English 1302 - Rhetoric

City of God Julia Schmiedel

tommcclellan — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 23:33:20 +0000

The City of God is definitely not your every day movie. A young man tells a story filled with poverty, violence, lust and the adolescent struggle to make the right decisions, about a group of thugs in the City of God in Brazil. This movie is quite a bit to take in, it lays heavy on your heart and mind but the story is a powerful one. It was very well done as far as emotional force goes, because after watching it, you’d have to be ice cold for it not to affect you. The acting in it was wonderful, you could truly feel their emotions and felt as though you were a part of their story. I think that it was very well done, the story of it is very powerful and although not a lot of people can handle watching something like it, I think if you take the time to realize the meaning behind the movie then it is well worth sitting through the horrid events that take place in the film. However, one of the problems I had with the film is best put by John Powers when he says “There’s more to the poor, after all — even the criminal poor — than the cruelty with which their lives sometimes end.” I don’t believe that they realistically portrayed how all of the favelas are. I understand that they are only talking about one small group of people in one small town, but they could have been a bit more clear. Viewers are easily confused and maybe even tricked into thinking that this is how the whole city was. Although I can’t help but disagree with Powers when discussing the scene when Steak & Fries is ordered to shoot one of the young boys, he states “It‘s an upsetting scene, yet its most disturbing feature may be the shameless way Meirelles works us over.” I don’t believe it was at all shameless, in fact I found that it really added to the severity of the film and the violence; it’s that one scene that stuck in everybody’s minds and made his movie stand out from all the rest. Isn’t that what they want? Their movies to stand out and leave an impact on your mind and heart? Roger Ebert describes the movie perfectly with one sentence ” ‘City of God‘ does not exploit or condescend, does not pump up its stories for contrived effect, does not contain silly and reassuring romantic sidebars, but simply looks, with a passionately knowing eye, at what it knows.” The fact that the movie doesn’t do many of these things is probably why your average movie goer would not enjoy it or understand it, this movie is not a sell out by any means and we shouldn’t compare to things such as “The Notebook” or “Freedom Writers” or any other cookie cutter movie that has to use the same basic love story just to sell tickets at the box office. Now don’t get me wrong I do enjoy both of those movies and I love a good chick flick, but it was nice and refreshing to see that there are still directors and writers and film makers who continue to raise the bar, push limits, take chances and make a movie with that much of an emotional impact. I applaud the director of this film, I think it was brilliantly done and as no movies are perfect this one is sure to stay at the top of my list of best films.

Citation

Powers, John. LA Weekly. N.p., 16 Jan. 2003. Web. 13 Dec 2011. http://www.laweekly.com/2003-01-23/film-tv/straight-outta-ipanema/2/.

Ebert, Roger. Chicago Sun Times. N.p., 24 Jan. 2003. Web. 13 Dec 2011. http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20030124/REVIEWS/301240301/1023

Ceaphus Gordon IV Critics Reviews on City of God Stephen Holden VS Mike Clark

tommcclellan — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 20:39:10 +0000

Ceaphus Gordon IV

English 1302

12/14/11

Early in the reviews and critics Stephen and Mike give off their opinions of what they think of the characters in the movie. Stephen sees this city as a city infested with crime drugs and killing. Mike Clark is slightly a little more positive on the aspect of seeing a young man goal driven trying to succeed in life itself spite the harsh conditions of the city he lives in. In this movie gangs, drugs, and killing is almost and unavoidable crossfire that Rocket is caught in between.

Mike Clark likes to describe this movie as a more so interesting movie than anything else. Besides this point he likes to pay attention more so to details such as the narrator stating “we will get back to this character a little later”. The reason being is that there are other characters and scenarios that take place in the movie that better help you understand what led up to this character becoming who they are, and what happens to them, and the reason it happens. Mike talks about there being surprises in the movie that come later on. These surprises are what keeps you interested and wanting to watch more of this movie. These details help explain how Lil Dice became Lil Ze or why the kid shot Knockout Ned when he was trying to help the kid.

Stephen Holden on the other hand describes this movie as a society of darkness with murderous street soldiers and kids with nothing left to turn to accept the joy of soccer. Stephen describes Steak and Fries nothing more than a little boy trying to join a gang. Hey tries convincing them to let him join with his pathetic excuses of details of what he thinks gives him rights of passage to this gang. In he excuses he claims “I smoke, I snort, I’ve killed and robbed”, and they allow him to join. In this city kids saw joining a street gang and swarming the city with a gun as a step to success in the world because all they saw were drugs and money. They figure that someday they can start their own gang and become very wealthy off of drugs. Stephen Holden sees that in this city if it wasn’t the drugs then it would more than likely be the money involved somewhere along the lines. In this city it seemed that nowhere was safe because the police department was even corrupted; allowing Lil Ze to continue business as long as they got their little cut of the money.

So when it come to the critics in reviews Stephen payed more attention to what was happening negatively in the city. Mike payed more attention to details of the film and how the main character also known as the narrator goes from rags to riches aside from being caught in the crossfires of shootings, drugs, and muggings. In the end the main character becomes a successful photographer and was able to move away from that part of town. The Hood known as Lil Ze ends up being devoured by his own creation. Little kids that want to be the boss of the gang end up killing Lil Ze thus taking over as the new gang. In the end it shows good or bad if you were a hood you ended up dying but if you lived an honest living you lived and were successful in the end.

Critics:

Mike Clark US Today

Stephen Holden The New York Times

City of God by Marcelo Rodriguez

tommcclellan — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 03:07:47 +0000

Marcelo Rodriguez

Engl-1302

November 21, 2011

Professor: Tom Mcclellan

City of God

Review and Film Critics Analyzes

City of God is a Brazilian film directed by Fernando Meirelles where the reality of the favelas (slums) in Rio de Janeiro is exposed. This film is based on the novel of Paulo Lins (Cidade de Deus) and it has as main characters Rocket, Li’l Ze, Benny, Carrot, and Knockout. If I have to give my own opinion about it, I would say that the film is good as well as bad. The movie is a good one in funny terms as well as scenes sequences. In the contrary, the movie is not good due to its high violence and drugs abuse among kids.

On one hand, I like how Meirelles shows an authentic slum from Brazil. I’m from Mexico and I could say that the situation in my country is not much different from the one in Brazil. For example, we have extremely poverty conditions, kids living in the streets selling drugs outside of schools, and moreover killing for money. Furthermore, in some scenes I had fun especially when Li’l Ze invites a girl to go dance and she denies the invitation. The one whose is telling the story (Rocket) says a funny dialogue about Li’l Ze is an ugly man. It made laugh a lot. I love the role Rocket plays because even when he lives in a slum he doesn’t give up the idea of becoming a professional photographer. Ironically, Rocket has a huge challenge when to becoming a photographer of a newspaper he needs to document in images the gangs of his own neighborhood. He did not imagine how the gangs will pose for him in order to be famous. Roger Evert a critic from the Chicago Sun makes a good emphasis about this movie saying: “Yet the film is not all grim and violent. Rocket also captures some of the Dickensian flavor of the City of God.” I agree with Evert and I can say City of God has admirable characters like Rocket and his father who tries to give good examples to his sons by giving them good values. In addition, I liked the sequence of the scenes by starting when the chicken escapes and everybody is running behind it trying to chase it. In that particular moment, the story goes back to their childhood and come back almost at the end of the film where the two main gangs fight each other.

On the other hand, I think the film exposes too much violence. Even though is a true story, I don’t like to see children with guns killing people and themselves. I remember the film Smuldog Millionaire from India where Jamal, Salim and Lakita; the main characters were so poor victims of adults, but I don’t remember seeing them with a weapon and killing, at least not as they were kids. I think the producers opted more for commercial purposes than a good documental film. I agree with film critic John Powers when he points the next sentence: “but rather than coming to understand the texture of daily life there- Where are the mothers? Where are the people who work for a living?” In City of God, I remember how Li’l Ze orders a kid to kill another kid, and that for me was an extremely impacting and horribly scene. I didn’t like the way Li’l Ze faces his problems simply by shooting a gun. There is another moment where Li’l Ze is having a discussion with a friend and just because the other guy doesn’t shut his mouth up Li’l raises his hand with a gun and simply killed him. Moreover, I didn’t like when they killed Benny, and Carrot refers to him as a good guy. Benny wasn’t a good guy. Yes, he tried to change his life but after being a bad person contaminating young people with drugs. Maybe he was a cool guy, but he wasn’t a good person at all. In addition and still agreeing with Powers, Knockout becomes a member of Carrot’s gang in order to take revenge, but he got killed too by a kid who was a banker guard son and who Knockout killed. To finalize, I did not like the end of the movie and especially when kids are planning their next victims. It makes me think like they are going to make the second part of this film or the never ending of the story.

To sum up, in some humoristic ways I liked the film and also I like Robert Evert point of view by saying is not too bad, but at the same time I agree with John Powers with his idea of too much violence in this film. I did not like the way how the director has to show lost of violence, and drug abuse among kids. It is so sad to see that kind of feeling in many kids. All kids should have innocent minds, but in some parts of the world they became adults at a very young age.

Works Cited

Ebert, Roger. Rev. of City of God. Chicago Sun Times. N.p., 24 Jan. 2003. Web 13 Dec. 2011.

Powers, John. Rev. of Straight Outta Ipanema: Revelation versus Exploitation in City Of God. LA Weekly. N.p., 16 Jan. 2003 Web. 13 Dec. 2011

Kiet Vo- City of God (final update with Works Cited)

tommcclellan — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 05:32:14 +0000

If you go out of your house and see kids handling guns- real guns you may think it is the end of the world. However, City of God brings to us the real story in Brazil, where any day can be the last day of life. Within 130 minutes, life and death were switching quickly. The battle of drugs gangs, the death of gang members and the poverty of Cidade de Deus, city of God may be an ironic feature. My first thought before watching this film is city of God must be rich and beautiful just like God’s place, Heaven. However, my friend, who is from Brazil, said that place is far away from the wealthy of Rio de Janeiro, and only God can go there. I agree with her after watching the movie City of God. Like God, gang leaders have the opportunity to decide whether a person lives or dies.

I could say that there is a mysterious “devil cycle” in this film, and that is cycle of revenge.I call it devil cycle because many characters in movie die for it. Let start with the death of Knockout Ned, who joined Carrot’s gang, robbed a bank, and killed a bank guard. In the final shootout between Lil Ze‘s gang, Carrot’s gang and the cops, there is a kid who got shot, and Ned try to help him then with his last breath, but the kid shot Ned. The thing is that boy just wanted revenge for his father. Back to Ned, why he joined in Carrot’s gang? The reason is he wants revenge for his girlfriend and brother, who were Lil Ze’s victims. The one who seeks revenge will face revenge, and they are stuck in the trap of death.

In that chaotic city, there are still lights shining through the darkness. Rocket’s father, who is a fisherman, chose not to be involved in drug gangs. He also educates his sons in the right way. Unfortunately, just one of his sons is like him. The other son, Goose, who was the hoodlum, got shot by Li’l Dice. Rocket, Goose’s little brother, wanted revenge for his brother, but did not get it. He loved clicking his camera more than pulling a trigger. He planned to rob many times, first on the bus, then at the store, and finally in a stranger’s car. However, each time he tried to rob someone, he found that person to be too cool to rob. Even the guy who was from Sao Paolo, whom people in Rio usually don’t like, was too cool to rob. In that regard, Rocket is like an angel in city of God, and only angels can survive in God’s hand.

Nobody get out of life alive. In other words that presented city of God, people in favela should not think about get rid of that city unless they will die. It shows how harsh the movie is, and like John Powers, he has a strong impression about this film. Some of his ideas that sounds too negative are “Walking from the theater, I found myself wondering: Do Brazilians really need a movie to show them that Rio’s favelas are infernal compounds run by drug barons and that this state of affairs is devastating for the people who live there?” and “No matter how nobly intentioned, such movies are more likely to satisfy our voyeurism than to engender any newfound sense of social responsibility.” If I have a chance to directly comment to his review, I will answer his question. Brazilians do need to show Rio’s favelas in the same way like City of God. In Fast Five, which is well known as “fast and furious”, the center of Rio at day is controlled by government but by drug barons at night. We could not image how the capital of Brazil is driven when the sun set. Center of Rio in general, Rio’s favelas in particular, drug gangs run their business whole day, they don’t care whether or not the police appearance. Powers seem to be too full because of violent scenes, or he might be anti-violence. He is actually a perfect naysayer with overwhelming counter-arguments, so his review tends to terminate all the rights in City of God. Fortunately, I did not stop at reading John’s review, and Roger Ebert’s review blows a soul of the film, which is abandoned by John Powers, to audiences. “As the camera whirls around him, the background changes and Rocket shrinks from a teenager into a small boy, playing soccer in a housing development outside Rio. To understand his story, he says, we have to go back to the beginning, when he and his friends formed the Tender Trio and began their lives of what some would call crime and others would call survival.” I could say City of God is a picture time lapse collection, and the film doesn’t flow normally in chronological order. It follows director, and that point creates an art for the film, which feature is high rated in a recently love movie “500 Days of Summer”. There is still a flower growing on the rock of the sidewalk (Mr. McClellan profile picture), and love is still existing in City of God between Rocket and his life camera.

Works Cited

Ebert, Roger. Rev. of City of God. Chicago Sun Times. N.p., 24 Jan. 2003. Web. 12 Dec. 2011. .

Powers, John. Rev. of Straight Outta Ipanema: Revelation versus Exploitation in ‘City of God. LA Weekly. N.p., 16 Jan. 2003. Web. 12 Dec. 2011. .

“City of God” with the critics- Belgica Gonzalez

tommcclellan — Tue, 13 Dec 2011 04:39:59 +0000

The 2002 film, City of God, is an emotion- evoking, eye opening account of the lives of the slum-dwellers in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The movie was an awakening for me because I could not begin to imagine such a violent and hectic existence before actually witnessing the action on the screen. As a whole, the director demonstrated the reality of the situation well. I thought the places and people well represented the story that Meirelles was striving to portray. Judging by my reactions to the film (gasping, smiling, tense, and even feeling a sense of achievemnt), the emotional aspect was a strong force. Hardly a scene was played out, that I was not on the edge of my seat. Along with a constant flux of feelings, was a challenge to follow the political aspect the director brought to light. The almost complete anarchy that rules the area is an obstacle for me to even comprehend. The film did the job of showing how politics play a large role in the fomation and continuation of the slums. The morality of the film clashes with mordern-day American values, making it even more powerful and dramatic in bringing its message. For example, the man who abuses his wife excessively because she has not been faitful is a shock to most viewers. This lack of morality suceeds in further characterizing the slums and it dwellers, making the situation appear that much more violent. The shooting and rape only add to the gasp evoking quality that is a common attribute of the movie.

City of God won several awards, including four Academy Award nominations for Best Cinematography, Best Directing, Best Editing, and Best Writing. Although I believed the 2002 film to be a thought and emotional provoking film, John Powers, film critic, disagrees. He says, ” it is oddly lacking in emotional heft.” Roger Ebert, on the other hand, says “breathtaking and terrifying, urgently involved with its characters.” Ebert gives an overall wondergul rating for the film. I agree with Ebert. I think the film, City of God, is a violent but passionate, emotional but thoughtful, and excruciantingly realistic account told by an easily identifiable narrarator. I enjoyed the sensitivity and challenges of the story, as well as the realism demonstrated in the cinematography. It’s an overall, lasting impact movie that will stay with me.

Powers, John. LA Weekly. N.p., 16 Jan. 2003. Web. 10 Dec 2011. http://www.laweekly.com/2003-01-23/film-tv/straight-outta-ipanema/2/.

Ebert, Roger. Chicago Sun Times. N.p., 29 Jan. 2003. Web. 10 Dec 2011. http://www.altfg.com/blog/awards/city-of-god-biggest-oscar-snubs-449/.

Ceaphus Gordon IV growing up with Dallas police department first essay update

tommcclellan — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 13:17:24 +0000

“What is your name and your badge number sir”. These are usually the questions I get now in current time. But things were alot more simple when I was growing before the first day of school;before my first car; before the badge number. My name is Ceaphus Gordon IV and I was born in Tyler Texas on March 22nd of 1989. I Grew up in the North Dallas Richardson area as an only child for the first 7 years of my life until my sister was born. I Graduated from Plano East SR High and was working at walgreens during the time. I put in an application and within 11 months my application was answered with a phone call from the Dallas Police Headquarters. The lady said in a loud tone “hello I’m looking for a Mr.Ceaphus Gordon IV” . I said “This is I” and she said to come downtown the following week for a interview followed with drug test and background checking. I interviewed in front of a table of LT’s and Sergeants. After that day I had felt as if my shot was over because I felt that my interview wasn’t that great. Within four weeks I received a phone call from the Dallas PD stating that I was to report to the station for uniforms and training. I was so happy to find that they had accepted me to there squad because there was a little over a hundred people in the auditorium and there was only to be four positions and I was selected out of those hundred people. The interview was a little intimidating because they’re all lecturing you asking you “what makes you think you deserve this position”, and “what makes you think or feel that your better selection to these other hundred people”.Back tracking on the interview LT. A Williams from main headquarters ask me specifically “what can you do that these other people can’t”. I replied that I am youngest of all of these people which is beneficial and I am fit to walk and withstand all types of climits. Reason being is at my last job at walgreens I was in charge of the cooler and freezer and would be in there for a thirty minutes to an hour at a time so climate didn’t bother me. SGT.Sneed asked me “what can you possibly say that would convince us that you’re dependable in the work field”? I relied that on my last job I was always dependable and helped out when the store manager had no one else to turn to and was only sick once or twice out of the whole three and a half years I worked there. After this SGT. Sneed had no more questions. The Final question was asked by LT Williams. “How do you go about doing your job when you are not sure how to do something”? I replied that “I will go and ask a LT how to do it and write it down so I wont forget and if I dont know something I will let the person know I don’t know but I will find out and when I do I will let them know. LT Williams replied ” No more questions thank you Ceaphus we hope to see you out there”. Throughout the whole interview I was just so nervous that I thought I was messing up the interview. But LT Williams is my dads LT and they are good friends and my dad told me later that afternoon “LT Williams said you did good but you give too much detail on answers and just to keep your answers short and simple.

Frying Pan to the Fire (revision) by Jennifer Lamb

tommcclellan — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 00:56:07 +0000

Sex sells; violence keeps them in their seats. It seems that the more repulsive, repugnant, and reprehensible the subject matter, the easier it is to hold the attention of the audience. Quality and creativity, and cohesion, are of little value to film makers who use negative, abrasive material, because there is no need for an actual story line to keep the audience following along. Anything that resembles a plot, theme, or moral (or the purpose) is dissolved into one long act of voyeurism. The movie “City of God,” an adaptation of the book written by Paulo Lins fits this description. Extreme violence, robbery, killing, rape – all the necessary subject matter to divert the attention away from any artistic presence, exists in this movie. Though the point comes across well enough, it is definately not suited for all age groups.

This movie is about how one young man finds the well-hidden path away from the life of turmoil and peril as it is lived out in the poorest sections of Rio De Janiero. A government subsidized housing project, more commonly referred to a favela, is the setting in which the movie is filmed. Rocket, the main character and narrator, recounts a vivid, graphic series of events which start out innocently enough, but quickly turns into a sordid tale of murder, robbery, rape and gang-banging. There are many of these favelas surrounding Rio De Janiero, but this specific favela received attention because of a feud between rival gangs that escalated to turmoil of war-like proportions. The pivotal moment in the move is when the two characters who become bitter rivals, Knockout Ned and Li’l Ze, cross paths at a big party. The conflict begins when Li’l Ze sets his sights on Ned’s girl. A few scenes later, his girlfriend has been raped and his family members murdered by Lil’ Ze. Knockout Ned, once an ordinary working man, is now transfigured into a lethal, revenge–seeking, gangbanger, against Li’l Ze, who is already a gang-banging tyrant, blood thirsty from childhood. This left Ned vulnerable because now perceived as a threat. Using skills learned from his military background, Knockout Ned becomes the leader of the gang he joined for protection. The incessant feuding between the two gangs leads to a heightened media attention and a closer look at life in the favela. In the same way that Ned becomes involved in gang life which he once avoided, Rocket becomes a pseudo employee of Li’l Ze. When Rocket submits pictures to the newspaper that bring Li’l Ze the recognition he wants as the gang leader, he pays Rocket to take more pictures. Rocket finds himself doing a favor for the man who murdered his older brother. His desire to pursue photography created an escape from the life he found himself caught in the middle of. The down-side is that if he does not take the pictures, he will face obvious consequences. So now, like Knockout Ned, Rocket finds himself in a situation where he can neither run nor stand still. The entanglement in the life of violence and crime becomes the end of both Knockout Ned and Li’l Ze. As for Rocket, he does escape drug-dealer life by becoming a photographer for the newspaper.

I think the underlying theme throughout the movie is irony. Each story has such an ironic twist that it is hard to avoid. It is a very interesting movie, but the hard-to-watch extremes tend to take the watcher over the edge at times. For example, the scene where there is a child murdering another child is absolutely impossible to watch. Regarding the film criteria of moral force, there is only the force in this movie, and that seems to be the pervasive element of evil throughout. There does not seem to be a moral, purpose, or a “the point of this story is . . . ” other than the irony of escaping from the heat of a frying pan only to burn in the fire underneath it. There is a great deal of realism reflected in the matter-of-fact way that the daily life of the residents of the housing projects was exposed. There was no glamorous “I’m wonderful and morally upstanding because I’m poor” portrayal of everyone in the movie. This is evident in the explicit conversation between two of the women in the neighborhood, and the scenes following where an angry husband is in handcuffs for killing his unfaithful wife. The greatest irony of all is that Knockout Ned and Li’l Ze both were killed by members of their own gangs.

One critic who captures this irony well is Roger Ebert in his 2003 review entitled “City of God” where he describes a place danger is opportunity, and culture is crime, and a stolen camara is a ticket out of a life of crime. I must agree with John Powers in his Los Angeles Times review entitled “Straight Outta Ipanema: Revelation versus exploitation in ‘City of God’“ when he said “No matter now nobly intentioned, such movies are more likely to satisfy our voyeurism than to engender any newfound sense of social responsibility.” I perceive that his expression was to indicate there is no need for the excessive amount of extreme material put to use in this movie in order to make a point. There was no emotional impact as a result of this film. No successful love story played out, and there didn’t seem to be a happy ending. Yes, Knockout Ned and Li’l Ze both met their demise through their gang life, but the greatest irony of all is that they both died at the hands of their own gang members. So, there is no real happy ending; just a story about one man breaking free from a drug dealer life. I guess you could say he escaped the frying pan and the fire.

Roger Ebert, Roger Ebert.com , “City of God” rev. January 24,2003

John Powers, Los Angeles Times,“Straight Outta Ipanema: Revelation versus exploitation in ‘City of God’“, January 16,3003

City of God (cited) by Judy Carrasco

tommcclellan — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 02:24:24 +0000

Movies filled with violence, drugs, gangs, etc. are interesting to me, except this one. Neither the plot nor the things happening attract my attention. Brazil, yes attracted me at first, but to tell you the truth I would have rather watched “Touristas” where tourists are slaughtered in Brazil by a corrupt doctor who steals their organs. However, all the violence just seemed like a little too much for me. Maybe it was a little exposing to the violence in Brazil, which I suppose can be a good thing to some people, but to me it’s something I would have preferred not to watch. Maybe the fact that it was a true story bothered me the most. I don’t want to watch the truth of drugs in other countries; I don’t even want to know the truth of drug handling and usage in my home country, Mexico. I understand it’s the truth and things like that happen, but in reality we should’ve just watched “Freedom Writers”.
“God is nowhere to be found,” Says Berardinelli in his own review of City of God. And it’s true; God is ironically nowhere to be found in the city named City of God. Is this irony? Both I and Berardinelli believe it is. He is shocked by the violence seen in this movie as was I when I watched it. “Part of the reason has to do with the age of the killers and their victims.” To me the worst part of the killing scenes in the movie was most definitely that the murderers are children at one point. Also the murdered are children as well.

Citation:
Berardinelli, James. “City of God.” www.reelviews.net. © 2003 James Berardinelli , 01/24/2003. Web. 7 Dec 2011. .

Martin Lulgjuraj : ” The Thrilla in Favela” Powers vs Ebert

tommcclellan — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 02:23:13 +0000

Tonight folks we are in for a treat! Powers vs Ebert, what a Clash of the titans. Both critics have a well respected record through the publishing circuit. Now here we go, “Lets Get Ready to Rumble” (Jim Buffer). Now the fight is on, Ebert starts of by giving the movie high praise. He goes as far as putting the movie in the class of Good Fellas. Ebert also says that the movie doesn’t “exploit or condescend”the characters of the movie, nor the kids in real life. Ebert believes the only way that the story could be told was by those kids that live in the Favela. Who else could act like a hoodlum if unless he is a hoodlum himself. Wow!, what an offensive attack by Ebert. Powers needs to Answer back or he will end up kissing the canvas. Powers starts of with an attack by stating that the movie is surly exploiting the kids in the Favela. He thinks that it cruel and unjust. Powers also states “Favelas are infernal compounds run by drug barons and that this state of affairs is devastating for the people who live there” What he is trying to say is that life is hard for the patrons of the Favelas and they shouldn’t take a subculture of the neighborhood and exploit it to make money. He also doesn’t like the violence dealing with the kids. It’s more or less a moral issue. What a great come back by powers he just took this fight to a new level. wow!, what we just witnessed was greatness. Now we go to the judges score cards……………. The scores just came back 114 to 114 even, and 115 to 113 ( Powers),W and 113 to 115 (Ebert) the fight is scored even! What a great fight by to worthy contestants. Both writers have valid point, and I agree a little bit of both of them. Ebert is looking at the movie from only an entertainment perspective view only. Now on the other hand Powers is looking at the movie from a righteous point of view and that kinda touches home. One must marry one’s feelings to one’s beliefs and ideas. That is probably the only way to achieve a measure of harmony in one’s life.

Powers, Jhon. “Straight Outta Ipanemaa.” LA Weekly. 16 01 2003: 2. Print.
Ebert, Roger. “City of God.” Chicago Sun Times. 24 01 2003: 1. Print.

City of God- Ceaphus Gordon IV

tommcclellan — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 01:52:19 +0000

City of God was what I call a rough but “Real” movie. Of course it is a little difficult to follow along with the translations but the movie itself goes to show you that just when you thought life was rough you really had no earthly idea of what rough means. In this city you were either going to be a hood or a salesman that sales fish. So it was basically like choosing poverty on a honest job, or choosing wealth with the possibility of being killed at any given moment because you were a hood and hoods sale drugs. The main character in the movie “Rocket” chose to live above the life of a hood making lots of money doing an honest job of photography throughout all the conflict and temptation from the lifestyle of a hood. One thing that all hood’s shared in common was selling drugs. Not all of them were bad people even though they lived the lifestyle. Benny was the coolest hood of them all that made peace with everyone and was generous to many even when they had nothing. Carrot was peaceful like Benny and just kept everything business like usual and felt that just because he was a hood didn’t mean he had to act out of violence and wild behavior. Lil Dice who later became better known as Lil Ze was a very violent person and was known to kill people on spot no matter who was there and where it was. He seem to have more of a thirst and addiction for killing. After his first couple of killings as a kid he became numb to the fact that he was murdering people and if there was any competition or threat to his business he would just want to solve it in killing the people causing the problems. Sometimes he would kill people for no reason at all or just out of anger.