Synopsis: A young man leaves his arduous work routine in a rural town to try to improve his life in the capital of São Paulo. However, upon arriving in São Paulo to work in a scrapyard, Mateus discovers that he has become a victim (along with several other boys) of an illegal intermediary that facilitates modern-day slavery.
In some stories, there's no long-awaited "happy ending" before the final credits begin to roll. Here we find a degrading and realistic portrait of a society that still relies on human trafficking and slave labor, along with countless other atrocities, to fuel the structure of the capitalist system at its most vile and disgusting. On Brazilian soil (in fact, this is a Brazilian production), this movie takes on even greater weight, given our history marked by a widely known system of slavery, which lasted for no less than 388 years. Therefore, this is the type of project that needs to be recognized as an invitation to a debate about a present past, which cries out for urgency from public authorities (and these, in turn, always seem to ignore this secular problem).
Netflix
Café História
Yes, the world has changed. Slavery as it once was no longer a reality, at least not in the eyes of the law (which still allows countless instances of labor analogous to slavery to escape). On the other hand, we have contemporary slavery, which is the kind of issue that serves as a very well-used foundation for this movie's plot. Alongside human trafficking, police corruption, political involvement, and other controversies, the script here is powerful, "calibrated" with excellent discussions (even if some of them are not properly explored in depth), placing the audience in the role of voyeur of human degradation (a difficult role to assume, as the movie's events reveal increasingly sad and revolting scenes).
It all begins when Mateus is "recruited" to work at a scrapyard in São Paulo. Imagining he's heading for the chance to have a better life (not only for himself, but also for his elderly mother and two sisters), he soon realizes upon arriving at the place where he's to work that he's fallen into a trap. Along with other boys also "seduced" by this opportunity for a better life, they now have a huge debt to pay (an excuse their boss uses to keep them imprisoned there, because in reality, the idea is never to free them) and must do so by working under a regime analogous to slavery (in a more modern sense, let's say). However, Mateus is determined to "change the game" to save themselves and their new friends.
Lugar Nenhum
Netflix
Amidst the execution of his plan, Mateus ends up not realizing his oppressed situation, and finds himself increasingly on the oppressor's side when his boss, Lucas, gradually sees him (after audaciously confronting him and quickly accomplishing several successful tasks) as a potential right-hand man to help with the illegal scheme that keeps the corrupt and inhumane world he's part of running. This threshold becomes a very interesting approach because it is through Mateus's perception that the audience is invited to participate in the movie and experience the horrors of everything that is happening. A dramatic movie takes on the contours of a horror movie due to the heavy themes it brings to light, which truly cause great indignation because they are realities that unfortunately still exist throughout the country.
There's a provocative approach to all the themes presented. They all use slavery as a kind of "tool" to promote the psychological domination to which the "new slaves" are subjected. The narrative structures are overly simple, but hidden between the lines lies the true strength of the plot, which lies in the issues raised within the project. Structural racism introduces new dynamics that are even more controversial, thus increasing the strength of the script (which was already strong enough to impact everything that happens in the movie). Along the same lines, corruption in public power appears as a "weed," ready to corrode everything in its path. The way all of this is connected in the plot deserves applause.
LinkedIn
B9
Here we have a protagonist torn between risking his own family's future (since all his relatives are under surveillance by people he doesn't know, but who are part of the scheme to coerce all the prisoners into continuing to work without attempting any kind of escape) or remaining in that truly degrading situation, and an antagonist who, to a certain extent, provides thoughtful insights that attempt to explain his reasons for continuing to work in that brutal scheme (such as the line: "You're only oppressed until you have the chance to be an oppressor.") and how other people might also feel the same way. There's a sense of despondency on both sides... And everything requires attention, because it's in the details of the lines that many powerful things happen in this movie (which is simple... but very effective).
Among the cast, the standout is veteran Rodrigo Santoro, playing a well-constructed character, well-delineated in his most relevant layers. The kind of villain who repulses the audience, but who also has moments of "altruism" as he tries to convey his personal side of the story (and this is something that might spark empathy in some people... but it didn't work for me, because looking more closely at some details reveals that anyone who does this kind of work is genuinely a bad person, not just financially disadvantaged). The supporting cast is weak (including the protagonist, who can be placed in this category for failing to deliver a particularly impactful performance), but this never detracts from the movie's overall brilliance.
Cine Set
O2 Filmes
Alexandre Moratto directed 7 Prisoners with a human and realistic perspective, without glamorizing the themes. Along with Thayná Mantesso, he also wrote part of the entire script. Both were very bold in their approach, and perhaps only the more impactful aspects were kept from them by limited technical issues (because it's clear this is a low-budget movie). Nevertheless, Moratto managed to create excellent shots, with angles that favor the scenography of the main setting (a junkyard) in a very inviting way. Despite the rather didactic beginning, the second and third acts introduce more complex lines to the script, culminating in an unexpected climax that is entirely in keeping with a sad reality.
CRÍTICA DE PELÍCULA: “7 prisioneros” (2021)
Sinopsis: Un joven abandona su ardua rutina laboral en un pueblo rural para intentar mejorar su vida en la capital, São Paulo. Sin embargo, al llegar a São Paulo para trabajar en un desguace, Mateus descubre que ha sido víctima (junto con otros jóvenes) de un intermediario ilegal que facilita la esclavitud moderna.
En algunas historias, no hay un esperado “final feliz” antes de que comiencen los créditos finales. Aquí encontramos un retrato degradante y realista de una sociedad que aún depende de la trata de personas y el trabajo esclavo, junto con innumerables atrocidades, para alimentar la estructura del sistema capitalista en su forma más vil y repugnante. En suelo brasileño (de hecho, se trata de una producción brasileña), esta película cobra aún mayor relevancia, dada nuestra historia marcada por un sistema de esclavitud ampliamente conocido, que duró nada menos que 388 años. Por lo tanto, este es el tipo de proyecto que necesita ser reconocido como una invitación a un debate sobre un pasado presente, que clama por la urgencia de los poderes públicos (y estos, a su vez, siempre parecen ignorar este problema secular).
Sí, el mundo ha cambiado. La esclavitud, como era antes, ya no era una realidad, al menos no ante la ley (que aún permite que se escapen innumerables casos de trabajo análogo a la esclavitud). Por otro lado, tenemos la esclavitud contemporánea, un tema que sirve de base muy bien utilizada para la trama de esta película. Junto con la trata de personas, la corrupción policial, la participación política y otras controversias, el guion es potente, “calibrado” con excelentes debates (aunque algunos no se exploren con la profundidad necesaria), colocando al público en el papel de voyeur de la degradación humana (un papel difícil de asumir, ya que los acontecimientos de la película revelan escenas cada vez más tristes y repugnantes).
Todo comienza cuando Mateus es "reclutado" para trabajar en un desguace en São Paulo. Imaginando que busca una vida mejor (no solo para él, sino también para su anciana madre y sus dos hermanas), al llegar al lugar de trabajo se da cuenta de que ha caído en una trampa. Junto con otros chicos también "seducidos" por esta oportunidad, ahora tienen una enorme deuda que pagar (una excusa que su jefe usa para mantenerlos presos allí, porque en realidad, la idea es nunca liberarlos) y deben hacerlo trabajando bajo un régimen análogo a la esclavitud (en un sentido más moderno, digamos). Sin embargo, Mateus está decidido a "cambiar las reglas del juego" para salvarse a sí mismos y a sus nuevos amigos.
En medio de la ejecución de su plan, Mateus termina sin darse cuenta de su situación de opresión y se encuentra cada vez más del lado del opresor cuando su jefe, Lucas, lo ve gradualmente (tras confrontarlo con audacia y completar rápidamente varias tareas con éxito) como una posible mano derecha para ayudar con el esquema ilegal que mantiene el mundo corrupto e inhumano del que forma parte. Este umbral se convierte en un enfoque muy interesante, ya que es a través de la percepción de Mateus que el público es invitado a participar en la película y experimentar los horrores de todo lo que está sucediendo. Una película dramática adquiere los contornos de una película de terror debido a los temas fuertes que saca a la luz, que realmente causan gran indignación porque son realidades que, lamentablemente, aún existen en todo el país.
Hay un enfoque provocador en todos los temas presentados. Todos utilizan la esclavitud como una especie de "herramienta" para promover la dominación psicológica a la que están sometidos los "nuevos esclavos". Las estructuras narrativas son excesivamente simples, pero entre líneas se esconde la verdadera fuerza de la trama, que reside en los problemas que plantea el proyecto. El racismo estructural introduce nuevas dinámicas aún más controvertidas, lo que refuerza la fuerza del guion (que ya era lo suficientemente fuerte como para influir en todo lo que sucede en la película). En la misma línea, la corrupción en el poder público aparece como una "mala hierba", dispuesta a corroer todo a su paso. La forma en que todo esto se conecta en la trama merece un aplauso.
Aquí tenemos a un protagonista dividido entre arriesgar el futuro de su familia (ya que todos sus parientes están bajo vigilancia por desconocidos, pero que forman parte del plan para obligar a los presos a seguir trabajando sin intentar escapar) o permanecer en esa situación verdaderamente degradante, y un antagonista que, en cierta medida, ofrece reflexiones profundas que intentan explicar sus razones para seguir trabajando en ese brutal plan (como la frase: ”Solo estás oprimido hasta que tienes la oportunidad de ser opressor.”) y cómo otras personas podrían sentir lo mismo. Hay una sensación de desaliento en ambos bandos... Y todo requiere atención, porque es en los detalles de las líneas donde ocurren muchas cosas impactantes en esta película (que es simple... pero muy efectiva).
Entre el reparto, destaca el veterano Rodrigo Santoro, quien interpreta a un personaje bien construido, bien definido en sus facetas más relevantes. El tipo de villano que repugna al público, pero que también tiene momentos de "altruismo" al intentar transmitir su lado personal de la historia (y esto es algo que podría despertar empatía en algunos... pero a mí no me funcionó, porque al analizar algunos detalles con más detenimiento se revela que cualquiera que se dedique a este tipo de trabajo es realmente una mala persona, no solo una persona con dificultades económicas). El reparto secundario es flojo (incluido el protagonista, que podría clasificarse en esta categoría por no ofrecer una actuación especialmente impactante), pero esto nunca le resta brillo a la película en general.
Alexandre Moratto dirigió 7 prisioneros con una perspectiva humana y realista, sin idealizar los temas. Junto con Thayná Mantesso, también escribió parte del guion completo. Ambos fueron muy audaces en su enfoque, y quizás solo los aspectos más impactantes se vieron opacados por problemas técnicos (ya que es evidente que se trata de una película de bajo presupuesto). Sin embargo, Moratto logró crear excelentes planos, con ángulos que favorecen la escenografía del escenario principal (un desguace) de una manera muy atractiva. A pesar del inicio bastante didáctico, el segundo y el tercer acto introducen líneas más complejas en el guion, culminando en un clímax inesperado, totalmente acorde con una triste realidad.
CRÍTICA DE FILME: “7 Prisioneiros” (2021)
Sinopse: Um jovem troca a árdua rotina de trabalho em uma cidade do interior para tentar melhorar de vida na capital paulista. No entanto, ao chegar em São Paulo para trabalhar em um ferro-velho, Mateus descobre que se tornou vítima (ao lado de mais alguns outros garotos) de uma intermediação ilegal que favorece o esquema de escravidão moderna.
Em certas histórias não existe o tão esperado “final feliz” antes que os créditos finais comecem a “pipocar” na tela. Eis aqui um retrato degradante e realista de uma sociedade que ainda faz uso do tráfico humano e do trabalho escravo ao lado de outras inúmeras atrocidades para alimentar a estrutura do sistema capitalista na sua camada mais vil e nojenta. Em solo brasileiro (aliás, está é uma produção brasileira), esse filme ganha ainda mais peso, porque temos um passado marcado pelo sistema de escravidão amplamente conhecido, e que perdurou por nada menos do que 388 anos. Sendo assim, este é o tipo de projeto que precisa ser reconhecido como um convite a um debate sobre um passado presente, que grita por uma urgência dos poderes públicos (e estes por sua vez, sempre parecem ignorar esse problema secular).
Sim, o mundo mudou. A escravidão como era antigamente não existe mais, ao menos não aos olhos da lei (que mesmo assim ainda deixa escapar inúmeros episódios de trabalhos análogos a escravidão). Por outro lado, temos a escravidão conhecida como contemporânea, que é o tipo de problemática que funciona como um alicerce muito bem utilizado na trama deste filme. Ao lado do tráfico humano, corrupção no meio policial, envolvimento político e outras controvérsias, o roteiro aqui é muito potente, “calibrado” com ótimas discussões (mesmo que algumas delas não sejam devidamente bem exploradas na sua profundidade), colocando o público num papel de voyeur da degradação do ser humano (um papel difícil de assumir, à medida em que os eventos do filme vão revelando cenas cada vez mais tristes e revoltantes).
Tudo começa quando Mateus é “recrutado” para trabalhar em um ferro-velho em São Paulo. Imaginando que vai seguir rumo à chance de ter uma vida melhor (não apenas para ele, mas também para sua mãe idosa e suas duas irmãs), ele logo percebe ao chegar no lugar onde vai trabalhar, que acabou caindo numa armadilha. Junto com outros garotos que também “seduzidos” por essa oportunidade de ter uma vida melhor, eles agora têm uma dívida de altíssimo valor para pagar (uma desculpa usada pelo chefe deles para mantê-los aprisionados no local, porque na verdade, a ideia é nunca libertá-los) e precisam fazer isso trabalhando em um regime análogo a escravidão (nos moldes mais modernos, vamos dizer assim). No entanto, Mateus está determinado a “mudar o jogo” para salvar a si mesmos, e aos seus novos amigos.
Em meio a execução do seu plano, Mateus acaba não se dando conta da sua situação como oprimido, e se vê cada vez mais do lado opressor quando o seu chefe, Lucas, aos poucos vai enxergando nele (após muita ousadia ao enfrentá-lo e realizar tarefas bem sucedidas em pouco tempo) um futuro braço direito para ajudar no esquema ilegal que mantém de pé esse universo corrupto e desumano do qual ele faz parte. Esse limiar se torna uma abordagem muito interessante porque é através da percepção do Mateus que o público é convidado a participar do filme e sentir os horrores de tudo o que está acontecendo. Um filme dramático ganha contornos de filme de horror pelas temáticas pesadas que trouxe à tona e que realmente causam muita indignação por serem realidades que infelizmente ainda existem em todo o país.
Existe uma abordagem provocante sobre todos os temas que são propostos. Todos eles fazem uso de escravidão como uma espécie de “ferramenta” na promoção da dominação psicológica em que os “novos escravos” são submetidos. As estruturas narrativas são demasiadamente simples, mas nas suas entrelinhas está a verdadeira força da trama, que são as problemáticas trazidas dentro do projeto. O racismo estrutural chega trazendo novas dinâmicas que são ainda mais controversas, aumentando então à força do roteiro (que antes disso já era forte o suficiente para causar impacto sobre tudo o que acontece no filme). Nessa mesma linha, a corrupção do poder público se mostra como uma “erva-daninha”, pronta para corroer tudo o que estiver em sua frente. O modo como tudo isso é conectado na trama merece aplausos.
Temos aqui um protagonista que está dividido entre arriscar o futuro da sua própria família (uma vez que todos os seus parentes estão sob vigilância de pessoas que eles desconhece, mas que fazem parte do esquema para coagir todos os prisioneiros a continuarem trabalhando sem tentar planejar nenhum tipo de fuga) ou se manter naquela situação real de degradação, e um antagonista que até certo ponto traz pontuações reflexivas que tentam explicar as razões dele se manter trabalhando naquele esquema brutal (como a frase: “Você só é oprimido até ter a chance de ser opressor.”) e como outras pessoas também podem pensar igual a ele. Há um desalento em ambos os lados... E tudo requer atenção, porque é nos detalhes das falas que muitas coisas fortes acontecem neste filme (que é simples... mas muito eficiente).
No elenco, o grande destaque é o veterano Rodrigo Santoro na pele de um personagem muito bem construído e muito bem delineado em suas camadas mais relevantes. O tipo de vilão que causa repulsa no público, mas que também tem seus momentos de “altruísmo” ao tentar mostrar o seu lado pessoal da história (e isso é algo que talvez pode despertar empatia em algumas pessoas... mas comigo não funcionou, porque olhando com mais atenção alguns detalhes, quem faz esse tipo de trabalho é porque é realmente uma pessoa ruim, e não apenas desfavorecida financeiramente). O time de coadjuvante é fraco (incluindo o protagonista, que pode ser encaixado nesta categoria por não conseguir entregar um resultado performático muito impactante), mas em nenhum momento isso tira o brilhantismo do filme por inteiro.
Alexandre Moratto dirigiu 7 Prisioneiros com um olhar humano e realista, sem fazer uso de qualquer “glamourização” sobre os temas abordados. Ao lado de Thayná Mantesso, ele também foi responsável por escrever parcialmente todo o roteiro. Ambos foram muito ousados na abordagem, e certamente só não fizeram algo ainda mais impactante pelas questões técnicas mais limitadas (porque é notório que estamos diante de um filme com baixo orçamento), mas ainda sim, Moratto conseguiu criar ótimos planos, com ângulos que favorecem a cenografia do cenário principal (ferro-velho) de uma maneira bem convidativa. Mesmo tendo um começo muito didático, o segundo e o terceiro ato trazem linhas mais complexas no roteiro, culminando num ápice inesperado e que é totalmente condizente com uma triste realidade.
The Long Walk is one of those movies that sounds absolutely stupid on paper but somehow ends up working way better than it should, just a bunch of guys walking until they drop dead or get shot sounds boring as hell but this thing actually keeps you locked in for the full two hours witch is pretty wild when you think about it, they just walking but its their interaction, the things they talk about, their "Moments" as Pete describe it on the movie. Cooper Hoffman and David Jonsson carry the entire movie on there backs and the chemistry between these two is insane, you actually end up giving a shit about what happens to them, witch is pretty rare for a movie where you know damn well only one person makes it out alive at the end. Francis Lawrence directed this and he also did most of the Hunger Games movies so he knows how to handle these death game type stories, the guy gets how to make it feel real and heavy, instead of just cheap entertainment for people who want flashy action scenes or cool deaths. This aint some flashy death match with crazy explosions every five minutes, its just people talking and walking, and slowly falling apart both in there heads and there bodys, literally their bodies give up before their mind and somehow it never gets boring or feels like a slog to sit through, witch is pretty impressive when you think about such a very simple action of walking, just keep walking, there is no finish line or ending.
Source
The rules are super simple and thats what makes it work so damn well, walk at 3 miles per hour or you get warnings and after three strikes your done, soldiers shoot you right there on the road and the movie doesnt hold back from showing how messed up that whole situation is for everyone involved, every other guy on this walk loose it as they see the rest going down walking on blooded foot or even totally broken ankle. The movie doesnt waste any time with boring setup that drags on forever and dont even care about giving much context of the why this is all going on its just straight to the bone, it gives you the basics real quick, then jumps straight into the walk without spending 40 minutes on backstory nobody cares about anyway. Mark Hamill shows up as the Major and he was good in the role but it feels like easy paycheck work for him, nothing to crazy or memorable compared to some of his other stuff over the years. The whole concept is based on a Stephen King novel from the 60s and apparently this was the first thing he ever wrote, even though it didnt get published until way later under a fake name, the book had 100 contestants walking but the movie cuts it down to 50, witch makes it feel more manageable and focused on the characters that actually matter to the story, feels more personal, they even form a group and call themself Musketeers.
Source
The entire story develops on a very fucked up world after War as Major describe there is an epidemic of laziness and it does look like from the environment we watch on the country side, after a big war that happend 19 years ago and left everything in complete ruins for everyone, the government is run by this totalitarian regime that bans books and music from before the war and also look like everyone is poor, anyways thats not the important part of the movie so doesnt really matter. The point is that every year they do this Long Walk thing, where one person from each state has to participate in the event and the last one standing gets money and one wish, supposedly this is meant to inspire the nation and boost productivity for the economy but really its just propaganda bullshit, to keep people in line and distracted from how terrible there lives are. Raymond Garraty is the main character and he joins the walk because he wants revenge on the Major for killing his dad in front of him and his mom, his father was executed for reading banned books and thinking for himself, witch in this world is basically a death sentence that you cant escape from, this hole story reminds me a lot of a movie that Bale did many years ago called "Equilibrium". Pete McVrees is the other main character and he was basically Rays best friend, even wanted to be his actual brother, thats all he wanted in life and this topic show up throughout the whole thing, David Jonsson plays him and the dude is phenomenal in this role. There chemistry together is what makes the movie work so well because you believe these two guys actually care about each other as friends, its not just fake movie friendship where they say nice things but you dont buy it for a second cause the acting sucks. Judy Greer plays Rays mom, and she has very few scenes in the whole movie but shes absolutely heartbreaking in both of them, specially the opening when shes driving her son to the start line, knowing theres a good chance hes never coming back home to her again.
Source
One thing that really stood out was how the movie shows all the messed up stuff that comes with walking non stop for days without any breaks, like how do you go to the bathroom when you cant stop moving forward, what happens when you get a cramp in your leg that makes you slow down, what if you get a rock in your shoe or your ankle breaks from walking so long. All these everyday things become life or death situations and the movie doesnt shy away from showing how brutal it gets for these young guys, one kid has explosive diarrhea and the movie shows is straight up no blur or cover up scene, another kid breaks his ankle and kept walking basically on his bone for hours witch seemed pretty unbelievable to me for me that was the beauty of this movie. The kills are super graphic and straight forward head shot and there faces explode into pieces, one kid gets run over by a tank when he tries to talk to the camera crew filming everything, another one tries to grab a soldiers gun and gets killed instantly without hesitation. The end is a bit confusing so I decided to look up about the story and found out that movie was shot in sequential order witch means they filmed everything in the actual order it happens in the story, this was a smart choice because it lets the actors actually bond with each other over time, just like there characters do in the walk and you can see them getting more tired and beat up as the movie goes on and there bodys start giving out. Francis Lawrence and his crew deserve a lot of credit, because filming something like this where almost every scene is outside in the elements and people are constantly moving without stopping, must have been exhausting as hell for the cast and crew, even if the story has some logical holes in it that dont quite add up.
The ending is pretty different from the book as I mention and its also a bit confusing because things happen out of no where and I think it works better for what the movie is trying to say about sacrifice, in the book Ray wins and just keeps walking off into nothing like a zombie but in the movie Pete ends up winning after Ray sacrifices himself so his friend can live and go home. Pete asks for a soldiers gun as his wish and the Major gives it to him thinking Pete wont actually do anything with it on live television, that sounds totally stupid but it could be just the fact that power got him blind, Pete shoots the Major right in the face in front of the whole country watching on there TVs, witch was pretty damn satisfying to watch after everything but still felt a bit hollow for me, it was just too easy and too simple. Like me some people might want a more clear ending, with everything explained but I think the ambiguity works here for this type of story, I always have this idea that adaptations main point is to sell more books or video games so ending the movie in such gray area works for people to get interested and want to know more about or even buy the book, the message is that even when you win you still lose in the end, because this whole system is designed to break people down, until theres nothing left of who they used to be before. Ray wanted revenge against the government and Pete wanted money to escape his shitty life and terrible childhood, but in the end neither of them really get what they wanted out of it. Its a pretty flat way to end things but it fits the tone of the whole movie perfectly, this isnt a feel good story about overcoming adversity and winning against the odds, its about how governments use young people as pawns and grind them down for entertainment and propaganda purposes. I love this movie and even though it has a few holes in the story I cant stop from giving it a 8.5 out of 10, its probably one of the best Stephen King adaptations in recent years and definitely worth watching if your into this kind of dark depressing stuff, just dont expect to feel good after its over, because you absolutely will not be smiling.
