Around the World in 24 Frames 01.08.10: City of God

Posted by Len Archibald on 01.08.2010

"Around the World..." takes a look at more modern masterpieces with a little tale out of Brazil where the kids' behavior would make Tony Montana and Larry Clark blush. I also rant over those who try to undermine the impact Avatar will have on the film world.




Good Friday to all! As you read this, I am probably snowed in, but relishing over the fact that I have just witnessed the first rough-cut for Beating Traffic (my feature film debut as a director) and let me just say that it is GLORIOUS. Glorious.

THE RANT

I have already prepared myself for the hate that I may receive on the comments section below and I am fine with that – but this is something I think needs to be said.

Since the World Wide Web became accessible to the masses, I think it's safe to say that it has been both a blessing and a curse – anyone can now publish their thoughts and opinions on any given subject and there are voices out there that are refreshing and offer points-of-view that have not been explored. It has given writers an opportunity to hone their craft, whether through journalism or other creative avenues that they would not have had during the days of "print-only" media. 411Mania is a venue for some of the best minds I've ever read to show their stuff.

The internet has also been a curse in regards to the fact that anyone can now publish their thoughts and opinions on any given subject and there are voices out there that have no sense of what they are talking about. Those who like to spout off opinion-as-fact or shoot at the hip without basic researching skills. I'm talking to those people today. You know who you are; you will probably out yourself by responding to my soapbox-y rant.

So, Avatar has become something of a phenomenon. It is the fifth film in history to gross $1 billion worldwide. It also did it the fastest (SEVENTEEN DAYS *shakes head*) – a mark that may never be broken again in my lifetime…or at least until Avatar II. It currently stands as the second highest grossing film of all time. I have seen the film, I think it is magnificent. The story, albeit on some familiar grounds is sound and accessible; the acting is top-notch, and the sound and look of the film – let me just say that even if Avatar isn't the greatest film ever made (it is not) – it is one of the BEST LOOKING and BEST SOUNDING films I have ever seen (film is an audio-visual medium for those not in the loop.) The 3-D technology that accompanies it basically blows any other film made before in 3-D out of the water.

Now, I understand the above I have said is opinion. They're my opinions, and I'm okay with that – but I want to use my opinions as a rebuttal to those…Let's call them "backlash-seekers" who decide it is cool to throw out tired words like "overrated" on any and everything that becomes somewhat of a success. We can call many things overrated in this world. Reality television can be considered "overrated" – simply because it was hailed as the next great televised phenomenon when all it is – is just "doctored documentary", which has been around since Triumph of the Will - even before that, actually – maybe Nanook of the North. Bottled water is overrated: it's water. In a bottle. I can take my tap water, boil it, put it in a plastic jug and chill it to a little below room temperature and get the same out of it. The fact that some places charge $3.00/bottle is ridiculous – water takes up the majority of our planet! These things are "overrated". That's the meaning of the word: to regard something or somebody as better or more capable, than is in fact the case. Avatar is not in that category – and I will explain why for the "backlash-seekers". I even saw one comment that "a well made movie should be so enthralling that you can enjoy it on an iphone" - there is so much wrong with that statement and way of thinking that I am sure if I ever met this person I would probably hammer them to death with my Canon XL. Or toss a Mac G5 at them at the least.

First and foremost: the majority of the "backlash-seekers" know nothing about movies. That is a blanket statement - an ignorant statement, perhaps – but I will back it up. What I mean when I say they know nothing about movies is that they do not understand 1) the specific technology and craft of filmmaking 2) the art and psychology of filmmaking 3) the history and cultural significance of filmmaking and 4) the business of filmmaking. All four are intertwined and not one can function in sync without the other three. If you want to become a success in this industry, you must understand and have a grasp of all four.

When I see statements in regards to the "special effects" of Avatar, including the 3-D technology being "nothing special", that angers me because it is a blatant disregard for the technology and craft of filmmaking. All films have special effects. EVERY FILM has special effects. When D.W. Griffiths re-invented film language through The Birth of a Nation with the "chronological cut" – you understand that was considered a radical effect at the time? You may not know it – you may think every film is from the "Dogme 95 Collective" (if you don't know the definition of that term – you've already proved my first point) but every film is not. I must also point out that Avatar does not prove that people like "shiny" things - Avatar is not Transformers 2 - and its obvious that these critics have probably not seen either film. Avatar holds shots – keeps things continuous so the audience can explore the world – tracks shots almost in a Kurosawa-like fashion; Transformers chops footage at a record-setting clip, making it jarring – almost uncomfortable, even – for some audience to invest any type of attachment to the story. This is filmmaking 101.

I would like to ask those who like to comment on the 3-D technology: how many film cameras have you built? How much do you know about the inside workings of motion picture photography; and I'm not just talking about basic techniques and terms like "18% grey", "f-stop" and "shutter speed". How much do you know about Cameron's Reality Camera System – the one he PATENTED AND BUILT? Do you understand how HARD it is to create a SINGLE camera body with TWO high-definition cameras inside it? Do you understand why that is? Have you heard of "depth perception"? Do you know how the human eye works in regards to processing a basic three-dimensional image on a two-dimensional screen?

Have you heard of, researched over, read about, attempted to discover or even used the following: "Stereoscopic camera"; "The Volume" or "The 3D Fusion Camera System"? Would one understand why James Cameron did not want to shoot 3-D at 24 frames per second and felt Avatar needed to be shot on a higher frame-rate? These are legit questions that need to be pondered – and one that holds merit when giving a critique of a film with any kind of technology. Just as one would better understand the sound of an album if they knew the art and craft used to create the sonic harmonies an artist would use, or the rendering techniques created for a video game – or even how one "books" a wrestling match to know if it is a **** or ***** match.

Now, I'm not going to claim myself as the authority around here. I will admit that even I don't know the answers to all the questions I've asked – but I did do my best to research as much as I could. I've followed the making of Avatar since it was announced. I knew about Cameron working with USC's Dr. Paul Frommer to develop the Na'vi language. I knew that visual effects studio Weta Digital was embarking on programs and sequences that have never been tested or attempted. I heard about Spielberg, Lucas and Jackson (all film technological gods in their own rights) being given access to test the programs, equipment and sound stages for if/when they would want to use such technology for their own future projects. I saw the footage released at Comic Con – met with mild reviews. I said then, they doubted him with The Abyss. They doubted him with Terminator 2 - they doubted him with Titanic and he keeps making new believers or making doubters eat their words; why would anyone doubt him now? This isn't Kevin Costner taking $100 million of a studio's money with only a basic understanding of actor and camera placement. James Cameron MAKES his own photographic equipment; he DEVELOPS his own program interfaces; he BUILDS his own sound stages. The fact that this film took ten years to even be deemed acceptable to be filmed is a testament to the dedication and understanding of the CRAFT and TECHNOLOGY of movies.

This has been my longest rant to date, and I don't apologize for that. I think it is high-time that the "backlash-seekers" get put in their place. Earlier I caught some static for mentioning that those who called Heath Ledger's performance in The Dark Knight overrated didn't understand anything about acting. I stand by that statement, because I HAVE studied stage and film acting, producing, directing, writing, etc. I have seen performances from films from around the world that have made me question my own existence on this planet and have shaken me to my soul and I have seen performances from around the world that makes me want to hack my head off with a rusty ax. I am in the process of editing my first feature and am in the process of searching for legitimate distribution for said film. This shit is HARD WORK, and I will not let anyone – anywhere, anytime tell me that what has taken me over a year to create, out of love and passion – suffering through sleepless nights over an incorrect line interpretation, disjointed line-of-sight, breaking the "180 degree rule", color balance and matching because of "day for night" shooting and having to jump through hoops for corporations so I don't get sued for misdirected product placement – is "ho hum". Most have no idea what I'm talking about, so it would be a courtesy in fact to not discuss things you don't understand anything about. My gripes won't change anything: people will still fly off the handle and talk shit like they know what they're talking about when they don't. Such is the nature of man: opinions are like assholes, right?

Finally, to those who think I've fallen to my knees to give my fellow Canadian filmmaker a fellatio-session: notice I have not once given complete praise to the story of the movie. Read up top again - "sound and accessible". I repeat, I do not think Avatar is the greatest film ever made. I do think the film runs a little long, and if I was so lucky to make the film, I would have ended it right before the final battle (just as Jake Sully narrates the gathering of all the tribes on Pandora to fight the humans.) It still isn't my favorite film of 2009 (that goes to The Hurt Locker), but I am not so full of pride to not give a film its due: Avatar is a game-changer. When a "backlash-seeker" can create what I saw I will tip my hat to you and defend your work in the very same way (of course, expect your own backlash.) The gist of the story is you have not and James Cameron has. He is at a place artistically, creatively, and technologically that basically every aspiring and professional filmmaker would kill and give up their firstborn to be in. I am, in fact, terribly, insanely jealous of James Cameron that he has been able to make a film like Avatar a reality to the world. I am more than man enough to admit that much.

Watch My Bloody Valentine in 3-D, then watch Avatar. Take time to observe the CGI world in The Phantom Menace then check out Avatar. When Steven Spielberg, George Lucas and Peter Jackson want to check out what YOU'RE doing, you will know that you're setting the tone for how movies will be made and watched for the next 25 years. Then look at the figures: 10 years and a $400 million budget = $1 billion in returns in SEVENTEEN DAYS. People, that isn't overrated. That's a miracle in this economy. That's ingenious marketing. That's giving people something they want to see – and something they want to see AGAIN. That is not an opinion. That is a stone-cold fact.[/end rant]

***************************************

I love movies. They represent escapism, art, intellect and spirituality. Some are nothing more than popcorn flicks, designed to ease the burden of "real-life" for a couple of hours. Some bring important issues to the forefront that challenges how we perceive our surroundings. The most important thing for me – if one is a serious filmgoer – is to constantly expand and discover new movies. This includes experiencing stories told outside of North America.

Yes, I know: "I don't like to read while I watch movies". Well, neither do I, but I won't use that to prevent me from finding a great story within the screen. It is important, as human beings to discover other cultures and expand our perceptions of those different from us and how they see the world. There are reasons that Bergman, Kurosawa, Fellini, Ozu and Truffaut are important in the movie world – They are just great at what they do.

I intend to highlight a new film every week that is considered "foreign-language"; now that definition is simple, yet broad and complex. For example, if you need subtitles to understand the events of the plot, I will discuss it. If it is a film from a primarily English-speaking nation, but is *NOT* in English (i.e. Leolo or Atanarjuat: The Fast Runner from Canada), I will discuss. If it is a film from outside the U.S. and it *is* in English, I will not discuss (sorry, Brits & Aussies) – for now. My goal is to shed light on some of these gems, and help quell the insatiable appetites for those who can't live without seeing a new movie. Enjoy!

Cidade de Deus: City of God

Country: Brazil
Release Date: August 30, 2002
Distributed by: Miramax & Buena Vista International
Directed by Fernando Meirelles
Runtime: 130 minutes
Cast:
Alexandre Rodrigues
Alice Braga
Leandro Firmino da Hora
Phellipe Haagensen
Douglas Silva
Jonathan Haagensen
Matheus Nachtergaele
Seu Jorge
Roberta Rodrigues
Graziella Moretto

When I was younger, I lived in a housing development in Rexdale, Ontario. There were many friends I had – Vic and Mannish, two Hindu boys (I mentioned them for my column on The Music Room), Shawn, Paul and Shannon. And Nathan. Nathan was a character. He was the oldest out of all of us (by about four months, but when you're seven years old, that's like fifteen years) and he had shaggy hair that reminded me of "The Natural" Butch Reed. Of course, he also combed his hair back and kissed his pathetic biceps like him as well. He lived with only his mother in a small, cramped one-room apartment that I can never forget. We had fun as kids, but we were all aware that we lived in a shithole – that would get shittier over time. I think it was kind of unspoken about who would be able to "get out" and who wouldn't. I remember hearing about Nathan being gunned down in his teens years later after my family had moved to Brampton. I never mentioned this to my family. They probably knew themselves. There was a reason we hastily left.

The families in Fernando Meirelles 2002 gem of a film, City of God (Cidade de Deus) did not have the opportunities presented to me. Based on the 1997 novel of the same name written by Paulo Lins, the film depicts slum life and violence in a way that I had never seen before – the slums are ruled by the young – the very young, and the law does not exist. Or if it does, it is invisible. When I first encountered the movie, I expected something along the lines of Hector Babenco's Pixote, where the dirty children of Sao Paulo ran rampant robbing and killing. This was different. These kids were not worn down by the life of poverty. They were not dirty or grungy. These were vibrant, fun-loving, humorous, bright children. That made their plight all the more disturbing.



Cidade de Deus is narrated by Rocket (Alexandre Rodrigues as an adult and Luis Otávio as a child.) When we first meet him, he storms down the grungy streets with a friend and a camera, scared that he will be killed by the slum's most notorious gangster, Li'l Zé (Leandro Firmino da Hora). Rhythmic music fills the air, a knife is being sharpened. A chicken is being chased by hordes of criminals with guns. The chicken almost gets run over by a police cruiser. People dance and laugh. Rocket suddenly finds himself in Li'l Zé's wake as the chicken approaches. It looks as if our narrator is doomed and he is about to tell the story of his downfall.

In one of the absolute most breathtaking scene transitions I've ever seen, the camera whirls around our protagonist, and the background dissolves from the grey, saturated buildings to an open, dusty orange and brown field. Rocket is now nine years old and it is "The Sixties". Within those first six or so minutes, Fernando Meirelles arrived on the scene as one of the next great filmmakers. City of God displays a point of view and inventiveness rarely seen in any film, no matter what country it hails from. There is a life and urgency that is about to boil from every corner of the frame.



In the 1960's, three hoodlums known as "The Tender Trio" - Shaggy, Clipper and Goose (Rocket's brother) - are terrorizing local businesses with armed holdups. They split part of the loot with the citizens in the slums (called favelas) known as the 'City of God', a Rio de Janeiro suburb, and are protected by them in return. Several younger boys idolize the trio and follow them around. One is known as Li'l Dice ("Dadinho" in Portuguese), and he convinces them to hold up a motel – run as a brothel - and rob its occupants. The gang agree and decides to not kill anyone. Once they arrive, the "Trio" tell Li'l Dice that he is too young to accompany them and must serve as lookout. They give him a gun and tell him to fire a warning shot if the police arrive. A warning shot does go off, sending the three scurrying off. The next day, it is revealed that a massacre took place at that same motel and Li'l Dice has disappeared – most likely captured by the police. The robbery and multiple murder brings the attention of the police, forcing the "Tender Trio" to leave the slum. Clipper joins the church, and Shaggy is shot by the police while trying to escape with his girlfriend. Goose - who is Rocket's older brother - is met with a fate that reminded me of Dr. Dre's line in his track with Snoop Dogg, Lil' Ghetto Boy…

…I fell to the ground
With blood on my hands, I didn't understand
How a n*gga so young could bust a cap
I used to be the same way back…



The narrative of City of God becomes one of the most complex, well-focused character studies of the decade. It flows like a novel, moving in chronological order, but somehow not. It introduces side characters, gives them importance – but doesn't dwell on them long enough to take away from the overall impact of the story. Shorty, an informant for the police is introduced early – and his mini-story damages the lives of two of the "Trio", which eventually leads to the segue way into Rocket's full story, and his encounters with Li'l Zé.

Li'l Dice and his friend Benny re-appear. Both have been hiding out and committing crimes on their own since the motel incident. Eventually, the two grow up into young men and Li'l Dice emerges re-christened (or whatever, as he was given his new name by what seemed to be a witch doctor) as Li'l Zé and quickly becomes the most notorious criminal in the City of God. Zé, played by Leandro Firmino da Hora, is one of the great psychopaths of cinema. Eerily resembling reggae superstar Beenie-Man, Zé is a walking force of murderous nature, part Anton Chigurrh, part Tony Montana and part Henry (from Portrait of a Serial Killer). He arrives as Rocket meets up at an apartment that gets no less than three separate stories around it to get drugs from Blackie, a local dealer. Rocket wanted to obtain pot for Angélica (Alice Braga), a girl with whom he is infatuated with. Zé arrives to take over Blackie's drug operation and goes on a competition-wipeout-like killing spree that would make Michael Corelone piss his pants. Zé comes out on top as the most notorious, feared and respected gangster in the slum.



The film moves at an unbelievable pace, and reminded me of Martin Scorsese's Good Fellas, with its head-first dive into the story. There are too many characters that are integral to the plot to count, but every one is important and shares equal screen time with Alexandre Rodrigues' portrayal of Rocket. The film is about him – but about what he sees. What Fernando Meirelles exceeds at is that he doesn't make Rocket a mere observer/narrator of the tale, but doesn't have him immersed in the life, either. It is a tightrope of writing and characterization and it is executed very well. A great sequence of scenes has Rocket and a friend attempt to get into the life and rob a few people, but are thwarted – not because they are inept or incapable, but because they are good-natured. They meet people who are "too cool" and just don't have the will to rob these people of the joy that they bring Rocket and his friend. Robbing also gets in the way of Rocket's other plans, such as becoming a photographer and losing his virginity.

That is another trick that City of God is able to play extremely well: despite the grim surroundings, the bleak outlook and the gritty settings of the slums, there is an energy and playfulness within the story that can't be denied. A late disco scene is more tragic because of the sheer joy and liveliness that precedes it. Roger Ebert calls this "a riot of life", where certain characters seem to "transcend the usual rules". One such character is Benny (Phelipe Haagensen), Li'l Zé's best friend, and the absolute heart and soul of the story. Looking like DMC with a glorious golden crown of an afro, Benny is nothing more than a good guy caught up in a bad situation he was destined to never escape but make the best out of it. He holds parties, shares pot and buys liquor for all his friends. He is also the conscience to Li'l Zé's psychopathic rampage. Many times Benny steps in on behalf of the side of reason, forcing Zé to lower his weapon and let peace reign, even for a moment. Phelipe Haagensen brings a sense of old-school hippie wonderment to the role, sad and full of glee at the same time.



The film was photographed by César Charlone, who collaborated with Meirelles to create a look that was distinctive in nature. The sixties are washed out in those glowing oranges and dusty browns. The seventies desaturate the colors, giving the film an old grindhouse/exploitation look. Daniel Rezende's editing is a marvelous advancement of film language, where the cuts are used to enhance the story, and not just to serve it with a Michael Bay-like strobe effect of cuts. All three were nominated for Academy Awards for their work, along with Bráulio Mantovani's adapted screenplay. The fact that a Brazilian film was nominated for four of the more major Oscars was a major coup for the movie and its crew, who took a page from neo-realism to shoot on location and cast actual residents of the Cidade de Deus favelas.

Fernando Meirelles originally studied architecture in University of São Paulo, where he began to dabble in experimental filmmaking. From there, he began work as a television commercial director. He claims that the experience trained him to work quickly, obtain a shot and move on. His "O2 Films" production company, is in fact an advertising agency – and quickly grew to become one of the most respected and sought after advertising producers. After making City of God, he directed the critically acclaimed The Constant Gardener in 2005, the first film he did in English. He directed the polarizing, but no less visually stunning Blindness that was released in 2008. In regards to filmmakers outside of the United States, he is one of the most respected and visually impressive shot composers in the world.



I don't want readers to misinterpret my childhood in Rexdale as some sort of parallel comparison to the lives depicted in City of God - I can't, as I got out of there. As well, I think my neighborhood got off easy compared to the harsh realities of those who live in the impoverished slums in Brazil. From time to time, though - I think about my old friends and what they could be doing now. I think about how easy it could be to slip into a life of crime. You have something. I want it. I will take it. The thought is simple, the act is not - unless it is all you know. Cidade de Deus, without judging, or being condescending, shows us that life in the streets is everything and nothing what you expect it to be. There can be laughter there. There can be rhythm, there can be a lot of tragedy - but there are ways to get out. You just have to look for them, find them - and finally, know that you deserve to escape.



Trailer for City of God


{Film Passport Stamped]

Coming Attractions: In 1997, one of Italy's most famous comedians took a story that mixed slapstick, romance and the bond between father and son in the most abominable of circumstances and showed that laughter can shield one from some of the most inhumane situations.

Questions or comments? Completely disagreed with any of my picks? Are you in love with me? Leave comments below or email me at [e-mail]!!!

Bookmark 411mania.com on your computer!

-or-

Check us out at Twitter!

TWITTER

http://www.twitter.com/411mania
http://www.twitter.com/411wrestling
http://www.twitter.com/411moviestv
http://www.twitter.com/411music
http://www.twitter.com/411games
http://www.twitter.com/411mma