After a long wait, beloved girl group Apink delighted fans with a heartfelt reunion that celebrated their enduring friendship and legacy.
On November 7, Apink’s official social media shared two new group photos captioned “This Member Remember,” sparking excitement among fans who have followed the group’s 14-year journey in the K-pop industry.
The photos instantly spread across fan communities and media platforms, showcasing Chorong, Bomi, Namjoo, Hayoung, and Eunji radiating warmth and closeness.
Despite the passage of time, the group exuded the same vibrant chemistry that first made them fan favorites, proving that Apink’s bond remains as strong as ever.
Playful Poses and Family-Like Energy
In the newly released photos, the five members posed affectionately together, evoking the feeling of a family portrait. They wore matching black T-shirts emblazoned with the phrase “This Member Remember” alongside cute character designs.
Each member added a personal twist to their outfit with unique sunglasses, injecting fun and personality into the shoot.
Even in their relaxed and playful poses, fans could feel the deep sense of connection and mutual affection between the members.
Their radiant smiles and natural chemistry highlighted the unity that has long defined Apink’s image — one built on trust, loyalty, and genuine friendship.
The overwhelming positivity reaffirmed that, even after more than a decade, Apink continues to occupy a cherished place in K-pop fans’ hearts.
Apink (Credit: YouTube)
Mixed Emotions Over Son Na Eun’s Absence
While the reunion brought immense joy, many fans couldn’t help but notice the absence of former member Son Na Eun, who officially departed from the group in 2022 to focus on her acting career.
Some expressed a tinge of sadness over her missing from the photos, sharing nostalgic memories of the full six-member era that defined much of Apink’s early success.
However, most fans emphasized positivity, focusing instead on celebrating the current five-member lineup.
Many praised their unwavering teamwork and loyalty to the Apink name, noting how they’ve gracefully maintained their bond and artistry despite lineup changes.
Continuing a Legacy of Dedication
Apink’s reunion photos are more than a simple social media post — they symbolize the group’s lasting legacy in an ever-changing industry.
Over 14 years after their debut, Apink remains one of K-pop’s most respected and enduring girl groups.
Earlier in 2025, the group successfully completed a full-group Asia tour, proving their continued popularity and stage presence.
In April, to celebrate their debut anniversary, Namjoo released the self-written digital single “Tap Clap,” a track filled with bright energy and gratitude toward fans.
Meanwhile, members Chorong, Bomi, Namjoo, and Hayoung have signed exclusive contracts with WITH US Entertainment, where they continue to explore solo projects, acting, and variety shows, while Eunji maintains her own activities as a singer and actress.
Despite their busy individual schedules, the five reunited members have made it clear that Apink remains at the heart of their artistic journey.
What’s Next for Apink
Looking ahead, fans have even more to anticipate. Namjoo is set to feature in Taiwanese artist MAVIS’s upcoming single “MARTINI,” scheduled for release on November 11, showcasing her growing international collaborations.
As Apink moves forward, this latest reunion serves as a warm reminder of their shared history and unbreakable friendship.
Though Son Na Eun’s absence was felt, the group’s message of love and unity resonated deeply with fans, proving that Apink’s story continues — one of resilience, artistry, and sisterhood that transcends time.
Rarely does a biopic so sharply upend the expectation of hero worship as Lav Diaz’s “Magellan.” Last year, its Cannes debut set off buzz not because of star-driven bombast, but because of its deliberate removal of romance and spectacle from the legendary explorer’s story.
Diaz, famed for slow, meditative cinema, directs Gael García Bernal in a role that steadfastly refuses the usual arc of triumph and adventure, instead tracing the shadows that conquest and colonization have cast across history and collective memory.
From its first scenes, the film dismantles familiar perspectives. The story opens in 1511, not with ships or ceremonies, but with an indigenous woman foraging beside a river.
When a white man appears, the tranquility fractures; Diaz lets viewers feel the anxiety and violence of first contact, emblematic of centuries of upheaval that followed.
Rather than dramatizing battle sequences or triumphs, the film leans on mournful tableaus: the aftermath of assault and dispossession, glimpsed from a distance both literal and emotional, never drawing viewers in with war-movie bravado but holding them at arm’s length.
Diaz’s focus is never on charting Magellan’s life as a chronology but on burrowing into the moral and psychological cost of conquest. Bernal’s Magellan, shot mostly in wide frames, is a subdued antihero: laconic, hunched by disease, and consumed less by curiosity than by ambition and stubbornness.
There is no charisma here, only a grinding need for legacy, even as his own crew and personal ties disintegrate around him.
Yet the film also questions who gets to script the arc of history. By weaving in the story of Enrique, Magellan’s enslaved Malay interpreter whose identity is splintered and never quite free, Diaz broadens the narrative beyond the explorer’s own perspective, introducing ambiguity where textbooks favor certainty.
National Myths and Artistic Risks: Controversy and Context
Lav Diaz is no stranger to controversy, but Magellan pushes further, especially with its portrayal of Filipino history and identity.
Perhaps most provocatively, Diaz reframes the demise of Magellan at Cebu: Rather than immortalizing Lapu-Lapu, the Filipino folk hero who supposedly slew the explorer, Diaz hints at a narrative ambiguity, positioning Rajah Humabon as the orchestrator behind Magellan’s final defeat.
For some, this bold interpretation interrogates rather than erases Filipino resistance, aiming to expose how historical narratives are shaped and weaponized by those in power. By challenging official myth, Diaz invites heated debate and reflection on how postcolonial societies build and sometimes distort their own icons.
This friction is not for controversy’s sake but part of a broader critique of the politics of mythmaking. Through lingering shots and daunting silences, Diaz seeks less to indict individuals and more to examine the collective trauma and legacy left in the wake of colonial violence.
Magellan (Credit: Rosa Filmes)
Statues, holidays, and political rhetoric have for centuries turned flesh-and-blood figures into emblems, often at the expense of historical complexity.
Critical response reflects this tension. On one hand, “Magellan” is hailed as a hypnotic, uncompromising vision stripping Diaz’s eight-hour marathon style to a (relatively) approachable three-hour drama, yet sacrificing none of his characteristic severity or artistry.
On the other hand, some viewers note the challenge of engaging with its slow pace, elliptical storytelling, and emotionally distant tone.
Critics have praised the film’s lush but unadorned visual style; cinematographer Arthur Tort fills the screen with landscapes that dwarf their human subjects, reinforcing the insignificance of individuals against the sweep of history and nature.
Gael García Bernal’s casting drew international attention and further accentuated the film’s cross-cultural ambitions. His performance, all restraint and haunted reserve, has exceeded expectations for a historical epic, steering the film away from conventional emotional cues, making the result both difficult and deeply affecting.
Diaz’s decision not to indulge in dramatics and to often shoot Magellan and his ship at a distance strips Magellan of grandiosity; he becomes a faint presence buffeted by fate, not a conquering hero standing astride destiny.
Historical Reckonings: Social Impact, Future Debates
With its festival circuit run and expanded release, “ Magellan” positions itself at a crossroads of art, history, and geopolitics. The film’s reception in the Philippines and across the festival scene shows both the eagerness and anxiety with which societies revisit foundational narratives.
In an era shaped by ongoing battles over historical memory, whether in monuments, school curricula, or state celebrations, Diaz’s work resonates as a piece of cultural reckoning.
Its refusal to comfort, to flatter nationalist sentiment, or to excuse the conqueror is both its artistic triumph and its challenge.
“Magellan” stands in direct contrast to the rise of populist mythmaking, both at home in the Philippines, with parallels to the historiographical power plays of the Duterte and Marcos Jr. regimes, and abroad, where right-wing and colonial nostalgia often color historical storytelling.
For viewers prepared to engage with its demands, Diaz’s film opens space for a more honest confrontation with the enduring wounds of empire.
Ultimately, “Magellan” is more than a costume drama or a warts-and-all biopic: it’s a call to scrutinize who tells the story of the past and why those stories matter now.
In stripping Magellan of heroics and spectacle, Diaz invites audiences to look beyond familiar legends and perhaps begin finding new ways to understand and heal from history’s longest shadow.
