Fact or fiction: How accurate should historical biopics be?
The recent controversy about the historical accuracy of Jerrold Tarog’s Quezon biographical film has created numerous online debates. Central to the discussions is whether biopics are supposed to share only historical facts, or directors are entitled to some creative liberties.
Much of the issue is rooted in the outburst of the grandson of former Philippine president Manuel Quezon during the talkback session of the film’s Oct. 23 showing in Makati City. In a lengthy tirade aimed mostly at Tarog, Ricky Avanceña wondered whether the film was political satire, and when Tarog answered in the affirmative, Avanceña lamented how it might misdirect students in the audience.
Heneral Luna actor John Arcilla, another Quezon descendant, likewise shared his thoughts while agreeing with Avanceña.
“I, or anyone else, cannot blame you. Our family is still very much alive. They should have considered consulting the direct descendants and relatives [of Quezon],” he wrote on Facebook. “The preachy and direct characterization of our Lolo’s persona according to what the film wants to paint was explicitly stated by the fictional Joven—who represents the audience—right to his face. That’s what truly feels bothersome. I feel you, ‘nsan.”
To address the controversy around its treatment of Manuel Quezon's story, TBA Studios, the producing studio of Quezon, clarified in a statement that while the movie has fictional elements for thematic purposes, the facts and details in the Bayaniverse entry "are easily verifiable through public records, online research, or library resources."
The production also noted it released a study guide and companion book with a "comprehensive list of the books and references used in the film’s research." The book, Quezon: The Story Behind the Film, contains a century-long timeline of events from 1872 to 1972, relevant to Quezon's story. The study guide by historian Alvin D. Campomanes, meanwhile, includes lists of questions teachers can use for class discussions: one set focused on the main characters, and another tackling specific scenes in the film.
A big part of the guide is devoted to discussing filmmakers' need to apply some creative liberties in telling the story of historical figures.
Campomanes asked, "Is it possible to produce a historical film without any invented or fictional elements?"
"The answer is no," he wrote. "An actor’s interpretation of a historical figure, the choice of a lamp or curtain, the lighting, color grading, and camera angles may all involve invention... Does this mean the historical event depicted in a scene is not true? The exchange of opinions on these questions is always stimulating and rewarding."
"In order to engage historical films meaningfully, we must remember at the outset that they are only 'creative approximations' of past events," he added, citing American historian Roberto Rosenstone.
Historians weigh in
When asked how accurate historical biopics should be, historian and author Jose Victor Torres acknowledged that the line between art and fact is thin. "But the director still has to be creative because he is making a film, and not a documentary," he told PhilSTAR L!fe. "That is why there is always that [advisory] at the start of [a biopic] that it is ‘based on true events’ and does not claim to be totally factual.”
Vin dela Serna Lopez, Palanca award-winning author of historical novel 1762, added that when a biopic director tweaks some historical references, they are actually adding to the piece’s educational element.
“The point of any artistic work anchored in the historical is a different kind of education,” he said. “We put them out there not necessarily to educate us on the details—we’ve got enough ivory towers to do that. We put them out there to reawaken the conscience, or to keep it awake, to pique the young who need that awakening, and to revive the will or the hope (or both) of the old who might have lost it a long time ago.”
In his analysis of the film, academic and historian Xiao Chua celebrated Quezon's complexity.
"Wala akong problema na maging kritikal sa kanya at purihin siya at the same time. And besides, as much as his family owns him, he also belongs to the nation. Dakilang Pilipino siya e. Wala tayong magagawa diyan. Inevitable nga sabi ng isang kaibigan ko," he wrote in a Facebook post. "Matuto na lang tayo sa mga pagkakamali niya at ipagdiwang ang mga magagandang katangian niya."
"Kaya nga ang cast, in all the forum na naattendan ko, still express their admiration for him despite 'yung perceived depiction sa kanya, kasi nga para sa kanila, it is what it is. What a complex, colorful man," he added.
For his part, historian Kristoffer Pasion described to L!fe the ideal biopic: “It has the balance of accuracy and creative license. One strengthens the other, and vice versa. It should never go hagiographical (that is, idealizing the subject) nor move away from what the sources/facts say.”
The role of a biopic, according to him, is to tell a historical figure’s story by evoking emotion using drama and narrative experiences “while embodying a deeper truth about its subject, depending on the filmmaker’s intent.
Pasion pointed out that like historical research papers, biopics cannot capture every detail, so the director may use editing mechanisms to emphasize some points and exclude others.
“Ultimately, such films are shaped not only by fidelity to historical evidence but also by the cultural context and sensibilities of the time in which they are made,” he said. “The challenge for filmmakers is always to ensure that the basic overarching theme and foundational elements of the narrative are based on what can be gleaned from the sources, having been informed by a consensus of historians. This still allows space for creative license.”
Pasion went on to express his hope that history teachers and advocates "have made themselves ready" to answer questions about Quezon. He said, "People need to know Quezon based on the primary sources. People will definitely ask us—and this is good."