Moustroll Good movie but grossly overrated

Numerootno A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

Taha Avalos The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Luís Felipe Rasmuss de Almeida "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.

Eumenides_0 Bruno 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.

ThurstonHunger A 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

vvanpo The 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.