This is another movie following the footsteps of "Cidade De Deus" and "Tropa De Elite", meaning that the main topic is the blatant corruption of our society in Brazil. The main difference this time is that we are no longer in the streets of Rio, but moved on to Brazil's largest city. Much of positive can be said of the movie. The editing and the special effects are superb. The opening sequence, with drawings mixed in the scenes is particularly clever without being over the top. The acting is also very good and uses mostly actors from São Paulo itself, which is not something trivial, if you keep in mind that the huge soap opera industry of Rio is the one usually providing star power for film productions (granted, some of the main characters are played by actors known to the public for soap opera work: Alessandra Negrini and Caco Ciocler to cite the best known faces). Having said this, I cannot turn a blind eye to the plot. It is true that it is very intricate and told in a fast involving pace, but almost every single detail does not survive a closer look. Virtually everyone is cheating on the spouse in a way that helps the big master plan of the main character. Petty thieves suddenly become mega criminals, with heavy artillery hidden in their shacks and do not bend under any kind of pressure. Perhaps the most absurd thing is the improbable alliance between a former professor and the guy who killed his wife and child, without any apparent reason. The director should have tamed his ego and hired a better screenwriter instead of having a go at everything. I hope that is what he does in his next work, given that his directing talent is not at check.
Reviews
6 Reviews
Two Rabbits
(2012)
We are all corrupt, so let's just blow it all up and try to run with the money.
27 January 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Logan's Run
(1977–1978)
still kicking
12 October 2010
In Brazil, this series aired in the early 80's, and I loved it. I now realize it came before Star Wars, which makes it look even better to my eyes. I recently got hold of all 14 episodes and am watching them all, one by one, and must say that I think the series is still great. Of course it brings memories from those times in my life, but the way the stories are so naive is great. The weak sexual tension between Logan 5 and Jessica 6 (the numbers instead of family names are also precious), the obvious reference to Mr. Spock in Rem's lines, the still great looking effects of the sandman's weapons... I read they are planning on a remake for 2012. I just hope it is not as bad as the original 76 movie.
The Method
(2005)
puritanism
29 October 2008
Warning: Spoilers
I was actually surprised to read that some people thought the bathroom scenes were unnecessary. I beg to disagree.
There are a few levels to those scenes.
It implies that the Macho Iberico and la Santa Zorra also knew each other. It was not simply sex between strangers. Who knows, maybe Fernando had something to do with Nieves not returning Carlos calls. It is also a good contrast when he says that the bathroom is the only place where they can be themselves. Of course, that was before we learn that cameras are everywhere.
It is also the key to the game played between Nieves and Carlos during the ball game.
So, it was not irrelevant at all.
There are a few levels to those scenes.
It implies that the Macho Iberico and la Santa Zorra also knew each other. It was not simply sex between strangers. Who knows, maybe Fernando had something to do with Nieves not returning Carlos calls. It is also a good contrast when he says that the bathroom is the only place where they can be themselves. Of course, that was before we learn that cameras are everywhere.
It is also the key to the game played between Nieves and Carlos during the ball game.
So, it was not irrelevant at all.
Embodiment of Evil
(2008)
Good trash cult
11 August 2008
I must confess to not having seen the first two installments of this Brazilian cult series (At Midnight I'll Take Your Soul & This Night I Will Possess Your Corpse). I tried renting them in Brazil, but couldn't find them.
Still, the movie is definitely fun to watch, even without prior knowledge of the story of Josefel Zanatas, the undertaker also known as Zé do Caixão (Coffin Joe).
Without giving much away, Zé do Caixão is obsessed with having a perfect son, born to a perfect woman, which he likes to refer to as "the continuation of the blood". He is also a hard-core atheist and sadist.
I personally think that Zé's atheism is one of the most interesting facets of this movie. Instead of slipping through the easy path of satanism, Zanatas (almost an anagram of Satanás, Satan in Portuguese) remains a down-to-the-bone atheist, even when confronted with visions of hell and of past victims of his sadist rites. It is this that gives him his alleged superiority. He is free, as he puts it himself. Free of all belief in false (theist) morals.
This if of course a trash movie, though with much larger budget than his previous work, so one should not expect to see Hollywoodesque special effects. Yet Mr. Marins creativity is still captivating, and delivers marvelous scenes, such as that of a naked woman leaving a dead pig carcass (no special effects here, it was a true pig). Humor is also very present, and at some scenes even very experienced actors have a hard time concealing a smile.
All in all, 7 out of 10. But if you are only concerned with having fun, this movie is a 10 out of 10.
Still, the movie is definitely fun to watch, even without prior knowledge of the story of Josefel Zanatas, the undertaker also known as Zé do Caixão (Coffin Joe).
Without giving much away, Zé do Caixão is obsessed with having a perfect son, born to a perfect woman, which he likes to refer to as "the continuation of the blood". He is also a hard-core atheist and sadist.
I personally think that Zé's atheism is one of the most interesting facets of this movie. Instead of slipping through the easy path of satanism, Zanatas (almost an anagram of Satanás, Satan in Portuguese) remains a down-to-the-bone atheist, even when confronted with visions of hell and of past victims of his sadist rites. It is this that gives him his alleged superiority. He is free, as he puts it himself. Free of all belief in false (theist) morals.
This if of course a trash movie, though with much larger budget than his previous work, so one should not expect to see Hollywoodesque special effects. Yet Mr. Marins creativity is still captivating, and delivers marvelous scenes, such as that of a naked woman leaving a dead pig carcass (no special effects here, it was a true pig). Humor is also very present, and at some scenes even very experienced actors have a hard time concealing a smile.
All in all, 7 out of 10. But if you are only concerned with having fun, this movie is a 10 out of 10.
Edifício Master
(2002)
been there several times
4 August 2006
My mother has a friend who has lived in Edifício Master for over 20 years. So I have been to the building several times over all these years, mostly during my childhood. I recently met her and we spoke about the movie. She hated that it was made, and refused to be interviewed. She also did not watch the movie herself. There is a big stigma associated to buildings like Ed. Master (there are a few like it in Copacabana, but not that many). There are even stories about buildings that had their street numbers changed, so bad the reputation they earned, always in connection with prostitution and drug dealing. What I like about the movie, is that it shows that it is true that prostitutes do live there, but also that everyone is a human being, with often complex feelings. It is interesting to see how important it was for several of those interviewed to live in Copacabana, a famous postcard from Rio. Almost all of those are not from Rio, which adds a little to the postcard effect. Copacabana is indeed a very diverse, I'd even say strange place. Many tourists, a lot of violence, many street-kids snorting glue, smoking dope, a huge number of prostitutes. Both female and male (mostly transvestites). The only thing I think was missing was a transsexual interviewee (I'm sure there are some living there).
The Thin Blue Line
(1988)
food for thought
27 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I rated the movie as excellent, but this is irrelevant, given that it actually helped to free an innocent man wrongfully imprisoned.
The movie sheds some light in what the 'wheels of justice' are like. At least in 1976 Dallas.
To me there are two main aspects to what happened. There must have been an initial motive to go after Randall Adams instead of David Harris, and then, once he was made the main suspect, there had to be some explanation to why he is convicted, despite almost everything pointing in the other direction.
Adams was 28, whereas lil' David was 16. The movie pointed out that this would've been enough, since only Adams was eligible for death. In addition, and perhaps more important, David was from Vidor, Texas, whereas Adams was from out of state.
There is something else that, even though is never talked about, must have been in people's minds.
I first thought it hard to understand why a 28 year old would spend an evening with a 16 year old. Moreover, after it was clear that David had guns and even had shot some rounds in the air, Adams still goes with him to a drive-in movie, which included a soft-core feature (albeit a heterosexual one). They also talk about the possibility of David spending the night in the same hotel, which does not materialize because Adams' brother did not like 'those things'. Even after this is made clear, David still hangs around a bit, and Adams, leaning on the car, says he can help out, and offers to try to get him a job. Some viewers believed Adams was in the car during the shooting (because the story about the rounds shot in the air?). No witness claims to have seen two people in the car. David, however, says he slid in his seat when the officer came to the car. This would put him in a rather awkward position, if you follow my thoughts. It's hard to gauge how important this was, but I'd take a wild guess that Dallas is not exactly a gay-friendly city.
As for how this eventually only got worse, a few things caught my attention. The prosecutor's perfect record was not to be stained by this case; the first female officer on duty was not to have such a bad start, despite her obvious incompetence; and finally the life of a (texan) 16 year old boy was not to be ruined, as put by one of the police officers, even though he was the obvious suspect. Unfortunately, as Adams himself hints at, these have nothing to do with who was actually likely to have committed the crime.
At some point in the movie, an officer makes the remark that never had it taken so long for a cop-killing to be resolved. One can only wonder how many similar stories didn't make it to the big screen.
As a closing remark, I found Adams' interpretation of 'a rolling stone gathers no moss' a bit weird. As for all those on the prosecution's side:
Dum excusare credis, accusas
The movie sheds some light in what the 'wheels of justice' are like. At least in 1976 Dallas.
To me there are two main aspects to what happened. There must have been an initial motive to go after Randall Adams instead of David Harris, and then, once he was made the main suspect, there had to be some explanation to why he is convicted, despite almost everything pointing in the other direction.
Adams was 28, whereas lil' David was 16. The movie pointed out that this would've been enough, since only Adams was eligible for death. In addition, and perhaps more important, David was from Vidor, Texas, whereas Adams was from out of state.
There is something else that, even though is never talked about, must have been in people's minds.
I first thought it hard to understand why a 28 year old would spend an evening with a 16 year old. Moreover, after it was clear that David had guns and even had shot some rounds in the air, Adams still goes with him to a drive-in movie, which included a soft-core feature (albeit a heterosexual one). They also talk about the possibility of David spending the night in the same hotel, which does not materialize because Adams' brother did not like 'those things'. Even after this is made clear, David still hangs around a bit, and Adams, leaning on the car, says he can help out, and offers to try to get him a job. Some viewers believed Adams was in the car during the shooting (because the story about the rounds shot in the air?). No witness claims to have seen two people in the car. David, however, says he slid in his seat when the officer came to the car. This would put him in a rather awkward position, if you follow my thoughts. It's hard to gauge how important this was, but I'd take a wild guess that Dallas is not exactly a gay-friendly city.
As for how this eventually only got worse, a few things caught my attention. The prosecutor's perfect record was not to be stained by this case; the first female officer on duty was not to have such a bad start, despite her obvious incompetence; and finally the life of a (texan) 16 year old boy was not to be ruined, as put by one of the police officers, even though he was the obvious suspect. Unfortunately, as Adams himself hints at, these have nothing to do with who was actually likely to have committed the crime.
At some point in the movie, an officer makes the remark that never had it taken so long for a cop-killing to be resolved. One can only wonder how many similar stories didn't make it to the big screen.
As a closing remark, I found Adams' interpretation of 'a rolling stone gathers no moss' a bit weird. As for all those on the prosecution's side:
Dum excusare credis, accusas
Tell Your Friends