MovieChat Forums > Tropa de Elite (2007) Discussion > Why did American critics have such a har...

Why did American critics have such a hard time understanding this movie?

posted 13 years ago by Sash5034
13 replies | jump to latest

"A bad clone of City of God"

"A depressing film that celebrates brute strength as the only means to stem the tide of violence and crime in Rio de Janeiro."

"The film's message is that all of society is corrupt, so it doesn't matter who gets killed. It's a propaganda movie that shows no empathy for its characters or for its audience."

"For nearly two hours, Padilha bombards viewers with senseless, sickening violence for its own sake."

"The moral dilemmas are gripping, but the film takes itself far too seriously to ever connect with us."

LOL...What? I'm confused, did I watch the same movie? These guys should stick to generic Hollywood films with cookie-cutter bad guys and perfect heroes.

[–] Jessica_Rabbit69 13 years ago

I do agree with you so much. Most UK reviews ran along the same lines as the American ones.

And I think the reason for this is that the movie is anything but politically correct. You just wouldn't see this high level of testosteron and unapologetic machismo in any American or European movie. Hollywood would not get away with it. Although I don't think this movie glorifies violence, it is certainly most sympathic to BOPE. And in the eyes of Hollywood that shouldn't be. It is just so easy to be morally outraged about this film. The poor drug dealers should be the misunderstood good guys. There just is no Hollywood-like socially conscious message in Elite Squad.

But who cares if American critics liked it. The public loved it and it was a huge success in South America.

Jessica Rabbit
"I'm not bad. I'm just drawn that way."

[–] actionfilm-2 13 years ago

Wholeheartedly agree with you both. I just posted this elsewhere, it's been revised a bit, but it bears repeating as it relates here.

The criticism cited is extremely shortsighted imho, critics essentially labeling it as facist. I think the film was fair in it's portrayal of all parties involved, all protaganists were three dimensional characters, including the cops. The rampant corruption within the police force was shown, BOPE's heavy handed tactics were not hidden, and if anything the social ills caused by the narco traficantes was perhaps underplayed (understandable, in order to keep the film within scale). In the film BOPE is seen as brutal, unsypmathetic, etc. towards the drug trafficers, this in order to do their job, as to do otherwise would perhaps cost them their lives and the lives of others. Though to say there is no moral dilemma is only half right, they don't wrestle with it on the street, but the effects of the job take a heavy toll nonetheless. Evidenced by Nascimento's verging on mental collapse and Matias' loss of virtue.

BOPE teammembers were not painted as shining heroes, but neither did filmmakers portray them in a strictly negative light, hence the issue. The problem is not just the critics, these days mainstream Hollywood itself is hard pressed to portray law enforcement (or the military) in anything resembling a positive light. They may give the individual heroic qualities, but when it comes to law enforcement and the military in the general sense, rarely. Liberal sensebilties prevent this. I applaud Tropa Elite, if only the ridiculous SWAT film had a fraction of the cajones that Elite Squad displays.

[–] cdsi2 13 years ago

The best thing about this movie is that nothing is black and white. The depiction of the Brazilian police is frighteningly accurate. BOPE does exist, it does have this sort of Code of Honor. A Brazilian would know this, the country is rotten. Politicians are the biggest thieves... the police is terribly underpaid and corrupt. It seems like a hopeless situation, until these hero-like guys show up to save the day. Fascism? Who cares, they're chasing and killing bad guys. Fascism is for baddies. We aren't big on the double-standard concept.

Anyway, that's how many middle class Brazilians view this movie. Some others get shocked with the violence and its supposed "glorification" and hate the movie, just like with City of God. But some can see that the black and white concept is mainly shown on Captain Nascimento himself. Once he gets to that grey area, whether to quit BOPE and be with his family but still meaning to protect the city from itself, that's when his problems start. He's got a decision to make - not only on who's replacing him, but whether be black or white - stay on BOPE or be with his family. We see his hand stop trembling once he shows some resolve - staying on BOPE, going against his wife's wishes - violently so - even if it's only to fix the mess. This gets better defined on Elite Squad 2, when we find out

*SPOILER* he didn't quit BOPE after all and lost his family to a man who goes against everything he believes in, best of ironies. *END SPOILER*

As movie critics, they should have found the gray areas... though I admit, they're not the easiest to find. Most people I've seen who love this movie just enjoy it for their "heroic" actions. The sequel shows this ambiguity way better... are the BOPE good or bad? Are they murderers or heroes? Nevertheless, they do have good intentions in an incredibly corrupt environment, but are tragically and violently naive, in my opinion.

*SPOILER* They do get taken advantage of for this, in the end, and it's what will make even Nascimento believe they shouldn't exist anymore. *END SPOILER*

[–] turnitaroundtwice 13 years ago

Well I liked this film, but I can definitely see why some people would have taken issue with it, even the good guys were very much shoot first ask questions later (theres a bit where he mentions taking out 30 bad guys in his first week or something lol) and this is seen as desireable behaviour because no doubt every single person involved in the drug trade deserves to be killed right lol? Having bad guys who are just plain bad (no need for moral ambiguity) is common in movies (normally the generic hollywood movies you mentioned actually*) but this movie is based on a real life situation, and from what we seen the action of even the good police officers (torture and perhaps even murder) was every bit as reprehensible as the actions of any of the drug dealers yet they still made it clear that there were good guys and bad guys.

*You mention that people who don't happen to agree with your opinion should stick to their 'cookie cutter' but just wanted to point out that (aside from being an incredibly cliched thing to say lol) any of the changes suggested would actually have made the movie far less generic. As it is now it is entirely generic lol.

[–] Novosibirsk 13 years ago

The film had a bad buzz from the beginning and critics are rather sheepish. From what I've heard Brazilians actually cheered at screenings when the bad guy got his head blown off in the end. Since the cops in question were abusing their powers some idiots went: "Omg this is promoting fascism!" When the point was the complete opposite, the cycle of corruption and violence and so on .

But it's still strange how many people have trouble getting it, particularly when American shows such as The Wire and The Shield have explored rather similar themes.

[–] TheSummer2012 13 years ago

This film got some (unwarranted, in my view) bad press. I don't think it's a celebration of violence that lacks empathy or is, God forbid, promoting fascism. It's a work of fiction, of course, but it paints a believable (and from some of my Brazilian friends I understand truthful) picture of violence, corruption and hopelessness.

It's a deeply depressing movie at its heart but if you just focus on the style and cheer "coz the bad guy gets it at the end", that message may be entirely lost on some viewers. And as for those critics saying it shows "brute strength as the only means to stem the tide of violence and crime in Rio": It doesn't show brute strength as a means to stem the tide of violence. I don't think anyone seriously believes that violence and crime have been stemmed after the last scene. It's a cycle of violence (as Novosibirsk puts it) that will go on - other drug dealers will take over, more people will die and so on.

What "Tropa De Elite" shows is a rotten system of corruption and poverty that leaves no room for heroes: Whether it's the politicians, the police, the trigger-happy elite squad or the well-meaning middle classes that bemoan corruption but happily perpetuate the cycle of violence by buying drugs - no-one comes out particularly well at the end.

A great film.

[–] Ilyenvane 12 years ago

Why would anyone bother with understanding critics (and not only in America)? As for the viewer, this film is a masterpiece. I saw it in original language with subtitles, and the whole feeling just got me and lasted all the way till the end. I asked a Brazilian friend and he said that in real life everything is even more brutal than in the film...everything is relative...

[–] MachoManRandySavage 12 years ago

So 5 reviews means American critics don't get it?

Okay, whatever.

[–] jackfrusciante80 11 years ago

I totally agree with you, I couldn't believe the metascore that this movie gets.

I was forced to watch the bourne movies last week, and while I enjoyed the 1st one, the other 2 ones were nauseating copies of each other. To my surprise, looking up the score on metacritic, ultimatum had score of 82 and tropa has a score of 33?

New York times gave ultimatum 100, and gave this movie 0. I don't know, at some point, there has to be a political game that movie studies and producers in America play with the american critics, because we all know that good review means millions of dollars at the box office. Brazilian directors/ producers must have not paid their share to the critics. There is no other explanation.

Edit: check out the reviews for the sequel. Somehow the critics did an about face on the second one. Which I do not understand cause I thought the second one had more issues; critics must have thought that the political story lines were more worthy or something.

[–] JurassicMan1 11 years ago

Because most American critics are far left and they sympathize with criminals. The scene in the school struck a nerve.

[–] Galley_WormFilledSkull 9 years ago

As I see it, the movie is tongue-in-cheek. It certainly DOES NOT glorify police brutality. In interviews, both Padilha and Moura say they were disappointed by the audience's reaction to the movie because most people it was fascist propaganda and most of brazilians justify police arbritariness and brutality.
The film was intended to adress a more culture oriented audience, the only ones who understood the film as actually CRITICIZING police brutality rather than inciting it, pushing it into the audiences' minds.
The idea was to show that when police officers behave like criminals, innocent people will die and we're not going to have a less violent society. Maybe the screenplay should have been rewritten by a better professional to make the point clear. But most brazilians are uneducated, inclined to Fascism, violent themselves [even though the local media try to make us believe otherwise] and they support the death penalty, prison for life, forced labor in prisons and the execution of criminals by the cops in plain daylight. I know what I'm talking about. Brazil has recently ranked as number one in lynchings. And most lynchings of suspects reveal that the perpetrators are your next door nice neighbor and a third of the lynching victims are innocent.
The film tries, innefectively, it appears, to show how police brutality IS WRONG. Maybe if a movie like this was produced by americans and set in an american environment, most people would perceive that it states the opposite of what it looks to be defending.

'What goes around comes around. Just like a kangaroo.'