Pols 357 Movie Critique PDF

Preview

Summary

movie critque 10 percent of grade...

Description

Cailyn Thomson Film Critique Due by: 05/22/20 In the documentary “The Edge of Democracy” we see how the politics of Brazil changes from year to year, and the influence of political leaders and their techniques effects on Democracy. While her own background permeates throughout the film and while she acknowledges it, it can’t be forgotten or overcome and you have to take into account her bias within her reporting. In this documentary we can see how the documentary perceives certain events and how it compares the issues of the reality of Latin American development in politics. Such as the protests in Brazil in 2013, the state of the economy, the corruption within the government and the characterization of certain political figures such as Bolsonaro and Lula to the people of Latin America. In the documentary the protests of Brazil in 2013 were seen as people running around the upper and lower houses of the government holding rallies.(The Edge of Democracy, Petra Costa) In what started as a protest for bus fares turning into people protesting directly on the grounds of the upper and lower houses people running in the streets and marching with signs. However one thing mentioned at this time is that coincidentally this uprising of sort has happened all over the world with the Arab spring and Occupy Wall Street. Which leads me to see that some people took notice of uprisings working in other places of the world and that doing this now could potentially work. Compared with the readings the readings do not even take into consideration the other movements in the world having an effect on the movement in Brazil. They solely focus on the

rise in fares for busses, this being in one of the worst recessions. “In June 2013 more than a million protesters took to Brazil’s streets. But as Latin America’s biggest economy faces its worst recession in a quarter of a century this year, the concerns of the new middle class are even bigger, says Mauro Paulino, director-general of Datafolha, the polling company, which has tracked the protests.”(Brazil’s Middle Class Starts to Lose Ground, Pearson) Another instance in the documentary is the state of the economy, in the documentary it highlights how the economy was thriving under President Lula. As well as the growth of a new oil drilling site of Petrobas.( The Edge of Democracy, Petra Costa) Which ends up being one of the biggest downfalls to democracy. Seen as money tends to be what controls political parties not the actual legislators or presidents running the country. As well as acknowledging her own family ties to a corporation of construction that influenced politics and some of the executives even got detained and put in jail according to her mom. What is also acknowledged in the documentary is the 40 million people raised out of poverty by the programs initiated by Lula. Which allows for more people to go to school and in the documentary people state how the program helped their families of those in poverty, but admits that to others it actually hurts them and starts to turn into socialism and is hurting their economy more then helping. (The Edge of Democracy, Petra Costa) The readings do back this point up with the La Bolsa Familia program confirming that it did lift 40 million people into the middle class, however the documentary fails to follow up with the effects of an added middle class. “The biggest concern among Brazil’s new middle class, says Mr Paulino, is rising unemployment, especially among the young, followed by inflation.” (Brazil’s Middle Class Starts to Lose Ground, Pearson) So by omitting that even though it is a good thing that people are lifted out of poverty it causes inflation which then in turn starts an

economic problem for everyone else. This is because if you add more money into the system the same items are going to be worth more numerical dollars then they used to because the dollar is now worth less. Another is the corruption within the government, in the documentary it shows how some sides view this corruption to be severe enough to be an impeachable extent. However, some sides in the film just state that corruption was rampant in every campaign however it was just done more in this then in others.( The Edge of Democracy, Petra Costa) As well as in the sense of the impeachment process some of the congress man could not even agree on why Dilma was even being removed from office. As well as it says that most people did not even know why she was being impeached. Some congress man said it was because of the economic decline given in Dilma’s presidency from Lula’s, while others said it was because she was corrupt. In the readings however “In numerous ways, the events of 2016 have little in common with those of 1964. Rousseff is accused of a genuine violation of the law: hiding a government budget deficit with loans from state banks during her 2014 reelection campaign.”(Is a Coup Taking Place in Brazil, Friedman) With these facts we can see that there is no denial that she broke the law and that there is actually a legal precedent for these actions that can be taken by the government. Therefore by congressman claiming this was a coup and had no legal precedent for this are completely false. Especially seeing that coups are typically are shown to be in the form of military action and quickly and succinctly outstanding the leader and replacing them with one of their own. (The Edge of Democracy, Petra Costa) So since this happens over a long drawn out process involving the legal actions of the courts this would not qualify as a coup. Another point in this argument does prove how divided the congress man are on this issue and the range of political parties they belong to. This clearly proves how this could prove difficult to

get a majority in congress without out funding or support based on favors to get someone or many people from a range of parties to agree on an issue or support a politician. The introduction of Bolsonaro a right-wing conservative in the documentary starts with him stating that he has been called a racist and sexist and a homophobe. With him inviting in many people of the corporations that is in the documentary is seen to corrupt Brazil welcomed by him. Who are strong in the sense of there are many in what is thought to be by the old oligarchy in support of guns, anti-abortion and “bulls”( The Edge of Democracy, Petra Costa) However the comments in the documentary want to dissuade that women would vote for him by starting out with the statement of him being called a sexist. It is shown in the readings that many women are showing support for Bolsonaro, granted it is not solely because they like him it is mainly out of the distaste for the PT or workers party under Lula and Dilma. This is supported by the conservative movement called the Pink Tide which is anti- abortion and anti gay rights. (Women for Bolsonaro, Polimedio) Which is highly supported in the documentary of the gun lovers and conservatives tied to Bolsonaro illustrated by them being welcomed by him. Another key figure in Latin American politics represented in this documentary is President Lula. In the documentary he is portrayed as a hero and constantly in a positive light, even when he is detained and questioned, it says that he was painted badly only by the government parading him to detention on the grounds of what the documentarian at the time believed was corruption before she realized it was on banking. (The Edge of Democracy, Petra Costa) However this is contradictory to the reality within the readings that people were not favoring him so much that they would vote for the opposite party just because they didn’t want

another four years under him. Even though he held a high percentage of approval when leaving office. However the documentary did not touch on the scandals of 2006 in corruption between the first and second election. (Brazil, V&P chapter 14) Which since it was omitted it does not mean that he should constantly be portrayed as a hero while the corruption only gets highlighted during Dilma’s terms in office instead of his. This gives a very one sided portrayal of the argument with not acknowledging his corruption as well as others in the regime. Which could give background to why he was detained instead of the documentarian saying the detention was not on good grounds and that the parading him out of the apartment was unnecessary. In conclusion the documentary The Edge of Democracy in some portions such as protests of 2013 were correct. However the corruption and the legal precedence for impeachment, and the state of economy and its side effects were either understated overlooked or flat out misrepresented. Overall the movie had some good spots buts its facts were flawed and the standpoint of the reporter was clearly bias even though she stated the bias it still seeped in and permeated throughout the film with the misrepresentation of some events.

Works Cited

Costa, Petra, director. Edge of Democracy. 2019.

Friedman, Uri. “Is a Coup Taking Place in Brazil?” 2016.

Pearson, Samantha. “Brazil's Middle Class Starts to Lose Ground.” 2015.

Polimedio, Chayenne. “Women for Bolsonaro.” Foreign Affairs, 26 Oct. 2018.

Prevost, Gary. “Brazil.” Politics Of Latin America, edited by Harry Vanden, vol. 6....