Print article   email story

Gayle Edmunds

CITY OF MEN (STER KINEKOR)

Director:
Paulo Morelli

Featuring:
Douglas Silva, Darlan Cunha, Rodrigo Dos Santos and Camila Monteiro

Rating: ****

City of Men is a brutally hard-hitting drama about two boys coming-of-age in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro. It is produced by Brazil’s Fernando Meirelles, who was nominated for a Best Director Oscar for his film City of God, which was also set in Rio’s violent favelas. City of Men is the film version of a TV series of the same name that aired on Brazillian TV from 2002 to 2004.

City of Men is directed by Paulo Morelli, who directed the TV series, and, using hand-held cameras and the colourful characters of the favelas, he tells a universal story about two friends who must face the past in order to move into the future.

Acerola (Douglas Silva) and Laranjinha (Darlan Cunha) have been best friends since they were in nappies and a month before their 18th birthdays they decide to change their lives.

Acerola, who already has a son and a girlfriend, desperately wants to sow his wild oats and enjoy the delights of other women. Laranjinha, who drives a motorcycle taxi and has a girlfriend he adores, wants to meet his father for the first time – but first he has to work out who he is.

The two set about getting what they want, but war is coming to Dead End Hill (the favela where the pair live) and no one can escape.

Madrugadao (Jonathan Haagensen), the hill’s gang kingpin, is challenged (with AK-47s) by his second-in-command, Nefasto (Eduardo ‘BR’ Piranha), and has to retreat to another favela to regroup. And a gang war in a favela involves everyone, because if you are related to the former leader your position goes from rock solid to precarious, which is what happens to Acerola and, shockingly, Madrugadao’s granny’s house is burned and she is chased out of the favela.

City of Men is not a glossy film, rather it feels – much like the lives it depicts – rough and ready. Morelli never romanticises the lives he captures on film. The handheld cameras and lack of set pieces gives the audience a real sense of the confused, transitory nature of the lives on the hill. Make no mistake, this is hard living with little chance of life’s hardships ever easing up.

What makes this film so appealing, despite it’s relentless savagery and honest portrayal of grinding poverty, are the two leads. They maintain their youthful optimism despite having little to be optimistic about and they offer up some hope of change as they fight to overcome their circumstances.

This is such a simple, visceral film that cost little to make and I couldn’t help wondering why SA’s filmmakers can’t seem to make something like this – universal and real.

Subscribe to the print edition of City Press