#tdi_1 .td-doubleSlider-2 .td-item1 { background: url( 0 0 no repeat; } #tdi_1 .td-doubleSlider-2 .td-item2 { background: url( 0 0 no repeat; }
By Joseph L. Garcia, Senior Journalist
Film Review
Bar Boys: After School
Directed by Kip Oebanda
Produced by 901 Studios
MTRCB Rating: PG
2017 movie Bar Boys is becoming a beloved franchise, with a 2024 stage adaptation and now a second film. Unfortunately for me, I didn’t ride the 2017 hype of the first movie, about friends navigating life and law school. In other words, I didn’t see it.
What that meant in this sequel review was that I had no emotional investment in the characters (played by Rocco Nacino, Carlo Aquino, and Enzo Pineda). Kean Cipriano attends law school in a way that his character in the first film did not. (All the actors play the same roles they played in the first film.)
“Boys” are now shown living their lives after passing through a bar 10 years ago. The lawyer of Mr. Aquino works for an NGO. The character of Mr. Nacino is a devoted family man, a good lawyer at a law firm (and is only used as the face of his firm, much to his displeasure), and a law professor. Mr. Pineda still plays the rich guy who can’t have it all; Mr. Cipriano abandons his showbiz game from the first film and does grunq work in law school.
Meanwhile, their beloved law professor, Justice Hernandez (played by veteran Odette Khan), dies. The boys take turns taking care of her. Now, for him, I felt an instant love. The boys are nice, but any scene with Ms. Khan, frail as he is in wheelchairs and hospital beds, is under her control.
However, even Ms. Khan dealt with incomprehensible dialogues, which is probably why I couldn’t fall in love with the characters immediately. They don’t sound like real people, or the actors aren’t comfortable with their lines — we notice this especially with the newcomers to the cast, led by Internet sensation Sassa Gurl. In all fairness to him, he does step up his acting skills in the latter parts of the film, when he no longer has to act out the classroom repetitions. For all the characters, however, their introductions feel like a rough idea of how people think lawyers talk. The few times the dialogue hits (especially when it’s the four main characters), I’m only reminded of the wannabe lawyers I didn’t like (but maybe that’s just me).
The film is unwatchable, despite my nitpicking. Perhaps because of the roots of Mr. For those who are cold in activism, we are given side stories related to social issues: The character of Mr. Aquino, for example, is a victim of work-related violence. Economic problems are highlighted by students of the character of Mr. Nacino: Therese Malvar’s CJ fights to become a lawyer to save her village from a corrupt mining company; Will Ashley’s Arvin is struggling with law school and a real job. We admire the ability of Mr. Ashley’s acting in bringing justice to that particular arc (that her young boss is a kind “nepo kid” played by the wonderful Emilio Daez is a bonus). The story arcs from the four main issues give the film oomph and longevity. We also give credit where credit is due: despite the intense, jargon-filled dialogue, the film shows the complexity of paperwork, meetings, and red tape that the best legal dramas won’t – and still makes it somehow compelling.
The film is not mine: I am not a lawyer. The subplots, I feel, could be developed into standalone films; but in terms of the main plot, I think the average lawyers get shivers down their spines while watching certain scenes. This is their show, and they have to behave themselves.
