Remapping Brazilian Film Culture in the Twenty-First Century

Stephanie Dennison

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2019
• Print ISBN:
  9781138119833
• eBook ISBN:
  9781317311829
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Film & Video
• Index: Social Sciences

Remapping Brazilian Film Culture makes a significant contribution not only to debates about Brazilian national cinema, but more generally about the development of world cinema in the twenty-first century.

This book charts the key features of Brazilian film culture of the first two decades of the twenty-first century, including: the latest cultural debates within Brazil on film funding and distribution practices; the impact of diversity politics on the Brazilian film industry; the reception and circulation of Brazilian films on the international film festival circuit; and the impact on cultural production of the sharp change in political direction at national level experienced post-2016. The principle of "remapping" here is based on a need to move on from potentially limiting concepts such as "the national", which can serve to unduly ghettoise a cinema, film industry and audience. The book argues that Brazilian film culture should be read as being part of a globally articulated film culture whose internal workings are necessarily distinctive and thus deserving of world cinema scholars' attention.

A blend of industry studies, audience reception and cultural studies, Remapping Brazilian Film Culture is a dynamic volume for students and researchers in film studies, particularly Brazilian, Latin American and world cinema.

*Honorary Mention - Best Book in Humanities for the LASA Brazil Prize 2021*

Part I

1

Making films in twenty-first-century Brazil

Brazil is configured along the lines of most world cinema cultures in that its film industry is “shaped by multiple economic, ideological, social and cultural exigencies that are compounded by US domination of the local film market and the consequent need for diverse forms of state support” (Johnson 2005: 14). It has likewise experienced the peaks and troughs in cinema-going tied to both fluctuations in ticket prices/public spending power and access to cinemas that mirror many of the world’s film cultures, and particularly those found in so-called emerging economies. With exhibition that dates from as early as 1896 and production from 1897, Brazil has experienced cycles of intense production and state funding, predicated on the twin pillars of belief in the significant contribution film makes to national identity, and its potential for contributing financially to state coffers.¹ While many observers argue that film production in Brazil has never constituted an industry per se, the country is much better placed than most of its neighbours in South America to claim the existence of what was once unproblematically referred to as a “national cinema” (Shaw and Dennison 2007: 1–5). Brazilians in their millions flocked to watch the home-grown chanchadas or comedies of the 1940s and 50s, and by the mid-1970s Brazilian films had reached a very respectable 30% participation in the market (Ikeda 2015: 79), thanks in large part to generous state support for production and distribution. As explored in Chapter 2, Brazilian films have been a constant presence in the major European film festivals, with the avant-garde Cinema Novo movement of the 1960s cementing the country’s fame for producing exportable films that are both aesthetically innovative and that contribute to debates on the social issues of the day. In the second decade of the twenty-first century the broad view of Brazilian cinema is that it is currently riding high: Brazil constitutes the world’s eighth largest audience (Rufino 2018); Brazilians view films on a record number of cinema screens (Moraes 2018); the audio-visual industry generates billions of reals annually (Festival de Gramado 2018); and as I will discuss in more detail in Chapter 2, domestic films are breaking box-office records.

The troughs experienced by film production in Brazil include the bankruptcy of the ambitious Vera Cruz studio complex in São Paulo in 1954 in what amounted to a failed attempt to create a film industry modelled on the US studio system, and the migration in the 1980s of film audiences to home video and the domination of the market by hard-core pornography. Neither of these, however, had the impact of killing off film production: that honour was held by Fernando Collor de Melo, Brazil’s first president, elected by universal suffrage after the period of dictatorship that ran from 1964 to 1984.

The development of film policy in twenty-first-century Brazil

In 1990, as a result of the election in 1989 of neo-liberal Collor de Melo and the hasty introduction of a “scorched-earth policy” (Johnson 2005:14) in the spirit of the promotion of free trade, 11 state enterprises and 13 other agencies were closed down (Ikeda 2015: 19). With one decree the principle institutions supporting the film industry were disbanded (Ikeda 2018: 458), effectively forcing Brazilian cinema into an “induced coma” (459). The National Film Council (Conselho Nacional de Cinema or CONCINE), the Fundação do Cinema Brasileiro (Brazilian Film Foundation), Embrafilme, the state film production and distribution company, and the Lei Sarney or Sarney Law of 1986 which was responsible for funding films, were all abolished, and the Ministry of Culture was reduced to a Secretariat.

Only three films were released in 1992. This halt to Brazilian film production was in fact very short-lived (two years) but much has been made of it, not least as it provides clear evidence of what can happen to an otherwise healthy film industry if sources of support are removed, even briefly. The Sarney Law of 1986 was temporarily replaced with the Prêmio Resgate, or Brazilian cinema rescue award, which was awarded to 90 projects in 1993 and 1994 and credited by Cacilda Rêgo (2011: 37) as the spark that gave life to a cinema reborn. However, still under Collor, the Culture Secretary Sérgio Paulo Rouanet introduced, in December 1991, what is referred to as the Lei Rouanet or Rouanet Law, an arts-related law which remains in force and has had a long-term impact on film culture. The Rouanet Law introduced the Fundo Nacional de Cultura (FNC), a federal government fund, partly supported by the National Lottery, which provided direct financial support for cultural production in Brazil. The law also established a mechanism, known as the Incentivo Fiscal, to provide for mecenato (patronage for the arts): businesses or individuals could invest part of their income tax into cultural activities that had been approved by the Ministry of Culture (not exclusively film or audio-visual related). Based on arts support schemes in place elsewhere, such as in France, over one billion reals were invested in the arts via the Lei Rouanet’s fiscal incentive mechanism in 2017 alone.

In December 1992 President Collor resigned amid accusations of corruption and an impending impeachment vote. Under his vice-president Itamar Franco the Ministry of Culture was reinstated. In 1993 the Lei do Audiovisual, or Audio-visual Law, was introduced, also based on fiscal incentives. After the Rouanet Law, it was the second most important piece of legislation in support of the gradually revitalising film industry. Ikeda (2015: 29) highlights the political influence of audio-visual culture in Brazil demonstrated by the introduction of this law: it was the only part of the cultural industries to have its own dedicated incentive scheme. The audio-visual law was responsible for the so-called retomada, or rebirth, of Brazilian cinema from 1995 (Shaw and Dennison 2007: 37). This positive scenario was completed by the creation in 1992 of RioFilme (a film distribution and promotion company attached to the municipal government of Rio de Janeiro) and a number of polos regionais or regionally supported filmmaking production centres (Ikeda 2015: 21). Ikeda also cites two filmic success stories released in 1995: Carla Camurati’s Carlota Joaquina: princesa do Brazil (Carlota Joaquina), which drew an impressive 1.5 million viewers to film theatres, even though the film had no distributor, and Fábio Barreto’s O quatrilho, which made the shortlist for the Oscar for best foreign film (33).²

According to Ikeda (2015: 14), it was under the two presidential terms of Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995–2002) that film policy based on fiscal incentives was consolidated. The Brazilian state continued to be the “conduit” for film production, but now market agents were introduced as an intrinsic part of the model (Ikeda 2015: 15), following a logic of sharing of responsibilities between the state and the market in the production of works of culture (26). During Cardoso’s presidency Ancine was set up (in 2001), the national film agency that has been instrumental in regulating audio-visual production in Brazil throughout this century. In 2006 the agency became responsible for the administration of direct forms of support for film production via national funding calls (editais), as well as the increasingly significant Fundo Setorial do Audiovisual (FSA) – the Audio-visual Sector Fund, part of the previously mentioned Fundo Nacional da Cultura, which supports independently produced feature-length films and their distribution in Brazil. As explored in the following chapters, for two decades funding calls have reflected the shift towards a more inclusive and diversity-led cultural agenda.

The FSA makes an important contribution to addressing long-standing concerns within the film industry in Brazil, incorporating the various segments of the production chain: from funding film production to distribution and exhibition. It also provides for a degree of state financial return on investment in films. Likewise, since 2012 the Ancine-administered programme Cinema Perto de Você (A Cinema Near You) has made funding available for the construction of new theatres, thus going some way to meeting the demand for investment in exhibition and audience-generation initiatives. And to address, at least on paper,³ the frequently aired concern that film producers are given no incentive to make films that engage with audiences, the Prêmio Adicional de Renda (the Additional Income Prize) was introduced in 2005 to reward independent filmmakers for box-office success.

This national funding scenario is supplemented by a number of regional and transnational initiatives. One of the most striking of these, in terms of the films it has supported, is Funcultura – funding for cultural activities administered by the state of Pernambuco, in Brazil’s north-east.⁴ In the 2018 funding call priority was given to cultural activities conducted by women, Afro-descendants, indigenous populations, those from the interior and public school attendees (Barros 2017), thus reflecting a broad diversity agenda that has attracted much direct funding to the arts over the course of this century (see Chapter 5). The main source of transnational funding, and one increasingly sought with the growth of interest in making international co-productions (see Chapter 2), is Ibermedia. The Programa Ibermedia is a film-financing pool set up in 1998. Spain, Portugal and Italy contribute to it, along with 18 Latin American countries – including Brazil via Ancine. It is modelled on Europe’s Eurimages and Media Plus programmes (Falicov 2013: 68). A notable recipient of Ibermedia funding (both for script development and co-production) is Brazilian filmmaker Beatriz Seigner, for the critically acclaimed Los silencios (2018), a Colombian/Brazilian/French co-production which premiered at the Directors’ Fortnight at Cannes and went on to win awards at the Brasilia Film Festival in 2018.

Such initiatives tend to be accessed by producers, where permissible, as supplementary to the more substantial national funds discussed above. As discussed in Chapter 2, further funds, such as those to cover pre- and post-production costs, are open to Brazilian filmmakers via film festivals such as Sundance, Rotterdam, Berlin and San Sebastian. Also, Brazilian producers are increasingly working with TV channels, for example the Globo-owned Canal Brasil (Brazil) and RAI (Italy), and the US majors (for distribution), completing a diverse picture of domestic funding for feature-length films.

Criticism of film funding schemes

Two of the first films to benefit from fiscal incentive funds (introduced post-1990) have proved controversial and have arguably set the tone for how film funding is broadly perceived by a large part of the Brazilian public. Norma Bengell’s big-budget O guarani (1996), based on the nineteenth-century foundational novel of the same name by José de Alencar, was the first in a steady line of films to be singled out for public opprobrium after the Ministry of Culture rejected the accounts presented by the film’s producers. As a result, until her death in 2013 Bengell was under investigation for fraud. Moreover, according to Ikeda (2015: 34), many businesses sought to distance themselves from Brazilian cinema. Furthermore, O guarani was a critical and commercial flop, which exacerbated debate about the wastefulness of investing in costly art forms such as feature-length films.

Around the same time, inexperienced filmmaker Guilherme Fontes raised eyebrows when he was awarded 8.6 million reals, through the Rouanet scheme, to make a film based on the life of controversial communications magnate Assis Chateaubriand, Chatô, o rei do Brasil (Chatô, King of Brazil). Fontes continued to make headlines and provoke discontent with the Rouanet Law, by delaying the release of the film by two years, then shelving the production altogether while he was investigated for fraud, and then finally releasing the film 20 years later, in 2015, while still under investigation.

Figure 1.1Assis Chateaubriand introduces television to Brazil. Still from trailer for Chatô, o rei do Brasil

(Chatô, King of Brazil, Guilherme Fontes, 2015)

As p...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Series Information
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Contents
• Figures
• Preface
• Acknowledgements
• Introduction
• Part I  
• Part II  
• Epilogue
• INDEX