MANILA, Philippines – The release of the highly anticipated historical film “Quezon,” chronicling the complex life and political ascent of the second Philippine President, Manuel L. Quezon, has ignited a fierce, public debate, centered not on cinematic quality but on historical accuracy, artistic license, and the responsibility of storytelling. The discourse has been amplified by the outspoken reactions of the President’s own living relatives, including actress Pinky Amador, who offered a thoughtful yet pointed critique of the film’s methods and potential impact on a historically-challenged nation.

The controversy reached a boiling point during a post-screening talkback session, where Ricky Avanceña, a direct descendant of the late President and Amador’s uncle, launched a blistering tirade against the film’s director, Jerrold Tarog.

The Avanceña Outburst: A “Joke” and Pandora’s Box

The confrontation began when Avanceña directly asked Tarog if the film was intended as a political satire. When the director affirmed the satirical angle, Avanceña escalated his critique, declaring the film to be “a joke.”

He went on to accuse the filmmakers of discrediting his family’s legacy, claiming that in making “Quezon,” the creators had “opened Pandora’s Box,” referring to private family history. His frustration culminated in an explosive verbal attack, captured by attendees:

“Hindi niyo alam ano ginawa niyo dahil kayo, gusto niyo kumita ng pera at sumikat… mahiya kayo,” Avanceña roared, accusing the team of profiting at his family’s expense. His anger peaked with a shocking invocation of his grandfather’s persona: “China-channel ko ngayon ang aking lolo sa paksa ninyo, ‘Pta kayo, mga p**ina niyo, kupal kayo!'” (Roughly translating to: “You don’t know what you’ve done because you just want to earn money and become famous… you should be ashamed! I am channeling my grandfather now on your subject: ‘You sons of bitches, you jerks!'”).

In a subsequent Facebook post detailing his experience—which was his third time seeing the film that week—Avanceña also singled out the film’s lead actor, Jericho Rosales, accusing him of attempting to block a response from a direct descendant of Quezon, thus contributing to the “canceling of a Quezon.”

The Artist’s Perspective: A Fine Line Between Art and History

The controversy drew comments from within the acting community, notably from John Arcilla, the lead star of the first “Bayaniverse” film, “Heneral Luna.” Arcilla, who is also a Quezon descendant, weighed in on Avanceña’s post, acknowledging the complexity of the situation and agreeing that living relatives should ideally have been consulted prior to the film’s release.

Arcilla noted that the “satirical” angle might be the “best defense” for the film, observing that the movie appeared to lean into that style through how it “styled the early rigodons of political opponents and some of the ‘actings.'” While he respected the technical aspects, Arcilla implied that the film’s interpretation of events itself felt inherently satirical.

Pinky Amador’s Calculated Critique: Sensationalism at What Cost?

Actress Pinky Amador, who was present at the explosive talkback session alongside her uncle, chose a more measured, yet equally critical, approach, sharing her perspective on Instagram.

Amador, whose grandmother, Maria Zeneida “Nina” Quezon Avanceña, was a key inspiration in her life—notably for protesting during the Marcos dictatorship—began by praising the technical skill and performances showcased in the film. However, she quickly pivoted to the issue of the film’s motivation and its ethical boundaries.

She posited that producer TBA Studios might have aimed for maximum “traction and subsequent sales” by making a “big, bold statement” in its latest historical entry.

“How to do that? Sensationalism. Shock value. Alternative treatment. As a creative, of course I get all that…but at WHO[SE] EXPENSE?” Amador questioned emphatically.

The actress expressed deep concern over the power imbalance involved, noting that the project was funded by billionaires and possessed the “MACHINERY to debunk any argument made against the film.” In her view, the resources backing the film allowed its creators to disregard potential historical or familial sensitivities.

The Education Crisis: History as Miseducation

Amador’s most profound objection lay not in the film’s artistic choices, but in its potential societal impact, connecting the film’s content directly to the Philippines’ ongoing educational crisis.

She starkly reminded her audience that the country faces a dire situation where 24 million Filipinos struggle with functional literacy, and a staggering 91% of 10-year-olds are unable to read simple texts.

In this context, she argued that films officially endorsed by the Department of Education—which “Quezon” is—are not merely entertainment; they become a primary source of information for millions of people. When such a film presents only a “sensationalized” side of history, it ceases to be poor storytelling and becomes outright miseducation.

In a video she posted from the talkback session, Amador warned the panel that films like “Quezon” wield immense influence because the modern viewing public often “no longer take time to do their research.” She stressed the necessity of “treading a fine line” with historical depictions, especially given the prevalence of modern “cancel culture.”

While Amador respected Director Tarog’s clarification that he intended to do right by his historical sources, she maintained her distrust of the project’s overall intent. In the comments section of her post, she issued a final, scathing assessment: “I surmise that the creatives of this film are just as cunning, Machiavellian, and manipulative as the anti-hero they produced.”

The actress concluded her powerful statement by acknowledging the personal risk she took, stressing that she might “never work with the filmmakers and receive hate from her fellow creatives.” Yet, she underscored her conviction, asserting that she was speaking out on behalf of her ancestors who are “no longer here to defend themselves.”

“Quezon,” which chronicles the politician’s life through the lens of the four rivalries he faced during his rise to power and stars Jericho Rosales in his return to film after seven years, clearly succeeds in achieving the “traction” Amador noted. However, the ensuing debate confirms that in a nation grappling with historical clarity, the line between cinematic interpretation and historical responsibility remains deeply contested, with the descendants of the subject serving as the most vocal critics.