Rio Gringa

Elite Squad 2 Trailer

The Tropa de Elite 2 trailer was released yesterday, but the R$16 million production may not quite have the impact the first film did. It will definitely make money at the box office (assuming the DVD isn't leaked to the whole country again), but it may have lost its novelty from the first time around. At least in the sequel, they take on new battles, political corruption and militias, which should be interesting.

Melting in Rio

This Perrier commercial is a cool idea, but just when you think it's in Europe somewhere, or maybe LA, BOOM! You're in Rio.

Update: A few Cariocas over at Diario do Rio figured out that the whole thing was filmed in Rio but was edited to make it look like Europe, even changing the license plates and signs. Good eyes, guys!

South of the Border

Back in college, when I had finished my third semester studying international affairs and Latin America, I finally began to understand the United States' relationship with our neighbors to the south and just how much the U.S. government had done to interfere in nearly every country in the hemisphere. More than anything, I was in disbelief that I hadn't learned any of this before, and was disappointed my how little information was available to the American public.

Oliver Stone's new documentary South of the Border could have potentially filled the void to help provide useful information about US-Latin American relations, and a brief history and basic snapshot into political trends in the region. Instead, it is an unabashedly one sided view of the rise of socialism in Latin America and mainly a loving ode to Hugo Chavez, although Stone, who evidently does not speak any Spanish, calls him Sha-VEZ during the entire movie. If that doesn't turn you off, the plot likely will.

Stone interviews several leftist Latin American leaders, though he spends the most time with Chavez. He also interviews President Lula, arguably the most powerful leader in Latin America, but spends the least amount of time with him. He also speaks to both Kirchners in Argentina, as well as the presidents of Cuba, Ecuador, Paraguay, and Bolivia. He completely ignores Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, and doesn't so much as mention him or anything related to Central America. He manages to paint a very rosy picture of Chavez as a sweet but determined everyman who is beloved by most in his country, other than the "evil" media and a minor group of opposition.

In between the interviews, Stone devotes a lot of time discussing Chavez's rise to power and recent Venezuelan history, as told by Chavez and his chavistas. There are also some very funny clips from US TV news shows, particularly FOX and CNN, meant to show how uninformed the US mainstream media is about Latin America. Unfortunately, Stone's version of events and complete unwillingness to show interviews with the opposition or even regular citizens in each country lead the viewer to believe that the film isn't terribly different from those silly news broadcasts.

The film's main flaw, other than the blatant bias, is that it spent very little time actually focusing on the structural changes brought about by leftist movements, in particular extending health care, education, and social benefits to those who previously had little access to them. It completely misses the point about why these leftist leaders have become so popular (other than their charming, "likeable" personalities, which is more than evident in the movie). It makes it seem like Chavez's "bravery" and popularity helped spread the movement in Latin America, giving him much more credit than he is due.

One of the other things that bothered me was Stone's attack on the Latin American media, who he blamed for demonizing the leftist rulers in the same vein as the US media. He also refers to human rights as a "buzz word" and mentions it only in reference to "false claims" of human rights abuses in Venezuela as compared to worse abuses in Colombia. Aside from not understanding what human rights are and how tenuous the balance has become between human rights and democracy during political shifts in the region, Stone clearly does not understand the vitality of a free press. He lumps the media together as an overall negative force that is hindering progress in Latin America, rather than recognizing that some media outlets attempt to exercise the right of free speech and try to combat propaganda from other media conglomerates.

It became clearer how out of touch the director and writers were in the panel discussion after the film, when rabid New York socialists had the opportunity to puxar saco and drone on and on without really asking questions (a few people did, though only one person, an Argentine, really questioned Stone's take on events). One person asked about the status of the transition to socialism in the region, and how each country was progressing, and the people on the panel couldn't quite answer. It made me want to laugh, thinking about Brazil or Argentina as a "socialist" country in the Chavez model. In all, I spent a lot of time rolling my eyes, at both the movie and the excitable people in the audience. But in the end, I was mostly just disappointed. Like several other reviews point out, this was a huge missed opportunity.

Further Reading

Oliver Stone's Latin America in 'South of the Border', New York Times

South of the Border movie review, Star Ledger

Oliver Stone, Visiting Points 'South' With A Few Buds, NPR

South of the Border review, Variety

Oliver Stone and Hugo Chávez: A Love Story, TIME

South of the Border review, AV Club

The Beautiful Game

Everyone still thinks that Americans hate soccer, and to be fair, the World Cup is still not nearly as big a deal here as in Brazil or Latin America. There are many reasons that Americans aren't crazy about the sport, and the more I think about it, the more reasons I come up with. Americans prefer homegrown sports (baseball, basketball, American football) to foreign sports (soccer, rugby), since they've become so ingrained in our culture. In sports as in many other areas, Americans have short attention spans and want instant gratification, neither of which jive very well with soccer. Plus, Americans tend to prefer regional and domestic championships to international games, not to mention that we are very set in our ways.

Despite how big American football is, it can never compared to Brazilian soccer culture, something you are practically born into, something that is often a fundamental part of each family history and personal identity. Americans don't quite have the same devotion as Brazilians, like this adorable little girl who sobbed, "My life is over!" when her soccer team lost a game. "How could they do this to me? I root for them!" she wailed.

We also don't have the same cult of devotion to athletes like Brazilians have, where Pelé has become something of a deity. (If you haven't watched this wonderful commercial/short film about Pelé's last goal, you should - plus, this one has subtitles).

But like I mentioned last week, Americans seem to be paying more attention to the World Cup. When Landon Donovan scored the winning goal during the last game, putting the US in the next round, I was at the office, but I heard screams echoing from people watching the game. Those screams were heard all over the country, like these videos show below (the Arkansas guy is especially entertaining).

That night, The Daily Show joked that the US had now joined "the Third World" now that we're becoming a soccer country.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
World Cup 2010: Into Africa - US Beats Algeria
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Tea Party

But to me, we're on the right path to joining the rest of the world in what is essentially the world's only global sport, one that manages to unite people like no other game. The United States' political and economic power is eroding, and it's time we got off our high horse and joined the rest of the planet in one of the few things we can all love. Loving soccer is one of the simplest and most gratifying things we can do to gain goodwill outside our borders and to win the respect of our fellow soccer fans--even if we can't agree to call it football.

Visas of the Rich and Famous

A few weeks ago, the United States and Brazil announced that they had both extended the duration of tourist visas to 10 years, meaning that tourist visas for both Americans and Brazilians will now last an entire decade, rather than just five years. Both countries also eliminated extra fees for business travel, student visas, and exchange program visas, but they will both continue to charge steep visa fees. (Though the US charges these fees for most foreigners, Brazil charges the high fees for tourist visas for Americans in an act of "reciprocity.") While I'd like to think there were diplomatic or good will motives involved in the visa extensions, it was likely due to logistics and efficiency: in 2009, US consulates in Brazil emitted over 506,000 visas, and from January to April of 2010, they emitted over 171,000 visas.

So this all sounds swell, right? Well, it's a minimal step toward bilateral relations, considering the horror stories that don't make the headlines, like the stories of exiled Americans whose spouses have been deported or temporarily banned from the country due to visa issues. But two stories did make headlines, and they are telling.

At the beginning of the month, American director Oliver Stone flew to Brazil to promote his new documentary and to meet with Brazilian leaders. Somehow, though, he was unaware that Americans need visas to enter Brazil, and despite US airport regulations to check visas for us regular folk, he managed to get on a plane and arrive in São Paulo with no visa whatsoever. Instead of being turned around and sent back to the US, he spent a mere 3 hours at customs and was admitted to the country. He was given an "emergency" temporary visa valid for eight days. Then, to top it off, he was met with open arms by the Brazilian government, and had a meeting with Dilma Rousseff, who he chatted with behind closed doors during his brief promotional tour in Brazil.

Fast forward to this week, when legendary Brazilian singer João Gilberto had to cancel his show at Carnegie Hall, a part of the CareFusion Jazz Festival. The reason? His US visa was expired, but on Monday he got an emergency appointment at the US consulate, where he handed in his paperwork and did the mandatory interview. His visa was then approved. But then, despite going through the necessary steps, he did not manage to get the visa in time and didn't travel to New York. The details are unclear, though it appears the visa wasn't printed in time. The visa debacle forced producers to cancel the show at the last minute. One of the producers said he was "heartbroken" that the singer, "one of the most important of our generation," was unable to perform.

So much for reciprocity.

The Third Rail

While I was away, both of my parents each sent me this article which was apparently on the front page of the New York Times (slow news week, I'm guessing). In any event, the NYT's Brazil correspondent, Alexei Barrionuevo, touched the third rail of journalism in Brazil, combining race, beauty, women's roles, and the North vs. South into a single story. The article, which was oddly opened up to readers online, received 250 comments, and the accompanying video has over 30,000 views on YouTube. My guess, based on reading between the lines and the parts of the story the author seemed to want to emphasize is that the article was mandated, and he tried his best to make it as relevant as possible to Brazilian current affairs.

Nevertheless, the article really pissed people off, as to be expected. While the idea that model scouts largely confine their search to the south, particularly Rio Grande do Sul, is not exactly news to Brazilians, but is apparently something of a novelty for the rest of the world, hence the appeal to the Times. It's disheartening that this is the "juicy" story they wanted on the front page, nonetheless, to try to sell newspapers, while there are much more pressing, current and relevant issues in Brazil, like racial quotas in federal universities, or the continued, abysmal socioeconomic gap between the North and the South of Brazil. But clearly, the editors got what they wanted, and created a little firestorm of controversy, leaving some Brazilians irate and some Americans still clueless as to the real, pressing, underlying issues in the story. I guess it's just another sign of the times in the publishing world.

Off Runway, Brazilian Beauty Goes Beyond Blond

Excerpt: "On the pages of its magazines, Brazil’s beauty spectrum is clearer. Nonwhite women, including celebrities of varying body types, are interspersed with white models. But on the runways, the proving ground for models hoping to go abroad, the diversity drops off precipitously. Prosecutors investigating discrimination complaints against São Paulo Fashion Week found that only 28 of the event’s 1,128 models were black in early 2008. The pattern creates a disconnect between what many Brazilians consider beautiful and the beauty they export overseas. While darker-skinned actresses like Juliana Paes and Camila Pitanga are considered among Brazil’s sexiest, it is Ms. Bündchen and her fellow southerners who win fame abroad."

Video

Football Fan Fail

I admit this commercial is a little perplexing...a YouTube commenter came up with this explanation: a man from Portugal emigrates to Brazil, where he marries a Brazilian. They move to the US and they have a son. Thus, a widow with a Brazilian accent, a guy translating into English, and the deceased wearing the national colors of Portugal.

Otherwise, the commercial doesn't make much sense.

 

What story do you think could explain this weird scenario?