence during the Marcos dictatorship, was pulled from its spot as the opening film at Cinemalaya 2023.

The censorship of these films undermines the very essence of independent film festivals. These festivals should be platforms that champion diverse voices from various backgrounds, but when they are tainted by censorship, likely due to pressure from political actors who may be supporting the festivals, they stifle the creative independence they should be nurturing. Filmmaking is an expensive craft, and as a result, filmmakers may choose to avoid politically charged projects, knowing they are likely to be blocked from even reaching the silver screen.

This trend sets a dangerous precedent for creatives, discouraging them from making films that critique the country’s current situation or the government’s response or lack thereof. It is possible that there are political actors who provide support to these festivals and are directly influencing decisions to censor content that could be seen as critical of the status quo. This may lead to self-censorship, as filmmakers may fear being targeted by censorship authorities. In a country that already undervalues the arts and culture, the government’s involvement typically arises only when it serves a political purpose. Consequently, support and funding for the arts remain limited, further discouraging dissenting voices and preventing meaningful societal critique through film.

Reevaluating the Government’s Role in the Philippine Film Industry

While monitoring content for safety, particularly for children, is important, the government should not have the power to control what its people consume. If the government maintains a monopoly over entertainment regulation, the threat of censorship will always loom. Disguised as protection or guidance, censorship undermines democracy by essentially dictating which films are allowed to reach the public. This power to control information and content restricts freedom of choice, suppressing the diversity of ideas and artistic expression that are vital in a democratic society. This is what the Directors’ Guild of the Philippines, Inc. also asserted in their statement stating their solidarity with filmmakers who continue to confront uncomfortable truths.

Filipinos should be free to decide for themselves what to watch, as they deserve access to a wide range of perspectives and experiences. Filmmakers play an essential role in highlighting issues and showcasing stories from sectors of society that might otherwise be overlooked. These creators take risks to produce films that provoke thought and bring attention to important social issues. This has led to calls for the reconfiguration of the MTRCB, with filmmakers and academics arguing that creative freedom should be unrestricted, allowing for a more open and diverse film industry.

The Future of Philippine Cinema

The Philippines is at a critical moment in the film industry, one that should fully be taken advantage of. The industry is experiencing a resurgence following the COVID-19 pandemic, with both the demand for and the supply of films on the rise, fueled by a new generation of talented filmmakers. Given these developments, we must ask: how can we protect and harness the power of this medium?

Censorship, particularly in cinema, has a profound impact on democracy. It not only restricts creative expression but also limits access to alternative sources of information. While the news media is responsible for presenting the truth, it is through film that people can truly feel and connect with that truth. Seeing realities through the eyes of those who experience them makes film an essential tool for social awareness and change.