Edition #14
Lisbon, 2011
“DKANDLE weaves swirling multi-colored vibrant unearthly soundscapes, blending fuzzy and reverberating Shoegaze textures, mesmerizing Dream Pop meditations, sludgy Grungey tones and moody Post-punk strains, heightened with soul-stirring lyricism and pensive emotive vocalizations”
TAGS: cinema, culture, videos
The ideological battle between the Brazilian elites—on one side, the bourgeoisie and oligarchies submissive to the cultural imperialism of the United States imposed on Latin America, and on the other, leftist intellectuals linked to revolutionary movements—gave rise in the early 1960s to the movement known as Cinema Novo, a significant milestone in Brazil’s cultural history.
Influenced by Italian Neorealism and the French Nouvelle Vague, Cinema Novo emerged as a cinematic movement that directly challenged the stagnation of Brazilian cinema in the early 1960s, which was dominated by a single film genre: the chanchada. The chanchada was synonymous with productions modeled after Hollywood cinema. It wasn't truly "Brazilian cinema" but rather a "cinema that wanted to be American." At the time, director Cacá Diegues described the chanchada as "the last straw... a vulgar thing, a poorly made parody of American cinema." The chanchada was rejected for lacking aesthetic boldness, being a crude copy of Hollywood productions. The lack of thematic variety was also a concern. "A single film repeated every year." "Unauthentic." "Alienated." "Rubbish"—these were some of the descriptions given by Cacá Diegues.
The goal of the chanchada was merely to make people laugh. There were no technical or aesthetic innovations, only a basic "Americophile" formula of entertainment cinema. In the complex Brazilian political moment of the time, the chanchada was criticized for not aligning with the visions that leftist movements had for Brazil. The chanchadas were considered reactionary and bourgeois because they did not depict the Brazilian citizen, their culture, their problems, or their way of speaking, nor did they contribute to the de-alienation of the people. On the contrary, they reinforced models that subjected the Brazilian public to American cultural dependence.
As an alternative to the "international-level" cinema of the chanchada and the films made by the São Paulo studio Vera Cruz, Cinema Novo proposed an anti-industrial cinema, "open, without any dogma, without any prejudice, (...) authorial, sincere, creative, revolutionary, and one that looked at Brazil's social and economic reality with the desire to analyze it, to transform it into a better world for everyone" (Paulo César Saraceni), and with a "high level of commitment to the truth" (Glauber Rocha).
It was the restlessness of this small group of filmmakers in the early 1960s that made possible this break from the way cinema had been made in Brazil until then. Although scattered (some were studying cinema abroad), the group began to exchange ideas through letters and phone calls. Glauber Rocha was very dissatisfied with the mediocre way cinema was being made in Brazil. He wanted his group of friends to start a movement with the aim of revolutionizing cinema, to make a cinema that showed what had until then been hidden from the people, a cinema that listened to the voice of the people. It was a central concern for Cinema Novo to depict the people and realities of a profound country.
The group was inspired by Rio, 40 Graus. Released in 1955 and directed by Nelson Pereira dos Santos, the film—clearly influenced by the tenets of Italian Neorealism—depicts a summer Sunday in the daily lives of different characters in Rio de Janeiro. A passage from the book A Fascinante Aventura do Cinema Brasileiro (1981), written by Carlos Roberto de Souza, expresses well the aspirations of cinema at that time: "Rio, 40 Graus was a popular film, showing the people to themselves; its ideas were clear, and its simple language provided a view of the Federal District [note: at the time, Rio de Janeiro was the capital of Brazil, which became Brasília in 1960]. For the first time in Brazilian cinema, one could sense a disdain for rhetoric. The film was made on a minimal budget and shot in natural settings: Maracanã, Corcovado, the favelas, the city's squares, populated by tricksters, little soldiers, slum dwellers, street kids, and deputies." The film was eventually banned by censors, sparking a campaign by students and intellectuals for its release, which occurred only a year after its launch.
Excited by the wave of neorealism, filmmakers from Rio de Janeiro and Bahia decided to bring new ideals to Brazilian cinema. They aimed to produce a cinema that didn’t rely on expensive studios but was made with "a camera in hand and an idea in mind" (this was their slogan). The films would use a language appropriate to the social situation of the time. The most frequently addressed themes would be strongly linked to the political and social issues of the country.
The name Cinema Novo (New Cinema) arose because its founders openly rejected the kind of cinema that had been made in Brazil until then (with rare exceptions like Limite by Mário Peixoto [1930] and the films of Humberto Mauro). They didn’t want their films to stand "shoulder to shoulder with those who, until now, have only wasted money on failed grandiosity" (Saraceni).
Cinema Novo was composed of three important phases. The first phase spanned from 1960 to 1964. During this period, the films mostly focused on the daily life and mythology of the Brazilian Northeast, portraying the region's hardships. They also addressed economic marginalization, hunger, violence, oppression, and religious alienation. Some of the productions that best express this phase include Vidas Secas (1963) by Nelson Pereira dos Santos, Os Fuzis (1963) by Ruy Guerra, and Deus e o Diabo na Terra do Sol (1964) by Glauber Rocha.
The second phase of Cinema Novo had a new purpose. The filmmakers, for the most part, began analyzing the errors of developmentalist policies and, more importantly, the recent military dictatorship. Their films also reflected on the new directions in national history. In this phase, which lasted from 1964 to 1968, notable works include O Desafio (1965) by Paulo Cezar Saraceni, O Bravo Guerreiro (1968) by Gustavo Dahl, and Terra em Transe (1967) by Glauber Rocha.
The third and final phase of Cinema Novo, from 1968 to 1972, was influenced by Tropicalismo, a Brazilian cultural movement that emerged under the influence of avant-garde artistic trends and national and foreign pop culture, mixing traditional Brazilian cultural expressions with radical aesthetic innovations. Cinema Novo now took its attitudes to their ultimate consequences, expressing itself through Brazilian exoticism, with palm trees, parakeets, hummingbirds, ferns, indigenous people, macaws, and bananas. A landmark film of this phase is Macunaíma (1969) by Joaquim Pedro de Andrade. However, political repression soon brought an end to the movement, forcing some of its filmmakers into exile. This led to the emergence of a new movement in the country: Cinema Marginal, which had a lo-fi aesthetic. After this, Brazilian cinema entered a poor phase, marked by the Pornochanchada period—a trashy version of the chanchada. Brazilian cinema produced a lot of garbage throughout most of the 1970s and 1980s until it managed to regain momentum in the 1990s and has been growing and strengthening ever since.
For fourteen years, Cinema Novo was a movement that consistently produced intellectual and cinematic work. It garnered critical success and succeeded in positioning Brazilian cinema among the most important in the world. Another victory was the development of a cinematic language research line that influenced, positively or negatively, all cinematic production in Brazil after the 1960s. According to David Neves, it even influenced young German filmmakers of the same period.
However, some factors were detrimental to the development of Cinema Novo. The first was its failure to break away from the old messianic tradition of the nationalist intellectual, who viewed the people as lacking their own will and needing to be guided to salvation through their films. The second harmful factor was the lack of a distribution policy for their films. A third factor was the group’s condescending attitude toward the general audience. This created a one-way relationship, where there were no exchanges or interactions between the filmmakers and the public.
People, in general, go to the cinema for entertainment. A couple in Brazil in the 1960s, going to the movies on a Sunday afternoon, just wanted to have ice cream, eat popcorn, and watch an enjoyable film. Cinema Novo broke with this tradition, introducing a political, critical, anti-glamour, and down-to-earth cinema. However, the majority of the audience preferred to stay away from this. It was too heavy, frightening, and unsettling for the general public. The problem with the poor reception of Cinema Novo was its political nature. It’s the old story of the annoying intellectual: you’re not allowed to laugh, nothing can be sugar-coated, you have to be the engaged intellectual, or else you’re alienated, sold out to the system... This was the so-called "ideological patrol." By criticizing the chanchada and distancing itself from its cultivated audience, Cinema Novo relegated itself to great isolation. The audience, which was mostly urban, did not go to see Cinema Novo films. Rural, northeastern viewers rarely went to see any film, Brazilian or otherwise, due to their material conditions and the difficulty of bringing the exhibition apparatus (projectors, films, etc.) to them. The bourgeoisie and middle class didn’t go because they didn’t like the image of Brazil that was being shown to them. The only ones who understood the goals and objectives of Cinema Novo were the "cinemanovistas" themselves or those who identified with them.
But through its aesthetic and ethical project, the emblematic films of Cinema Novo presented a revolutionary concept in their language, with the proposition of the jump cut, non-linear narratives, and an emphasis on the mundane aspects of everyday life, in total rejection of the standards imposed by the major studios. They left a legacy for current Brazilian cinematic production, with films like Central do Brasil (Central Station), Cidade de Deus (City of God), and Tropa de Elite (Elite Squad), which are clearly influenced by Cinema Novo. The difference is that today’s filmmakers (part of the movement called the Retomada) depict the backlands and the favela from a new perspective, returning to the classic narrative style of the Vera Cruz era. The sophistication proposed to the audience in terms of image treatment or script crafting has allowed Retomada cinema to reconcile with the tradition of market films, characterized by good technical finishes, almost advertising-like, and genre films from the industry—corresponding to the American model of entertainment.
TOP FILMS OF THE
NEW BRAZILIAN CINEMA
RIO 40 GRAUS (1955)
Director: Nelson Pereira dos Santos
WATCH ON YOUTUBE
Rio, 40 Graus (Rio, 40 Degrees) was
filmed in 1955, with a script and
direction by Nelson Pereira dos
Santos. It is considered the inspiring
work of the Cinema Novo movement.
The film begins with a panoramic
shot that explores the beauty of
Rio de Janeiro, showcasing the
Maracanã stadium, the Corcovado, and the beautiful beaches of the southern zone. The camera then slowly shifts towards the poorer parts of the city, continuing with a panorama now focusing on the favelas. This sequence highlights the director’s intent to analyze the stark contrast created by the poor communities situated within the wealthier parts of the city. The film portrays a laid-back Rio, with sun, beaches, football, and samba, while also reminding the audience that the city can be profoundly cruel. The movie addresses the hypocrisy of Brazil’s middle class, which has always harbored prejudices against the poorer social classes. One scene, for example, shows a poor, black boy selling peanuts being discriminated against by a young white middle-class man from Copacabana. "If you bother me, I'll have you arrested," says the white man. "It's criminal of parents to leave their kids on the street," comments a passerby. For the first time in Brazilian cinema, class prejudice was depicted so explicitly. Until then, no Brazilian film had concerned itself with showing the reality of the poorest classes, especially the favela dwellers, nor had any portrayed the middle class in such a realistic manner. This is what captivated the young filmmakers of Cinema Novo, who viewed this film as a major source of inspiration for their subsequent works.
CINCO VEZES FAVELA
(1962)
Directors: Marcos Farias, Miguel
Borges, Cacá Diegues, Joaquim
Pedro de Andrade e Leon Hirszman
WATCH ON YOUTUBE
Considered one of the fundamental
works for the emergence of the
so-called Cinema Novo in Brazil,
the film Cinco Vezes Favela
(Five Times Favela) presents five stories, all set in Rio de Janeiro's favelas. The second episode, Zé da Cachorra, depicts the revolt of a popular leader who becomes frustrated with the passivity of his fellow favela residents in the face of eviction threats from the shack owner. The final episode, Pedreira de São Diogo, is filled with Marxist metaphors, representing the uprising of the people against their oppressor, with a clear message of "The people, united, will never be defeated." Like Rio, 40 Graus, Cinco Vezes Favela is an authentic portrayal of the society in Rio de Janeiro at the time.
BARRAVENTO (1962)
Director: Glauber Rocha
WATCH ON YOUTUBE
Barravento (Waves) is the first
feature film directed by Glauber
Rocha, the most renowned director
of Cinema Novo. The story follows
an educated Black man who returns
to the small fishing village where he
was raised, with the intent of freeing
the people from the control of religion. The term "Barravento", as explained at the beginning of the film, refers to "the moment of violence, when things on land and sea change, when sudden changes occur in love, life, and society." The protagonist, Firmino, is unmistakably the voice of the author, calling his people to revolution. He is a character created by the author to express his own views. Firmino is misunderstood by his fellow villagers and has to leave because everyone turns against him. This mirrors Plato's Allegory of the Cave: he wanted to show the light to people who had never left the cave, but was met with strong opposition. Several recurring themes of the first phase of Cinema Novo are evident in Barravento: the glorification of the transgressor/outcast as a catalyst for social change, a critical eye on labor and production relations, the casting of non-professional actors, the hyper-realism of using real locations (with only the Candomblé temple specially constructed for the film), the director’s candid acknowledgment of limited technical resources, and the anti-religious discourse. Despite the attempt to free the people from the negative influence of religion, Glauber Rocha was ethnocentric in his reductive view of Candomblé, considering it an instrument of alienation and overlooking its role in the cultural identity of Afro-Brazilians.
VIDAS SECAS (1963)
Director: Nelson Pereira dos Santos
WATCH ON YOUTUBE
Based on the eponymous novel by
Graciliano Ramos, Vidas Secas
(Barren Lives) follows a family of
migrants from the Brazilian
backlands who lead a subhuman
existence in the face of social issues
such as drought, poverty, and
hunger, being forced to constantly migrate in search of a
better place. The title itself gives important clues about the film's message: "Vidas" (Lives) contrasts with "Secas" (Dry), where the former suggests abundance and the latter implies lack, creating a paradox. Additionally, the adjective "Secas" directly refers to "Vidas," indicating that the family suffers from drought; however, in a more metaphorical interpretation, it can be related to a life deprived and miserable. Vidas Secas was the only Brazilian film to be listed by the British Film Institute as one of the 360 essential works for a cinematheque. The film also clearly demonstrates the strong influence of Italian Neorealism on the director's work.
DEUS E O DIABO
NA TERRA DO SOL
(1964)
Director: Glauber Rocha
Set in the backlands of the
Northeastern Region of Brazil,
the plot of God and the Devil in the
Land of the Sun closely resembles
a real event that took place in
Canudos, a region in the northeastern backlands of Brazil, known as the War of Canudos. In this historical event, a group of religious followers led by a priest who preached against landowner exploitation was massacred by bandits (cangaceiros) under the orders of local "coronéis" (powerful landowners). The film clearly shows the influence of certain cinematic movements, such as the French Nouvelle Vague, resulting in the incorporation of specific aesthetic values, including scenes that blend improvisation and dynamism. Additionally, the film employs a distinct metaphorical language and offers a critical
interpretation of reality.
OS FUZIS (1964)
Director: Ruy Guerra
WATCH ON YOUTUBE
Considered one of the classics of
the "aesthetics of hunger"
associated with Cinema Novo,
Os Fuzis (The Guns) can be
summed up in one sentence:
a staggering portrayal of the absurdity of the human condition. The film seeks to make the viewer confront the issue of hunger in the Brazilian backlands and question the murky power dynamics in the region, where soldiers kill rural workers "in the name of the law." On one side, there are armed men, cowardly and arrogant; on the other, miserable, starving, and unarmed men who survive only through faith and belief. Ruy Guerra doesn't aim to explain anything; he merely presents the harsh and cruel reality of this conflict..
A FALECIDA (1965)
Director: Leon Hirszman
WATCH ON YOUTUBE
Based on a play by the writer
Nelson Rodrigues, A Falecida
(The Deceased) tells the story of
Zulmira, a woman obsessed with
the idea of death, who wishes for a
luxurious funeral to compensate for
the simple and miserable life she leads in a suburb of Rio de Janeiro. Despite featuring the great actress Fernanda Montenegro in the lead role, whose performance as Zulmira is brilliant, the film was not a box office success. Its melancholic tone certainly didn't help. As critic Jean-Claude Bernardet wrote in an essay in the book Brasil em Tempo de Cinema, the film "has no joy, no willpower. [It shows] stagnation, the decay of things and people, impotence." Unlike other Cinema Novo films, which often had a more socio-political focus, A Falecida instead touches on the hypocrisy of the suburban middle class in Rio, highlighting conflicts caused by double lives, blind mysticism, and depression. Though it was considered for competition at the Venice Film Festival in Italy, the film, according to Hirszman, was vetoed and only made it into a parallel showcase at the international event. "Official politics were against Cinema Novo," he commented.
TERRA EM TRANSE
(1967)
Director: Glauber Rocha
WATCH ON YOUTUBE
Terra em Transe (Land in Anguish)
was created with a complex
aesthetic, making it difficult to
digest. Addressing historical
themes, social repercussions, and
interpretations of Brazil or Latin America, and combining action with aesthetic, creative, and political factors, Glauber Rocha used journalism as material for cinematic creation, crafting intersections and connections between the press and cinema. The film can be seen as a grand parable of Brazilian history from 1960 to 1966, as it metaphorizes different political tendencies present in Brazil at the time through its characters. It presents an exhaustive critique of everyone involved in this process, including the various currents of the so-called Brazilian left. This was one of the reasons why it was poorly received by critics and national intellectuals. It is considered the most important film in Glauber
Rocha's career.
O BANDIDO DA
LUZ VERMELHA
(1968)
Director: Rogério Sganzerla
WATCH ON YOUTUBE
Inspired by the true story of a
criminal nicknamed "the Red Light
Bandit" by the press, the film
depicts a mysterious robber who
uses extravagant techniques to
steal from luxurious residences in São Paulo. Sardonic and cynical, the film, along with Macunaíma and others, marks the transition from the Cinema Novo aesthetic to the rupture of Cinema Marginal. It was filmed during the dictatorship, a period characterized by a lack of information about political and social realities and media manipulation of the news reaching the public. The film subtly criticizes this situation; for example, at one point, the narrator questions whether the Red Light Bandit might simply be a media invention, a myth created by the press. The film is a self-critique by the media itself. It serves as a self-portrait of Brazil at that time. The plot is disjointed, and the aesthetic is raw and innovative. Orson Welles (Citizen Kane) was a significant influence.
MACUNAÍMA (1969)
Director: Joaquim Pedro de Andrade
Macunaíma is a lazy and characterless hero born
in the jungle who changes from black (played
by Grande Otelo) to white (played by Paulo José).
As an adult, he leaves the hinterlands with his
brothers. The character of Macunaíma is a
critique of the slapdash and laid-back attitudes
typical of the average Brazilian. A compendium of
myths, legends, and the soul of the Brazilian people, it is based on the classic novel by Mário de Andrade. Macunaíma was revolutionary in that it challenged the prevailing cultural system, proposing the introduction of alternative cultural information that was completely different from the positions held by a society that had been dominated by reactionism and widespread cultural backwardness
For you, what is the best film of Brazilian Cinema Novo?
Comment below
previous page: THE GOLDEN ERA OF THE MUSIC SCENE
next page: EDUCATION IN ANCIENT GREECE
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE:
