Talk:Baler (film)

Untitled
This Wikipedia entry is useless and erroneous. The fact is that in the year 1898 there was no province yet named "Quezon." Do you happen to know the status of Manuel Quezon during that year? Baler presently belongs to the Province of Aurora!

The film "Baler" was all but lies and disrepects the true history and integrity of Baler. A more sensible research should have been conducted. Otherwise, for the sake of entertainment, the movie should have been named with "Baler" being only a part of the main title. The sole title provides a false impression that the movie will give the viewers an authentic 'hint' about the place and its history. Were the shots really taken in Baler?Kalibkib rollie (talk) 17:14, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Where is it shot?
One-fourth of it was shot in Baler, some in Tanay, Antipolo, Batangas, and Bulacan. Did the movie included the heroism of the Ultimos de Filipinas? Why there are lovers in the movie that was not originally part of the Siege? Why the title was not pertaining to the whole place? Why it had to go taping around Luzon? --Sir Jazer 13 (talk) 10:19, 28 February 2010 (UTC)


 * @Sir Jazer 13 it's been 13 years since your comment is written. Like Titanic which is of course a romantic epic set in the midst of the disastrous sinking of the eponymous ship, the whole movie is also a romantic epic set in the midst of the siege of Baler and, as you know, the movie's events serve as the obstacle that stands between the movie's protagonists. That is how historical fictions work, if you do not know. Even if you accurately depict the movie's events, it'll only become a boring documentary and, for the record, Baler is not a documentary, it's a movie, and you've forgotten that movies are made for entertainment so why the hell would it be all about the siege. Nobody freaking cares if the romantic story is not a part of the siege. This whole movie is just made for pure entertainment. Titan2900 (talk) 11:32, 1 April 2023 (UTC)