Bakit dilaw ang gitna ng bahag-hari?

1) Again, the Tahimik's commentary of the Philippine Masses or the 'Third World' feels so dense. It almost feels mocking at times. His gross simplification really makes shows his bourgeois (or even upper class) background more apparent. He was after all a son of a Government Official post war. It does not have the subtlety or the complication of other great Filipino directors of the time. It verges towards the worst of 'poornographist' of the country.

2) This really picks up when it became a pure video essay about Martial Law. It is where it really developed the Yellow (and ultimately the Pink) of it all. I think he smartly realize the importance and the need to document it. Sadly, it is one of the very few documentaries of the time to show the full extent of the Final Years of the Marcos Era and Post Aquino Presidency in full.

3) Given its lengthy time frame (from early 1980s towards the end of the Cory Regime), it also gives a glimpse of how the passage of time had changed. From a weary populace upon the death of Ninoy, the 1986 revolution towards the lowpoints of the Aquino administration. Its one of the few documentaries that really show the change in attitude towards each regime flowing from one to another. I think it predicts what I think the Aquino hate deluge of the Duterte-Marcos era AND also shows the growing contempt that I think most Filipinos has over the revolution (sadly). Its not in any way glass tinted view of the event AND show a much more nuance take on the rapidly changing time.

Again, I do not feel Tahimik's commentary on Third World Epithets but when the Aquino-Marcos section happened, it finds its footing. Tahimik commentary became sharper and his 'quirky' style less grating as he attune to something he might have a better hold of - the changing times of the era.