City of God’s reception was incredibly surprising, as it was popular with both Hollywood audiences and critics, an impressive achievement for any film, especially a Brazilian production which would normally pass unnoticed by Hollywood audiences. This success is, in my view, a result of a number of factors which make the film stand out from other indigenous productions.
It can be said that City of God caught attention since it formed part of a resurgence of Brazilian cinema. Following the ‘Cinema Novo’ movement in the 1960s, there have only been occasional films of note produced in Brazil. However, in the years leading up to City of God’s release, South American cinema began to be more successful, with films such as Amores Perros (Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, 2000) and Y Tu Mama Tambien (Alfonso Cuaron, 2001) performing well at the foreign box office, and this perhaps laid the foundations for City of God’s success.
Perhaps one of the main reasons for City of God’s popularity with Hollywood audiences is that, unlike other foreign language films, it does not completely alienate them. Many elements of a conventional Hollywood production are apparent in the film, including features of the familiar gangster genre. The film is described by Colin Kennedy of Empire magazine as “the South American Goodfellas”, and the similarity is obvious from the opening sequence.
The first image we see is one of a knife being sharpened; it is shiny, in close-up and is accompanied by lively Brazilian dance music which certainly adds glamour to the weapon, almost in celebration of it. The strong language of the traditional gangster film is also immediately obvious; the first word of the film is “fuck”. The narrative structure can also be seen to follow the pattern of a conventional gangster movie, as it tracks the rise and fall of one prominent criminal, Li’l Ze.
Conventional set pieces are present, such as in ‘Bene’s farewell’, when Bene is accidentally killed during a party which is held to celebrate his leaving. These features are immediately familiar to a Hollywood audience, and make these viewers feel more comfortable from the beginning of the film, as they can, to a certain extent, relate to it.
The gangster genre is not the only recognisable one that City of God manages to encompass, however; its mix of genres adds to its appeal. It has also been described by critics as a coming-of-age film of the narrator, Rocket, and a gang-warfare epic. It is arguably most explicitly a social realist film, because of how it deals with a real situation which obviously needs to be addressed. The film is not so much an example of a familiar genre that it becomes predictable and unoriginal, however; it manages to incorporate enough recognisable elements to not alienate a foreign audience, whilst retaining the individuality that it inherently holds as a piece of Brazilian cinema.
However, it is debatable whether or not City of God can in fact be considered a social conscience film. The filmmakers certainly bring attention to the dreadful situation in the slums of Rio de Janeiro, but arguably do not make any comment on, distribute any blame for or suggest a solution for the circumstances they present. This is certainly a possible reason for the film’s success, as it means that the film can be viewed by some as escapist entertainment, while audiences or critics who look for films with a social conscience can easily find one.
The appeal to both these kinds of audiences is, in my opinion, aided by its combination of cinematic styles. The realist, documentary-like style which might normally dominate social conscience films that try to elicit sympathy and activity from the audience is well balanced by moments of more innovative and stylised cinematography. For example, the scene in which the runts are punished by Li’l Ze and must decide whether to be shot in the hand or the foot is distinguished by a handheld camera throughout and often blurred and seemingly sloppy camerawork. This makes the violence particularly realistic and the moment effective and memorable for the audience. However, the same impact can be achieved through a deliberately non-naturalistic use of the camera, as is shown by the film in which Li’l Ze rapes Knockout Ned’s girlfriend. We are shown a minimal amount of what happens: momentary shots, of which the content is hard to discern, punctuate a scene which mostly consists of black screens. This prompts the spectators to almost ‘fill in the gaps’ themselves, and the way that viewers are forced to use their imaginations arguably makes the violence as effective here as when a high degree of realism is used.
This balance between styles is, in my view, another main reason for City of God’s success among different audiences. Its endlessly innovative editing makes it appeal as an example of art cinema and attracts a younger audience which expects a faster pace, and the moments of realism work to reinforce the reality of the situation upon which the film is based.
The principal reason for City of God’s sweeping success, therefore, arguably lies in the fact that it presents a very obviously real situation in a way that appeals to a modern Hollywood audience. The filmmakers completely absorb us in the world of the film, through Rocket’s voiceover, the immeasurable amount of stories and characters that the viewer is continually bombarded with, and perhaps most importantly by the cast of non-professional actors, real children from the slums who improvised most of the scenes, that make the action so believable. However, the fast pace and black humour, as well as the recognisable generic elements and innovative cinematic style that the film incorporates prevent us from dwelling on some of the seriousness of the situation and allow us to enjoy the film more as escapist entertainment, but without taking away the audience’s constant awareness that this is actually happening in today’s Rio de Janeiro.
I think that the fact that the film is based on real events, but that not too much emphasis is placed upon this, adds appeal for the film’s Hollywood audience, as it makes City of God stand out from other gangster films or gang-warfare epics that are perhaps more accessible. I would argue that this basis in actuality gives the film a different impact, as it is more credible than the Hollywood films that viewers may be offered; it follows a Hollywood model but adds a sort of gritty realism that creates a new and original attraction for audiences.
In this way, City of God caters for a very wide range of audience expectations, which is arguably what makes it so popular with worldwide audiences and critics.
Liz Cooper - A 22 year old media graduate from northern England, Liz now lives in London where she undertakes freelance television and writing work. A ...
Join the Conversation