"Four Days in September" examines the 1969 politically motivated kidnapping of the U.S. ambassador to Brazil. The Oscar nominated film is a realistic and believable dissection of the short lived international incident perpetrated by a small group of leftist extremists opposed to Brazil's military dictatorship. Unlike most such films, "Four Days..." puts a realistic and human face on all sides; the police, the rebels, and the American diplomat played by Arkin. A captivating, suspenseful drama in Portugese and English languages for realists.
Add a Review
-
=G=15 February 2001
-
Jon-Osterholm15 August 2004I didn't learn any Portuguese, but from this movie I learned a bit about Brazil, though "Four Days" is mostly in Portuguese. (I have a hard enough time with Spanish, thanks.) This film offers insight into a part of South American politics that I frankly have little knowledge of and I didn't follow at the time (I mean, the parts in the movie's epilogue during which I was alive and aware), and for that alone it is worth watching. Even if you don't care, the movie will bring it to light so you can imagine the Brazil of the 1960s and you just might care that you learned something about it.
"Four Days" manages to carry the viewer through to the 1989 end of the military regime in its epilogue. The Soviet Bloc was falling apart at about the same time, the Berlin Wall, if I recall, came down that year, so I suppose many would have missed this interesting ploy for attention by revolutionaries for that reason (which I certainly admit to, having following the Soviet departure steadily and having no idea about this Brazilian event).
The movie is a telling of when eager Brazilian Communist-leftist revolutionaries, both innocent and veteran, take the U.S. Ambassador hostage to draw the attention of the world toward Brazil, and to challenge the Brazilian powers they hope to overthrow ultimately, with demands for releasing their compatriots. I thought it was a convincing movie, though coming up short on making the characters particularly compelling. But then, the event was the focus, not the characters. Alan Arkin was terrific. So was the actor who played the central character, the young, not too tough, glasses-wearing Fernando.
The show didn't hide behind the revolutionaries, either. We saw things from the other side, too. It was believable, and I really enjoyed the handling of both sides of the coin in this real-life drama. There was a smoothly presented bit with a regime torturer and his girlfriend (wife?), where he suddenly admits to her what he does for the government. He'd claimed he was doing something much milder for some time, and finally outs himself as a member of the secret service. He rationalizes his torturing college kids to prevent a breakdown of Brazilian society, almost convincingly, but his lady doesn't buy it, and neither should the audience. The scene was meant to put a human face on the bad guy, and did it reasonably, but we also get that his
rationalizing leaves even him a bit flat, as he tries to embrace his woman when she turns away from him in distaste.
Most of the film is spoken in Portuguese, and I didn't mind reading this movie a bit. (It's when a movie that wouldn't be enjoyable in any language that I mind reading my way through it.) This is a movie worth seeing for its attention to a daring moment in Brazil's move toward democracy. And even if you don't care about that, it is a terrific suspense film. -
"Four Days in September" is a film that most here in the United States know nothing about--even though the film is a recreation of the real life kidnapping of the US ambassador to Brazil back in, 1971. Frankly, here in the States, we know very little about the country and many people I know think they speak Spanish there! It's sad and those who DO know a bit about the country get it from films like "City of God"! Because I am a history teacher, I was thrilled to learn more about the political turmoil in Brazil in the 1970s and their military dictatorship--as, I hate to admit it, my knowledge of the country is lacking. And, for me, the most surprising thing about the film was to learn that this government was in place all the way until 1989! Wow.
As for the film, it's a recreation of the evens leading to and following the abduction of the American ambassador--with a strong emphasis on the motivations and reactions of the younger members of this Communist group, MR8. Aside from a case of very capable Brazilian actors, American actor Alan Arkin is on hand as the ambassador. Overall, the film is excellent for many reasons. The script and direction are very good (without a lot of politics and without a strong bias) and the acting very good. In fact, I have no real complaints about the film, though I wonder about the further adventures of MR8--the film really had me wonder about the decades following this kidnapping.
By the way, though the film is about communist revolutionaries, the film is handled in a relatively dispassionate way and can be enjoyed by anyone regardless of their political orientation. It did seem to paint these leftists somewhat favorably, but not in a manner that seemed overly sentimental or biased. Plus, it did show the characters on the right as well--a smart move in the long run. Well worth seeing. -
Four days in September is not supposed to be funny, predictable, or boring. It is a piece of Brazilian history from the 60's and based on real events. Those dark years of Brazilian history are not supposed to be fun. It was certainly not boring either. For those who admire different cultures it is a great movie and a great introduction to contemporary Brazilian history. It starts with Girl from Ipanema and lots of images of a country that was enjoying itself in the years before the military coup. Leila Diniz, Bossa Nova, all was allowed before the military coup in 1964 and hence compose the first scenes of the movie. Characters are based on real participants of the kidnapping and Fernando Gabeira (Paulo) is still engaged in politics in Brazil. It's also worth noting that Fernanda Montenegro (Dona Margarida) and Fernanda Torres (andreia/Maria) (mother and daugther in real life) are both in this movie. It's a great piece for those who are willing to learn a little bit more about an amazing country that is Brazil.
-
SnoopyStyle7 February 2016In 1964, the military deposes the democratically elected Brazilian government. By 1969, the military has imposed a police state. Friends Fernando Gabeira and César decide to fight back by joining revolutionaries. The group MR8 is led by Maria. César is captured during a bank robbery. Fernando comes up with the plan to kidnap the American Ambassador Charles Burke Elbrick (Alan Arkin). They seek to exchange him for 15 prisoners.
I like the mix of characters in the revolutionary group. Each character is well defined and fully complete. It's not that much of a thriller despite a few action scenes. It has some psychological aspects. It's really the interactions within the group and with Alan Arkin that is the most interesting. -
vvanpo7 February 2003The year is 1969. Brazil is under a brutal military dictatorship. Political prisoners are being held and tortured. In order to get the junta to free some of their comrades, a group of ragtag "revolutionaries" kidnap the U.S. Ambassabor and threaten his life unless their demands are met.
Well-written and tense, the film ably demonstrates the flaws of people trying to fight fire with fire: "an eye for and eye". Alan Arkin is wonderful as the ambassador. His character gives incisive psychological sketches of his kidnappers: fervent and brooding; yearning and lost.
Fernanda Torres and Pedro Cardoso are marvelous as comrades who become lovers by their admittance of how really scared they are.
My subject line refers to a line in the script that aptly describes the bending of the political spectrum at its ends. I'm glad I found this movie. -
zephyr400019 October 2004I think that perhaps this film has been undervalued by other IMDb reviewers. What rot they disgorge! This is a finely acted, written and judged movie. Not particularly 'cinematic'; more a use of the medium of cinema to tell a fascinating story of revolutionary activity in pre-democratic Brazil. It is high quality stuff and kept me entertained throughout. The ending narrates the ending of a real life event so I cannot see how they might have made it more exciting for the bored viewer; or indeed less predictable. One criticism is that the film-makers did not successfully conjure an atmosphere of totalitarian oppression -- this supposedly tyrannical regime felt quite benign: you can't *tell* us it's oppressive, you have to *show* us. Make us experience it alongside the characters. As it is the film was less tense, mellower than it could have been, and the viewer does not root for the revolutionaries as much as he might as a consequence. But overall, an excellent and worthwhile film. 6.75/10
-
luisfelipe839515 November 2009"Four Days In September" is a brilliant and well-written movie. The year is 1969, and Brazilians are suffering with lack of democracy - that happens because of a dictatorship, which took place in 1964, when a militar junta overthrew João Goulart, the president of Brazil. In 1968, a Non-constitutional act was approved by the government, called Ato Incostitucional 5 (AI5), and by the day this was approved, the press started to be censored, and Brazilian people lost their freedom of speech. The movie starts showing three friends, and two of them decided to protest (and fight using weapons) against the dictatorship. When they've joined MR8 (Movimento Revolucionário 8 de outubro), a communist group against the government, Fernando Gabeira, currently a deputy in Brazil, had the idea to kidnap the American ambassador in Brazil, Charles Burke Elbrick, becoming one of the most famous points in the fight against the dictatorship. This is a must see movie if you really want to know more information about the Brazilian history. The acting is also good, also featuring Alan Arkin (brilliant performance), and Fisher Stevens (who acted as Chuck Fishman in "Early Edition", one of my favorite TV series of all times). Great and must see movie. A masterpiece from Brazilian cinema.
-
ThurstonHunger25 April 2006A friend of mine, who was a child in Brazil during the time that this film is set, recommended this to me. Thanks Alex, just like Onibus 174, I found this gripping.
Whereas Onibus 174 is a straight documentary, this fictionalized reenactment is allowed to let us see and hear things that likely did not happen. The best of those: an inner monologue from the always admirable Alan Arkin as he composes a more banal note to his wife at the behest of his captors.
As a result we get a film that is not too preachy, nor too confined by *what actually happened* the bane of many a "true story" come to screen. Of course here what actually happened had inherent high drama. But the key for me getting into this film was that all of those portrayed, are done so with at least a semblance of a conscience. Arkin's ambassador is just beautiful, that and his English helped me to identify with him immensely. His fate is definitely in the balance.
But the captors/rebels, and even the police in pursuit of them all have this sense of contrition and concern about what they are doing. There are interesting dynamics among the rebels as well. On a couple of levels you feel a fuse burning slowly throughout the entire film.
Hmmm, I'll have to ask my friend (or you can tell me) what the real title of the film means. (Is it something like "O What is this, companero" thus speaking to the doubting conscience of all involved??) Other oddball afterfacts, Stewart Copeland was somewhere in the soundtrack (didn't leap out when I watched it for better or worse). Also I see that the director was also responsible for "Dona Flor and Her Two Husbands" hmmm, not a good sign; even as a horny teenager I was leery of that "sex farce". I may be wrong, but I suspect this docudrama will age much better than that.
6.5/10 -
Eumenides_09 June 2009Bruno Barreto and screenwriter Leopoldo Serran have created one of the best Brazilian movies I've ever seen. It doesn't have the vicious coolness of Tropa de Elite, or the unusual camera movement and storytelling of Cidade de Deus. In fact it's a pretty classical-looking movie, with a delicate, straightforward story, reserved camera angles and little visual spectacles. But it has a great heart and a better story.
In the '60s, when Brazil is living under a dictatorship, a group of young men and women decide to create a revolutionary group to capture the world's attention about the atrocities being committed in their country. Because robbing banks and kidnapping Generals won't break the press' wall of censorship, they decide to aim at a bigger target, one which will have worldwide repercussions: the ambassador of the United States in Brazil.
The filmmakers are making a movie depicting one of the worst episodes in the history of Brazil, and yet they manage to find an even-handed way of showing the flaws of both sides. If the regime comes across as brutal, employing torture techniques and repression, the revolutionaries come across as sometimes heartless and willing to do anything to bring attention to their cause.
Although the cast was great in general, I loved Alan Arkin's performance as Charles Elbrick, the kidnapped ambassador. He portrayed fragility, coolness under pressure and even dignity. I wish he could have had a bigger role and more lines in Portuguese, which he managed to speak quite perceptibly.
In many ways this movie reminds me of Gillo Pontecorvo's The Battle of Algiers, another balanced examination of the two sides in a war for independence. I loved the subplot about a policeman who questions the use of torture in his job, and the way it messes up his personal life. But believing in the cause of defending his country against what he sees as terrorists, he has no other alternative. It's a fascinating look into the other side.
All in all, Four Days In September is a great political thriller, reminiscent of the '70s thrillers: slow paced, reserved, rife with ideas, and some good suspense. Anyone who loves movies like The Day of the Jackal, The Three Days of the Condor, or The Conformist, will surely love this Brazilian gem. -
paradamed23 November 2015When I first watched this movie I was a bit skeptic about it. Here in Brazil the media tends to be very biased.
The movie is very entertaining and shows a good view of the actual situation during the military governments. They try to actually be honest about it but not with the depth it requires. The characters are interesting and the acting is good.
Nevertheless the focus tends to be on the supposed "heroes" and not reality itself. The director even addresses the real issues behind the guerrilla/terrorists groups but not with very depth.
It is a very well known fact nowadays that those groups were not fighting for democracy but were actually fighting to instate a communist dictatorship. Some old guerrilla members/terrorists even came out on youtube claiming this was really the truth behind their intentions.
The supposed heroes are also not so noble as the film portrays them. One of them became senator and somehow avoided being charged with international drug dealing. He got caught with over a kilo of marijuana seeds. He probably bought his way out based on corruption, an unfortunately common issue in Brazil.
Another one of our heroes became State Minister but was involved in nepotism. Apparently the guy pretty much hired his entire family for important jobs in the government favouring his family against the law. He pretty much fell in discredit after that.
So my point is, much of the actual facts are portrayed by the intelligence officer. His claim was actually true. They were torturing people and using questionable methods to avoid an even worse communist government. And these communist groups, most of them affiliated with the Cuban dictatorship based their actions on using young, naive Brazilians as cannon fodder.
The bad thing is that even though this is mentioned it is not explored in depth.
All in all the movie is really enjoyable and worth watching. -
maralvimmm20 June 2018A good national trilher, based on the real facts, in the biographical book of Fernando Gabeira, who confessed that he had done these actions, shows the idealistic young people making a crime to defend causes that they thought noble, good to see and to know this portrait of that time of the Brazil. The young people I believed were engaged in a political movement that they thought was good, but they did not deeply understand the motives that led to Brazilian military occupation, only now with the facts that have recently occurred in the country could we understand the reasons and value the importance of intervention in that time. I recommend it, good to know our history and counting on great national actors. The filmmaker is one of the great national directors, it is about Bruno Barreto, who has done among other films the recent "Rare Flowers" (2013) and the acclaimed "Dona Flor and His Two Husbands" (1976). As protagonists we have the great American actor Alan Arkin who did among others Argo (2012) and Little Miss Sunshine (2006) and also counts on the national actors like Pedro Cardoso who made among other films, The Great Family: The Movie (2007).
-
Arkaan22 March 2000This is a truly passionate film about young men and women who fight for ideals that they believe in.
A Brazillian rebel group has kidnapped the American ambassador for Brazil, and demands that fifteen jailed political prisoners be let free. This leads to some tense sequences with Fernando, the most intelligent and cowardly of the kidnappers, and the ambassador (played brilliantly by Alan Arkin).
This could have become a routine thriller. It isn't due to it's intelligence and passion. A very worthwhile movie.
** Even if you're turned off by the idea of subtitles, don't worry. There is a lot of English. -
Bruno_Malta7 April 2002For several years, Brazil has been producing a lot of good movies. But only with " O que é isso companheiro ?" Brazil has managed to obtain the quality required to attract the great public. It is a excelent movie, based in a true history, this movie delivers some good hours of excitement. The acting is above the average for a Braziliam production. Bruno Barreto is a great director and show us that along the movie. He has the skills necessary to carry on the movie in a good pace. This movie should be seen for everybody that wants to know a little about Brazilian history. Its a little piece from our history, our dark times when the army was in power and nobody had the freedom of speech or acts. Its a great movie, Brazilian cinema at its best!!! I gave a 9 out of 10.
-
cabanas16 February 1999Four Days in September shows with great emotion, a black period of Brazil's story, the military dictature. A wonderful film, announced for best foreign film. A must see film.
-
rzabbot@bol.com.br22 December 2002''Four Days in September'' hasn't a wonderful script, but it's funny and has a precise reconstitution of the turbulent end of the 60's. If the screenplay gets some liberties, they're imperceptible (for those who doesn't live here in Brazil). Bruno Barreto is in a great moment in his direction, and the cast is something incredible. The best things of the film, however, are the sequences of action (simple-minded on a general point of view, but marvelous, for Brazilian cinema).
-
miguelangel-2319 December 2004One more time I turn off my DVD player, satisfied, with a very good production, I've never been left disappointed when I pick a Brazilian film to watch, I'm also an enthusiastic of Brazilian soap-opera, I'm telling you that is the best of the world, may look the traditional American soap opera like trash, not to mention that the soap-opera from Mexico, Venezuela, Argentina, etc is in my opinion pure garbage. So getting' back to this movie, I don't know what to tell you, I'm not very good describing movies, I left that for Ebert and Roeper, just trust me and watch the movie, it worth it. Great acting, great photography, besides, all the beautiful landscape from Brazil, do your self a favor and don't miss it, I recommend as well, Central Do Brazil, and Tieta Do Agreste
-
bob the moo10 October 2004When the Brazilian Government is overthrown by a military uprising, the result is a dictatorship over the people. With protests violently broken up on the streets, armed struggle is seen as the only solution and leads to the formation of the 8th October group (MR8). Desiring direct action, Fernando and Cesar join the group and are trained in weaponry and the likes. However during a bank job, Cesar hesitates to kill and is shot and captured by the police, while the others flee. It is this that gives Fernando the idea to kidnap the American ambassador in return for the release of 15 captured revolutionaries and bringing the events to the attention of the world. This film tells the story of the four-day hostage situation in the mid-sixties.
I'm not a particularly well-read person and there is a lot of history (even recent history) that I am simply not aware of and this includes the events and times presented in this film. For that reason I cannot really comment on the accuracy or level of detail containing in this telling but what little I have since gleamed from other sources tell me that it is pretty fair and close enough to being accurate. The plot is well told and is made interesting by the attention paid to the people involved in the situation; the drama and tension comes from them rather than false action sequences or stand-offs. The thanks for this should lie with the cast but also with the script that creates the characters and makes them 'real', meaning we find it easier to understand them and feel for the positions they are in. The historical context is well done and I did find it very easy to get engaged in.
The characters are where it is at and they are all very 'human'. We are never made to totally root for them because of what they are doing, but we are helped to understand why they are doing this and how hard it is for some of them to actually turn their words into action. Cardoso does this best and he is the real heart of the film and easily the most sympathetic character. He has good chemistry with Arkin, who does well acting in a foreign film. Torres does well to gradually soften her character as the film goes and it makes her more interesting than she was early on. Support is all pretty good with no really weak performances anywhere but the film mostly belongs to these lead three. The direction is good, capturing the feel of the period early on (where stock footage blends seamlessly into the main film) and producing tension without overdoing the style over substance.
Overall this is a pretty good film, telling a straight story using the characters to drive it forward and involve the audience. The film has tension but it comes from the people involved and the situations they face in the attempts to do the 'right thing'. The script delivers the characters to the actors and the actors are convincing in their delivery, producing an engaging and interesting film that helps deliver historical relevance in a miniature story. -
jungpfeffer12 July 2003After the dark era of the 1980s - when the only movies being produced locally were, to put it mildly, very erotic - the Brazilian Movie Industry struggled to regain international credibility. And, while "Carlota Joaquina" and "O Quatrilho" clearly paved the way, this is (in my opinion) the production that put Brazil back on the charts. Based on a true story, "O que É isso, Companheiro?" is brought to life by actors who are probably the best performers of the currently generation, and earned an Academy Award Nomination for Best Foreign Language Film. The most amazing aspect of this movie, however, goes unknown by international audiences: two of its main actors (Pedro Cardoso and Luiz Fernando Guimarães) achieved success, in Brazil, through their work as comedians.
-
velame14 January 2003The movie, based on the Fernando Gabeira's novel, is intense, full of action, motion and meaning. How a few young rebels planned and executed the kidnap of the US Ambassador in Rio - on that time, the Embassy was still there. Very well produced and edited, special comments about the sound, with some moments of silence and other with a disturbing noise. An expert crew. Take a look in Pedro Cardoso, who represents Fernando Gabeira. OK, some scenes of the movie are different from the original written version, but I should say it looks really good. But I would never suggest somebody else to try repeating their adventure and kidnap the US Ambassador...
-
AEIOU-222 October 1999If you dig substantive thrillers that have realistic, interesting characters this is for you. This is an under-seen flick full of emotion and tension. Alan Arkin is terrific as the hostage.The script is intricate, subtle and gripping. Fine direction by Barreto.
-
Elainet8 March 1999Great cast. It's a notorious sample of Brazilian cinema . A true story about a revolutionary army against military dictatorship at the 60's in Brazil. Bruno Barreto was able to recreate Rio at that time and tells a true story about those terrible days.
-
searchanddestroy-117 September 2011I won't add anything to the other comments that are very interesting. Only this movie is a sort of french NADA. Remember, that tale which shows us a group of left wing anarchist group who kidnap the US ambassador in Paris. This topic is very close to the Bruno Barreto's feature. But the Chabrol's one was very critical towards the anarchists - not the State's power - and wanted to demonstrate their craziness, although the characters were somewhere poignant. So, if we analyse really the two films, there are some differences in the way of telling those very similar stories. That's all I wanted to point out.
Period. -
I bought this video after reading numerous reviews from other people who raved about what a great movie it is...What a mistake to listen to them! It was totally predictable and boring. The subtitles wouldn't have been so bad if anyone had actually had anything interesting to say. Not much substance here and not really much of a story either. I knew when I heard "Girl from Ipanema" in the opening scenes that this movie was going to bite the dust...No characters to care about and a stupid and boring ending. DONT WASTE YOUR MONEY ON IT!!!