One, Lola Sepa, has just lost her grandson, who was killed by a cell phone thief; the other, Lola Puring, is the grandmother of the young murderer awaiting his trial. One needs money to give her grandson a funeral, while the other will do everything to get her grandson out of prison.
Wandering the streets of the city, they tirelessly fight for the salvation of their respective families. Two paths that cross but remain strangers to each other, without sentiment. The only thing that matters to both protagonists is the result.
Without hatred or resentment from the victim’s family, and without repentance or pain from that of the murderer. But despite all obstacles, they will achieve their goals, immersing us without Manichaeism or commiseration in this extreme poverty with unwavering dignity.
All accepting this destiny as inevitable and with the only feeling that they must continue to live, even survive. The beauty of ‘Lola’, akin to the candle scene, is in illuminating this life full of distress with a simple, tiny, flickering flame. The film is a curious melodrama of a people burdened by everything yet always dignified, as in the very beautiful funeral procession on the waters.
Brillante Mendoza, one of the most gifted contemporary filmmakers of his generation, wanted to highlight the coexistence between modernity (cell phones) and tradition (funerals) in social relations among the most deprived sections of the population in Manila (though the film could just as well take place in any third-world city).
With a particular focus on this social economy, the “bottom of the pyramid,” as economists call this mix of petty crime, street markets, acts of solidarity, barter, and pawning that allows the poorest and most deprived to continue living even in very difficult conditions.
In this sense, the film could remain in memory as a treatise of sociology, and that is why it deserves the beautiful critique it receives.
