American Adobo (2001)

Such a frustrating disappointment

Simply A Masterpiece

Sadly Over-hyped

Good concept, poorly executed.

This movie centers on a group of Philippine-Americans who meet for dinner (adobo-style cooking). Each in the group is having relationship problems and the film follows them as they each come to a turning point in their love lives.I have reviewed something like a bazillion movies on IMDb and I noticed a long time ago that I tend to rate films a little harsher than average. Because of this, I tend to get much more than my fair share of "not helpful" votes. Despite this, I continue being a somewhat harsh critic since I don't review films to make friends. However, this film is a rare case where all the reviews are far harsher and the overall rating far lower than I'd give the film. It makes me start to wonder if I was wrong in liking this film....well, no it doesn't.Now I could understand someone not liking this movie for a few reasons. First, this movie starts off very slowly and it's hard to like it during the first half hour or so. Heck, I considered turning it off--mostly because so many of the characters are unlikable and this is a SERIOUS problem for this style of film. Second, there is an awful lot of nudity, very strong language and adult content--again, some of this (particularly the language) seemed inappropriate for this type of movie.When I say "this type of movie", I mean an ethnic slice of life film--much like EAT, DRINK, MAN, WOMAN or DOUBLE HAPPINESS or BOLLYWOOD/Hollywood. The sort of movies that may make excellent date films or family films. However, I really couldn't see showing this to my kids even though they are teens--it's just got too many boobs and the dreaded F-word by the scores.Now if you can look past the harshness of the film, it does get a lot better and fortunately some of the less likable characters do improve as the film continues. However, I do agree with one of the reviews that felt a couple of the better subplots alone might have made a better film. The story of the spinster and the gay man were very compelling and touching. The rest, unfortunately, are harder to enjoy since the characters are pretty selfish.However, I am a sucker for films like this because they emphasize story and people. Now I can't accurately know what the Filipino experience is like--so how close they actually got to realistic characters is a bit of a mystery to me. But I liked the writing and story and for the life of me I cannot understand why it's rated THAT low. Oh well, to each his or her own.

if this was written by Richard Curtis ( four weddings and a funeral. Notting Hill ), it might made a better film. Although most of the conversations were made round the table, they might have been eating fish and chips. If your a Filipino watching the film, you have an idea what food would be served, but what about us non Filipino?.The film does not show the Filipino in a good light. The single man treats women like dirt ( is that why most Filipino women leave their country to become domestic helpers ) The good looking woman chooses a man, who is not in the same league as her. The married man works and his children are dreadful and his wife is a cow (reminds us that somethings don't change ). The gay and the virgin are the only normal people??? Is that representative of the Filipino abroad? Anyway the acting was good, and with a little more thought to the script, the film could have been more than average.

... because all I offer is honesty here, folks.I saw this with my wife and friends (and before you ask, she and they are Filipino). Afterwards, as we went home we were... laughing. Not at any of the funny parts. At the over-acting, at the storyline (the lead actress ends up with an Anglo fireman after years of self-imposed virginal solitude), at the gay subplot that could have actually made a better fim on its own. I really didn't care about the other characters at all, and oddly enough the only other white character was a Pinoy stereotype of American women (it's hard to take a film like this seriously when they can't even overcome the things they claim to find offensive in U.S. films).Having seen my share of Regal and Viva films, I'd say that while the production values were better than usual the director can't overcome the bad acting or maybe his own style of directing.Personally, I'd have preferred watching Ricky Davao shoot guys in the shoulder...Somebody should remake "Kabayo Kids" or something like that, gearing it to both Anglo and Pinoy audiences if they want to break in here.Oh, the film does have one good moment that I recall; one of the guests is admonished for speaking Tagalog in front of thier non-Pinoy guests. That hit home. I happens more often then they want to admit, and they never want to admit it's rude, especially since they know English.I'd give it a 4 out of 10. Maybe worth a rental, if only to compare notes with future Fil-Am films.

As a Filipino American filmmaker, I was excited to sit and watch a film about Filipinos. What I got was. a film about Filipinos from filmmakers who seem to think that 'we' are not intelligent human beings. Who was this film made for? Americans? Filipinos? Everyone? I'm not saying the characters were non-intelligent, but the way the story was told seemed like it was told to those who wouldn't get it.Subtext? Where was it?If this was a film made for American's then I'm embarrassed at the representation. Not the representation as far as character and story, but the representation as far as Filipino filmmakers and their work.If this was a film made for Filipinos, then I'd have to ask. are we this dumb that you have to over explain things?As user, `mhark villaruz' states, `the film tends to over explain things'. That was a huge complaint of mine which I posed to another Filipino director. He argued that maybe that is how Filipinos really are. They wear their emotion on their sleeve and nothing is left to subtext. Okay, I can buy that, but that is not what filmmaking and solid story telling is all about. Is it? My argument was that the non-subtextual style of characters was an insult to us as intellectual viewers. Again, why over explain things?The performers could only do so much based on a script and a director directing them. So here are a few things that stand out.-Was it kinda `stagey'? Cheating to the camera is one thing, but playing to the camera as Marissa (Bonnevie) did in the break up scene was just so. well, `stagey'! (that was just one of many)-Who knew Gerry (Davao) was gonna kiss Mike (De Leon)? Was that just so fricken' obvious? That didn't come out of nowhere but it could have. And if it did, it would have been a very dramatic moment. And what does it say about Davao's character, who we rooted for, when he was so in love with a man dying of AIDS? He just cheated on his life long partner at the END of the movie!!!If the film was structurally sound, the archs would have been more convincing.The 'kiss' and Tere's (Picache) breakdown, for example, could have all been structured as a midpoint sequence. It would have been interesting to watch their lives play out for the whole second act after that. Then we could see rewards for what they went through at the VERY end: Gerry possibly coming to terms with his mother and Mike, or Tere finding the love of her dreams, etc. etc. etc.Overall, the film was able to portray life here (America) as Filipino Americans and some of the cultures: The party where people were dancing in the b.g. (where was the pig on the table?), the American/Filipino language, the rich bitch, the political angst, the hardships, and the results of labor.But it lacked in direction, story and style.What got it made? Here's your answer: PASSION.PASSION - the number one lesson from this film for future or current filmmakers!