Truth be told but "Sequestro Relâmpago" is actually a good film because of its simplicity in telling a story like it, as it happened (as
stated early on this was inspired by an actual event), for creating and building suspense at all times and on an ultimate take there's still things
to be learning with the experience suffered by the main character. For the vast majority complaining about the ending (here on the site, also on
twitter when the movie was broadcast on prime time TV) I wonder what kind of movies are you watching anyway to call it an unsatsifactory conclusion.
It's all there, black and white, and you don't need the usual violent pay-off to actually have an ending. Lots of people complaining that it didn't answer a few things, that it was inconclusive but that's beyond the point when there's a really closure presented and for more attentive viewers use your force of imagination and go back to the burguer place sequence, cause you might have a hint about the future of one of those characters.
I think people are failing to grasp that the movie is about the experience, the near-tragical aspects of it which are all heart-stopping to watch.
The ending just happened to be that way.
Mariana Ruy Barbosa plays a typical suburban girl who after a night out with her friends is taken by two thugs (Sidney Santiago and Daniel Rocha) who want her money, credit card and her car, doing countless rides through the night in the streets of São Paulo encountering some perils, in between them and against someone else, and everything is not going their way. Will the men get their money? Will the girl be safe after this frightening encounter? Who's gonna get saved?
On the basis of seeing this three-character driven piece experience: it's a well-acted film with Mariana displaying plenty of fear and distress in the early moments of the hostage situation. The erratic parts relates to her character's reactions and not her performance and I'll return to that. Rocha (in his film debut) created a dangerous guy that sometimes uses of humor in awkward situations but he's a loose cannon responsible for the worst moments those three lived and time and again he almost gets everyone killed. Santiago is the "cool" guy who uses of some intelligence to control the situation but his affection for the girl jeopardizes some things.
I like the way director Tata Amaral conceived thrilling sequences, all of the tense moments were real, felt real and it's easy to imagine such scenario happening; and I also like the way she photographs and presents São Paulo as it really is: a wide big city with countless social divisions and that can be easily noted each street they rode by from middle class scenario where it all starts then moving to the city's downtown where you can spot all walks of life, and then moving to one of the bad guys neighborhood, distant from everywhere.
But it doesn't go down without some problems: the name of the victim of the actual kidnapping appears at the end of the movie yet I wonder why did they have to change it for the movie. And another thing (and this is more directed to the ones who complained about the ending) is that the only results about the aftermath of the case is actually this movie since if you search for the girl's name all the results will show this movie. I wonder if that's a real name, if the case ever happened, and if so how much was fictionalized for the movie since there are so many unbelievable things that can leave viewers in disbelief. About the escape attempts (of which I'll discuss later on) I won't complain all that much; but what troubled me time and again was the fact that the girl antagonizes her kidnappers several times and she opens her mouth in times when she shouldn't talk at all. What part of there's a gun pointed at you she didn't understand?
Amaral's film lacks a clear deeper message even though she's dealing with the same themes that made her career in other films, which is the violence problem in urban cities and how it affects differents segments of society. "Como Nascem of Anjos" is the perfect example of a group characters trapped in a hostage situation with dangerous kids with one situation culminating to unthinkable acts. There's a deeper meaning to it.
Here, it's all too void, too simple and you wonder what's the aim of it.
However, on a final analysis she actually gave us something to reflect upon. If the news about similar events don't hit you where it should, a movie like this can make magic since here you can spot and analyze events, elements and reactions, learn what to do and what to avoid in a similar situation. And that's something you'll take for life. Early on, you can notice that she could have avoided the whole scenario had she been more careful of her whereabout, she's too carefree. And when it comes to her escape attempts, each go by a degree of danger vs. Succcess. And I want you to pay attention to those three sequences because it makes us imagine all the variations that she hasn't thought out and that's why she failed (by three, I'm counting the burger shop even though she didn't do anything but there was a chance there).
Again, there's a good movie to be seen and found here, and the majority are simply failing to view it in an objective way rather than just the entertainment value. 7/10.
It's all there, black and white, and you don't need the usual violent pay-off to actually have an ending. Lots of people complaining that it didn't answer a few things, that it was inconclusive but that's beyond the point when there's a really closure presented and for more attentive viewers use your force of imagination and go back to the burguer place sequence, cause you might have a hint about the future of one of those characters.
I think people are failing to grasp that the movie is about the experience, the near-tragical aspects of it which are all heart-stopping to watch.
The ending just happened to be that way.
Mariana Ruy Barbosa plays a typical suburban girl who after a night out with her friends is taken by two thugs (Sidney Santiago and Daniel Rocha) who want her money, credit card and her car, doing countless rides through the night in the streets of São Paulo encountering some perils, in between them and against someone else, and everything is not going their way. Will the men get their money? Will the girl be safe after this frightening encounter? Who's gonna get saved?
On the basis of seeing this three-character driven piece experience: it's a well-acted film with Mariana displaying plenty of fear and distress in the early moments of the hostage situation. The erratic parts relates to her character's reactions and not her performance and I'll return to that. Rocha (in his film debut) created a dangerous guy that sometimes uses of humor in awkward situations but he's a loose cannon responsible for the worst moments those three lived and time and again he almost gets everyone killed. Santiago is the "cool" guy who uses of some intelligence to control the situation but his affection for the girl jeopardizes some things.
I like the way director Tata Amaral conceived thrilling sequences, all of the tense moments were real, felt real and it's easy to imagine such scenario happening; and I also like the way she photographs and presents São Paulo as it really is: a wide big city with countless social divisions and that can be easily noted each street they rode by from middle class scenario where it all starts then moving to the city's downtown where you can spot all walks of life, and then moving to one of the bad guys neighborhood, distant from everywhere.
But it doesn't go down without some problems: the name of the victim of the actual kidnapping appears at the end of the movie yet I wonder why did they have to change it for the movie. And another thing (and this is more directed to the ones who complained about the ending) is that the only results about the aftermath of the case is actually this movie since if you search for the girl's name all the results will show this movie. I wonder if that's a real name, if the case ever happened, and if so how much was fictionalized for the movie since there are so many unbelievable things that can leave viewers in disbelief. About the escape attempts (of which I'll discuss later on) I won't complain all that much; but what troubled me time and again was the fact that the girl antagonizes her kidnappers several times and she opens her mouth in times when she shouldn't talk at all. What part of there's a gun pointed at you she didn't understand?
Amaral's film lacks a clear deeper message even though she's dealing with the same themes that made her career in other films, which is the violence problem in urban cities and how it affects differents segments of society. "Como Nascem of Anjos" is the perfect example of a group characters trapped in a hostage situation with dangerous kids with one situation culminating to unthinkable acts. There's a deeper meaning to it.
Here, it's all too void, too simple and you wonder what's the aim of it.
However, on a final analysis she actually gave us something to reflect upon. If the news about similar events don't hit you where it should, a movie like this can make magic since here you can spot and analyze events, elements and reactions, learn what to do and what to avoid in a similar situation. And that's something you'll take for life. Early on, you can notice that she could have avoided the whole scenario had she been more careful of her whereabout, she's too carefree. And when it comes to her escape attempts, each go by a degree of danger vs. Succcess. And I want you to pay attention to those three sequences because it makes us imagine all the variations that she hasn't thought out and that's why she failed (by three, I'm counting the burger shop even though she didn't do anything but there was a chance there).
Again, there's a good movie to be seen and found here, and the majority are simply failing to view it in an objective way rather than just the entertainment value. 7/10.