'Last Supper No. 3' is both funny and profound

Director: Veronica Velasco Decidedly funny and undoubtedly entertaining, “Last Supper No. 3" engages its audience with comedy sans the usual slapstick jokes, earning it a well-deserved award as the best film of Cinemalaya 5 last July. The independent feature was enveloped in witty exchanges and effective metaphors, keeping viewers absorbed in the film. Meet Wilson Nanawa (Joey Paras, Zsa Zsa Zaturnnah Ze Muzikal) an assistant production designer who unwittingly walks into the maze that is the Philippine legal system. Gareth Pugeda (Jojit Lorenzo), the owner of the elusive “Last Supper No. 3," leads him there. It starts out like this: Wilson borrows Gareth’s “Last Supper" tableau. Wilson misplaces it. Gareth sues Wilson and his assistant Andoy (JM de Guzman), asking for P25,000 as compensation. Their search for justice is spread out over two years. The movie highlights the different incidents Wilson goes through while trying to clear his name. He pays employees to get information he needs. A judge goes out of town the day his court date is set. His lawyer fails to appear in court. The film is a humorous take on the country’s legal system, exposing how someone without the knowledge to work the rules can easily get lost in it. For someone who deals with perfection as a profession, being catapulted into a situation that he has no control of is a metaphorical slap in the face. We find Wilson doing multiple camera takes of the precise way of squeezing toothpaste onto a toothbrush. We see him carefully choosing which food stain would look better on television. We watch him memorize his responses when he takes to the witness stand. These images of perfection severely contrast with the flawed reality Wilson encounters: he gets conned into giving himself up to the authorities when his warrant of arrest comes out, his court hearings are set back due to the untimely death of the presiding judge, and yes, he loses a depiction of the Last Supper and might be imprisoned for it. The movie, then, does not only discuss the flaws of the legal system, but also questions the authenticity of "perfection." The seemingly delicious corned beef in an advertisement is actually laden with varnish to make it glisten. Their agreement to settle, meant to appease both parties, backfired – bringing Wilson and his assistant to court. Most importantly, Wilson finds out that no amount of practice will guarantee seamless delivery on the witness stand. The film successfully demonstrates the difficult journey Wilson undergoes to achieve justice. The film drags out just when it needs to show the laborious path the main character undertakes to attain acquittal, allowing the audience to feel the same frustrations he does as he goes through the system. Another notable aspect of the film is how it succeeds in being funny without poking fun at the main character’s sexuality, a usual go-to in mainstream movies. The movie deviates from the predictable path of deriding homosexuals and demonstrates that it can still be hilarious without doing so – arguably, even funnier than most precisely because it chooses not to. The humor in the film is rooted in the situations themselves - ridiculous to most, but also very real to some. The film has its faults, however. It fails to answer certain questions in the end: What exactly happened to the Last Supper No. 3? Who was responsible? Granted, answers to these queries are not necessary to the plot, but they are ones that the curious viewer would want to know. With the proliferation of independent films in recent years, the variety for the genre seems endless. “Last Supper No. 3" proves to be a movie one cannot pass up. It is humor with brains, a departure from the norm. It is a look at society and its imperfections without being too dark and depressing. It is a testament to the Filipino spirit, how one copes despite hardship and coming out triumphant in the end. - GMANews.TV