Lula – first-look review | Little White Lies

Festivals

Lula – first-look review

22 May 2024

Words by Rafa Sales Ross

Elderly man with grey beard wearing light-coloured jacket and black shirt, seated and gesturing with hands.
Elderly man with grey beard wearing light-coloured jacket and black shirt, seated and gesturing with hands.
Oliv­er Stone’s por­trait of Brazil’s beloved pres­i­dent sad­ly fails to real­ly cap­ture what it is that makes Lula da Sil­va such a gal­vanis­ing polit­i­cal force.

Oliv­er Stone’s lat­est doc­u­men­tary is about two men: the tit­u­lar Lula, and Oliv­er Stone. It is 2022 and the Amer­i­can film­mak­er reunites with the Brazil­ian politi­cian for the first time since 2009’s South of the Bor­der, Stone’s attempt to chron­i­cle the Pink Tide that saw South Amer­i­ca lean into left-wing gov­ern­ments and more social­ly and eco­nom­i­cal­ly pro­gres­sive leaders.

In the fif­teen years since that last meet­ing, much has changed in Brazil (and South Amer­i­ca). With Lula, Stone sets out to bet­ter under­stand how the coun­try he left many years ago, one that ven­er­at­ed the man at its helm, could so vio­lent­ly turn their backs on its leader. How could one of the great­est ris­ing mod­ern democ­ra­cies fall into the hands of fas­cism? This is, of course, a great, per­ti­nent ques­tion, but Stone is much more inter­est­ed in being the man with the answers than he is in the answers themselves.

The doc­u­men­tary is struc­tured around an inter­view between Lula and Stone record­ed soon after the politi­cian was released from 18 months of unlaw­ful impris­on­ment and right before the pres­i­den­tial elec­tion that would lead to his third man­date. The two speak via an inter­preter, a lev­el of sep­a­ra­tion that is not an issue in itself but empha­sis­es the expand­ing gulf that lies between the men. Stone’s gaze — both phys­i­cal and cin­e­mat­ic — is unfo­cused and ever-shift­ing, and the ques­tions that he asks are super­fi­cial, a guid­ing frame con­coct­ed sole­ly to be inter­wo­ven with the archival mate­r­i­al of Lula’s rise and demise.

The footage shows Lula as a small boy grow­ing up in the North­east of Brazil as one of many chil­dren raised by a sin­gle moth­er with lit­tle means. Like many oth­er North­east­ern­ers in the 1950s, the Sil­vas leave their home­land for the promis­es of São Paulo, Lula quick­ly becom­ing the family’s bread­win­ner through mon­ey made as a steel­work­er. It is the steel company’s union that first entices the young work­er into a life of pol­i­tics and ush­ers in the birth of the Labour Par­ty he would come to spearhead.

Barack Oba­ma once called Lula the most pop­u­lar politi­cian in the world”, and it is easy to see why. Beyond the president’s ground­break­ing social­ly-focused ini­tia­tives that lift­ed 20 mil­lion peo­ple out of pover­ty, Lula is just a very, very like­able guy. He speaks can­did­ly and beau­ti­ful­ly about his com­mit­ment to the peo­ple and his call­ing as a leader, both a priv­i­lege and a curse. When Stone prods at Lula’s rela­tion­ship with the Amer­i­can gov­ern­ment, the pres­i­dent answers in a refresh­ing­ly can­did way. Hilary Clin­ton hates South Amer­i­ca; Bush was a bet­ter part­ner than Oba­ma; the US wants noth­ing but to keep Brazil in its place as a tame, third-world colony.

One would think hear­ing all of this spo­ken with such clar­i­ty would elic­it at least a sliv­er of self-reflec­tion from Stone, who pur­pose­ful­ly inserts him­self in the frame as the equal­ly rel­e­vant coun­ter­part in this con­ver­sa­tion, but that epiphany nev­er comes. The film­mak­er then enlists jour­nal­ist Glenn Green­wald, yet anoth­er Amer­i­can with a famous inter­est in Brazil, to help elu­ci­date Brazil’s fall into the hands of Bol­sonaro and the right-wing move­ment. The con­ver­sa­tion between the two Amer­i­cans plays as an over-extend­ed YouTube explain­er, Stone sit­ting awk­ward­ly on a wood­en bench par­al­lel to Green­wald as his lack of knowl­edge on the sub­ject grows clear­er and clearer.

Dur­ing his Lula intro­duc­tion at Cannes, Stone claimed his film would endear the politi­cian to the agnos­tics and down­right opposers. That he was say­ing that to a room very clear­ly filled with noth­ing but pas­sion­ate sup­port­ers says much about the film he was about to present, yet anoth­er effu­sive pat in the back from an Amer­i­can direc­tor whose uncu­ri­ous, self-con­grat­u­la­to­ry gaze does very lit­tle jus­tice to the leg­endary man he sets out to portray.

You might like