Filmmaker Darryl Yap has recently addressed the Movie and Television Review and Classification Board’s (MTRCB) statement concerning his upcoming film, “Pepsi Paloma.” In a detailed social media post, Yap provided insights into the submission process and his perspective on the board’s requirements.
Yap began by clarifying that the film’s distributor was responsible for submitting the movie to the MTRCB. He inquired whether the materials had been accepted and was informed affirmatively. “Ang nagpaMTRCB po ng pelikula namin ay ang distributor, tinanong ko naman kung tinanggap ang materials, umoo naman,” he stated. He noted that the distributor arrived at the MTRCB office early in the morning, and by lunchtime, when he sought an update, he was informed of a scheduled legal meeting. Later that evening, he received a letter outlining additional requirements that had not been requested for his previous 16 films.
Expressing his concerns, Yap mentioned that he was uncertain whether the MTRCB had viewed the film. He emphasized that when one submits a film to the MTRCB, it is typically for review purposes, not for safekeeping. “Pag pumunta ka sa MTRCB, natural papareview ka,” he remarked. He also highlighted that he was unaware of the additional requirements being requested, as he was merely submitting the film for review, a process that inherently involves the submission of certain materials.
Yap further expressed his respect for the MTRCB, stating that if they had not yet reviewed the film, he understood. However, he took issue with being portrayed as dishonest over minor details. He emphasized that he was simply submitting his film for review, not his personal character. “Gumawa ako ng pelikula, bahagi yan ng industriya; ng mga karapatan at kalayaang kaakibat nito. Pelikula ko lang ang pinapasuri ko, hindi ang aking pagkatao,” he asserted.
In recent developments, Yap has faced legal challenges related to the film. Vic Sotto filed 19 counts of cyber libel against him over the release of a teaser for “The Rapists of Pepsi Paloma,” which mentioned and accused Sotto of rape. Yap responded by stating that all materials he released were documented and based on events from the 1980s, emphasizing that he had no personal or political motives. He clarified that the film is about Pepsi Paloma and is not intended to target any individuals.
In his social media post, Yap elaborated on the submission process, stating that the distributor had submitted the film to the MTRCB early in the morning. By lunchtime, when he sought an update, he was informed of a scheduled legal meeting. Later that evening, he received a letter outlining additional requirements that had not been requested for his previous 16 films. He expressed his concerns about these additional requirements, stating that he was unaware of them and that he was merely submitting the film for review. He emphasized that he was not trying to be dishonest and that he was simply submitting his film for review, not his character.
Yap also addressed the legal challenges he is facing, stating that he has no personal or political motives and that the film is about Pepsi Paloma, not intended to target any individuals. He emphasized that all materials he released were documented and based on events from the 1980s.
In conclusion, Yap expressed his respect for the MTRCB and stated that if they had not yet reviewed the film, he understood. However, he took issue with being portrayed as dishonest over minor details. He emphasized that he was simply submitting his film for review, not his character. He reiterated that he has no personal or political motives and that the film is about Pepsi Paloma, not intended to target any individuals.