I’m Still Here (2024)
Directed by: Walter Salles
Premise: Based on Marcelo Rubens Paiva’s memoir. In 1970, former Brazilian congressman Rubens Paiva is taken by authorities following a coup d’état. Rubens’ wife Eunice (Fernanda Torres) holds her family together while trying to discover what happened to her husband.
What Works: I’m Still Here is a ground-level view of life under fascism and the everyday heroism of people endeavoring against a police state. The film is produced in a very realistic and restrained way. Rather than the histrionic style of a Hollywood drama, I’m Still Here is produced with a cinema verité-like approach. The filmmaking style suits the time period. I’m Still Here has a look reminiscent of media from the 1970s such as the Super 8 cameras that one of the kids is shown using. The era is recreated credibly and the costumes and sets have a lived-in naturalism that is in keeping with the style of the rest of the picture. The camera movement and shooting style have a gritty, hand-held look and the performances are unselfconscious. Although its style is plain, I’m Still Here is quite gripping. The film is about life under a military dictatorship and I’m Still Here simultaneously captures the ever-present paranoia of life in a police state and the sense of normalcy in the home as the family goes about their business. Rubens and Eunice had five children. The oldest was studying abroad when Rubens was taken and Eunice has to shield the younger children from the reality of the situation while also pushing to find the truth about her husband’s fate. That tension plays out in Fernanda Torres’ performance as Eunice Paiva. She puts on a brave face for her children but we can observe the stress around the edges of Torres’ performance. The family home is a shelter against the increasing danger outside and I’m Still Here dramatizes a quiet, dignified resistance as Eunice refuses to be intimidated.
What Doesn’t: The filmmakers of I’m Still Here struggle to find an ending. The bulk of the story is set in the early 1970s and then it leaps forward to 1996 and then to 2014. The story reaches its organic conclusion in the 1970s. The 1996 coda sequence is defensible as it bookends the story but the 2014 sequence is not necessary as it does not communicate anything that the closing text does not already accomplish. The protracted ending does not ruin I’m Still Here but it does sabotage the movie a bit; so much of the picture is tight and focused but the multiple conclusions feel like the filmmakers are fumbling for an ending.
Bottom Line: Although it stumbles in the end, I’m Still Here is an effective testament to resistance of authoritarianism. It’s a subtle movie but also quite detailed and I’m Still Here dramatizes the quiet heroism of persistence.
Episode: #1037 (March 2, 2025)