Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Myron Clemons A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

Marva It is an exhilarating, distressing, funny and profound film, with one of the more memorable film scores in years,

Scotty Burke It is interesting even when nothing much happens, which is for most of its 3-hour running time. Read full review

jgcorrea Lula is the leading and agglutinating symbol of the "cultural revolution" that gave leftists complete hegemonic control of public discussions, to the point that virtually all ideological opposition disappeared from the big picture. To confirm Karl Marx's claim that historical tragedies recur as farces, one should write a play about Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva. Any student of Marxism who has properly done his homework realizes that, from the point of view of revolutionary strategy, Lula did nothing wrong. Instead. He followed the recipe faithfully, with a fine dialectical sense of objective conditions, moments and opportunities, succeeding in accomplishing what was almost impossible: to save the Latin American communist movement from extinction, and put it in action in a dozen countries. The FARC themselves recognized it emphatically in a letter of thanks sent to the XV anniversary of the Forum of Sao Paulo. Lula himself, conscious of the work accomplished, celebrated his spectacular ideological victory by arguing that Brazil had reached the perfection of democracy: all candidates were left-wing. It is easy to call him a thief, a con man, a devil. But the fact is, such critique is based on a criterion of administrative appropriateness which only applies within the framework of "bourgeois morality." Lula, like Allende in Chile, had to make alliances and concessions - including the vocabulary of "bourgeois honesty" - with a firm intention of throwing them away as soon as possible. He moved amid the ambiguities of an opportunistic conciliation between the strategic demands of the revolutionary movement and the objective interests of his capitalist allies. Not even personal illicit enrichment can be seriously alleged against him by the canons of revolutionary morality. It is an historical fact that all the major stars of the communist cast enriched illicitly - Stalin, Mao, Fidel Castro, Pol-Pot, Allende, Ceaucescu - and it was a tacit norm that they had the obligation to do so, preferably with Swiss accounts, in order to have the means to protect themselves, and eventually restart the revolution in case of failure of any local project. Only Lenin was unable to enjoy a potentate status because some time after the victory of the Revolution, tertiary syphilis, fulfilling its fatal term, reduced him to a human rag. As per Yakov Stanislavovich Ganetsky, Lenin's financial mentor, "the best way to destroy capitalism is for us to become capitalists ourselves." The revolutionary movement has always relied on robbery, fraud, smuggling, kidnapping, drug trafficking, and, in democratic countries where it came to power, assault on public coffers. Lula did not invent anything, he did not innovate at all, he did not change anything, he only demonstrated an extraordinary ability to apply good old tricks. In the court of revolutionary ethics, therefore, not a word can be said against him. His Party (PT) was not a mere case of "corruption" like so many others, but rather a gigantic plan of appropriation of public money in order to give the communist movement full power over the continent.

nnshipley An amazing movie, incredible acting, gut wrenching and extremely interesting. Being somewhat politically naive about world affairs and living in North America, I did not even realize when I borrowed the movie that it was about former president of Brazil. RECOMMEND

fbellermann-1 I just saw "Lula, Son of Brazil" at the Palm Springs Festival. As others noted, the acting (Glória Pires and Milhem Cortaz ) is very good and first timer Ruis Ricardo Diaz does a good job portraying the future president. The cinematography is also up to the usual high standards of Brazilian films. The portrayal of the Northeast, origin of much of the marginalized population in the industrial southern cities is genuine and sympathetic, as it was in previous films ( "CentralStation", and "Behind the Sun" )The fictionalized and tear-jerky story line, however, comes across as the secular sanctification of Lula. One should not forget that the film's makers and some of the actors are intimately connected with the ex-president. Lula's remarkable popularity and executive success should not be cause to whitewash his entire past and portray him as the proletarian saint he appears to be in this movie. The director ( Fábio Barreto ) admitted that national screenings only netted an audience of 1 Million. In a nation of over 200 Million, that stands in contrast to the reported 85% approval rating of the politician at the end of his term. Ms. Barreto, full of class angst, blames this on the "Class A" population, supposedly the only ones interested enough or rich enough to afford the $5 ticket price. This implies a simplified vision of Brazilian society between the haves (Class A) and have-nots (Class C); exactly the sort claptrap ideological rhetoric that prevented Lula from achieving success in previous attempts. Yes, there is a wealthy elite and yes, Brazil does have lingering problems with class divisions, but there is at least a middle "Class B" (growing, in large part, due to the impact of recent Brazilian economic successes). There are worthwhile role models among the class of small entrepreneurs, possibly even in the "Brahmin" ranks of "Class A". The simple truth is, people in Brazil may largely approve of the ex-president, but they are not excited enough about him and his worker's party to invest the time and fork over the money to come and adore him. They'd rather wait until it's out on DVD and available for a buck on the notorious black market. Go and see this film. It has its merits and foreign audiences, in particular, will learn something about Brazil and Lula, but leave your handkerchief in your pocket.

David Traversa I was quite disoriented reading the four reviews on this film. Only four reviews. Very sad, but I'm afraid that only Hollywood movies get hundreds of reviews, no matter how bad they are. And I say that I was quite disoriented because the only four reviews are from Brazil, and quite severe they are. Could it be true that nobody is a prophet in his own country? it has to be, because I found this movie to be EXCELLENT!!The transition between the boy and the adult Lula is quite impressive, both actors could very well be the same person when the years go by and the boy becomes an adult.Gloria Pires is such a magnificent actress!! and quite contained. The actor that plays Lula's father is really amazing, not knowing him from previous works, one believes that he's really Lula's father, fantastic interpretation!!Everybody is excellent and so is the camera work, the editing, the color photography, etc. As far as I remember I've never been disappointed by a Brazilian movie. I think that Brazilian films are among the best in the world. And the Portuguese language as spoken by Brazilians must be among the most delicious languages to be heard, not to mention their music, absolutely ravishing!! (Do I sound like a fan of Brazil?).