Great documentary about life and book, homonymous, of the philosopher Olavo de Carvalho. The documentary expressed well what is Brazil, and what are the real problems that our country is facing. The film "embraces" and explains, - even though quickly -, several ideas of spinal cord - and reals, - of the thought of Olavo. However, the point negative, according to my judgment, must be added, and this is: excessive exposure of postulates philosophical that, for sure, can only be understood (talking about who is not your student or disciple), just after days, weeks, or months of serious study of philosophy's own intellectual concerned that, perhaps, would be a reasonable time to understand complex ideas of the documentary (and not in 1h: 21min movie). Olavo - professor Olavo, for your known - once again fell in error of "exaggeration! Finally, the writer of Virginia, is awarded by the truth virtually all your thesis philosophical, except, of course, of this big praise made to your own documentary -, later, in social networks. But, yep, is a handsome work of the director Josias Teófilo.
11 Reviews
Touching
hugoimdb6 May 2018
Warning: Spoilers
On social networks, Olavo de Carvalho is a symbol, not a human being - not even a philosopher, for the ones who use the Olavo symbol don't seem to know his ideas. The longtime idiots, who have recently decided to become political, either idolise or mock the Olavo symbol, without paying much attention to what he actually says.
As for me, in the few times that I've read something by Olavo on social networks, I couldn't understand why he'd become all that symbol. For me, he just seems like someone endowed with lots of curiosity and who's got some interesting and honest ideas - simply put, a philosopher, as he himself likes to be called.
Lately I've been reading a lot about Christianity, not from an exclusively religious point of view, but from a rational perspective, trying to understand the historical and sociological aspects that have lead to the expansion of the faith. Maybe that's one of the reasons I decided to watch this film, for I had already heard that Olavo deals with Christianity through a philosophical approach.
I've enjoyed the film. I don't remember all the things that Olavo said in it, but some of them had a strong impression on me. For example, the conclusion that most of our ideas don't have any importance even for ourselves, for we usually are not willing to die for them. So, when we try to propagate or impose our ideas, most of the time we're just in need of some attention or of alleviating some feeling of loneliness.
I also like the concept of the pedigree of opinions. We always have lots of opinions and, when we're confronted about them, we try to justify them, but most of the time we're not able to identify the origin of our opinions, their genealogical roots. All the time we're bombarded with ideas that are propagated by several social actors and we assimilate them without even noticing it. So, trying to identify the pedigree of our opinions is a really interesting exercise.
Another thing that touched me was the concept that everything that enters the sphere of being never gets out of it. If my soul exists now, it's going to exist forever. I don't know wether that's an idea of his or wether he borrowed it from someone else - it doesn't matter, as he himself says, the important thing is that the idea be true. Anyway, that argument for the immortality of the soul was something that touched me inside, especially because lately I've been through something like an existential crisis.
Finally, I was struck by his perception that, even though we have lots of civil rights and individual liberties nowadays, the state has never had so many technological tools through which it can very easily watch and control everybody's lives. Maybe the ever growing technologies will eventually become a serious threat to our freedom and anonymity.
Apart from all the things he says, the film is really enjoyable. The landscapes are fine to see, the soundtrack is cool. It's a light and enjoyable documentary.
As for me, in the few times that I've read something by Olavo on social networks, I couldn't understand why he'd become all that symbol. For me, he just seems like someone endowed with lots of curiosity and who's got some interesting and honest ideas - simply put, a philosopher, as he himself likes to be called.
Lately I've been reading a lot about Christianity, not from an exclusively religious point of view, but from a rational perspective, trying to understand the historical and sociological aspects that have lead to the expansion of the faith. Maybe that's one of the reasons I decided to watch this film, for I had already heard that Olavo deals with Christianity through a philosophical approach.
I've enjoyed the film. I don't remember all the things that Olavo said in it, but some of them had a strong impression on me. For example, the conclusion that most of our ideas don't have any importance even for ourselves, for we usually are not willing to die for them. So, when we try to propagate or impose our ideas, most of the time we're just in need of some attention or of alleviating some feeling of loneliness.
I also like the concept of the pedigree of opinions. We always have lots of opinions and, when we're confronted about them, we try to justify them, but most of the time we're not able to identify the origin of our opinions, their genealogical roots. All the time we're bombarded with ideas that are propagated by several social actors and we assimilate them without even noticing it. So, trying to identify the pedigree of our opinions is a really interesting exercise.
Another thing that touched me was the concept that everything that enters the sphere of being never gets out of it. If my soul exists now, it's going to exist forever. I don't know wether that's an idea of his or wether he borrowed it from someone else - it doesn't matter, as he himself says, the important thing is that the idea be true. Anyway, that argument for the immortality of the soul was something that touched me inside, especially because lately I've been through something like an existential crisis.
Finally, I was struck by his perception that, even though we have lots of civil rights and individual liberties nowadays, the state has never had so many technological tools through which it can very easily watch and control everybody's lives. Maybe the ever growing technologies will eventually become a serious threat to our freedom and anonymity.
Apart from all the things he says, the film is really enjoyable. The landscapes are fine to see, the soundtrack is cool. It's a light and enjoyable documentary.
Film as a viable, didactic, dialectical, high-brow medium
jgcorrea3 June 2017
A name should be mentioned as we approach cultural valorization and rescue, vis-a-vis the recent domination by the leftist Cultural Marxism in main sectors of the society. That name is Olavo de Carvalho (1947-2022), who needs no introduction. Faced with the hegemony of the PT Regime in Brazil (2004-2016), he consequently repelled the so-called Bolivarian movement and fought against the widespread corruption via billionaire bribes that devastated the Brazilian nation. Social networks and public marches adopted the phrase "Olavo is right!", to suggest the misrule and to denounce the general cultural downgrade. Carvalho's geopolitical analyzes proved accurate. He was right to insist on the importance of the São Paulo Forum, an international revolutionary organization to which the Bolivarian allies have aligned themselves since the end of last century. O Jardim das Aflições, an emblematic book, actually the author's favorite, gave the title to this documentary directed by Josias Teófilo. It was produced via crowdfunding without a penny of public money. It is not a reproduction of the original book, published in 1995. But its basic thesis echoes the original essay. The history of the West has been marked by the idea of an Empire and successive attempts at its restructuring. With different approaches, there was always a unique objective - to extend the imperial (imperialist?) domains to the limits of the visible, geopolitical and social world. Carvalho's essay examined whether it was necessary to (i) revise such thesis and (ii) assess the extent to which it would relate to current world scenarios. Critics, within their dutiful corporate media and their unfailing rancor, said this film "is never transcendent". Heck... Quite the opposite is true. The Garden is a kind of hour-and-a-half master-class on spirituality where Mr. Carvalho is personified by his own presence, work routine and family life. "The greatest existing force is personality," he advises us, among other practical, religious and metaphysical teachings. The film is based on the following themes: (i) the symbolism of gardens in the philosophical tradition, Epicurus' Garden of Delights, the Garden of Eden from the book Genesis, the garden of afflictions in the contemporary world and the physical 'garden' in Virginia (USA). ) where the philosopher lived; (ii) individual freedom and the oppression of the collective dictatorship; (iii) Aristotelian thought, and (iv) an eventually central theme in philosophical thought in general (see Plato, Schopenhauer, etc.): death.
What ideas are still important to us in the face of inevitable death? What are you going to do with your life while there's still time? Carvalho, like his predecessor Mario Ferreira dos Santos (1907-1968), is a philosopher that "Brazilian culture" cannot - or refuses - to absorb. Both hover above institutionalized national consciousness as kinda extraterrestrials, while below them the establishment and its educational forms 'take care' of citizenship.
Of course, you can't judge a person by the size of his library. (Otto Maria Carpeaux's library, for example, was surprisingly small, considering that its owner had written "History of Western Literature" and was one of the greatest encyclopedic minds in Brazilian culture.) But Olavo's library is impressive in itself. Throughout the film, he briefly discusses, in addition to his pillars Plato and Aristotle: Eric Voegelin, Ortega y Gasset, Saint Augustine, Anaximander, Boethius, Josiah Royce, Antonio Gramsci, Raymundo Faoro and many others.
This film opens up the philosopher's personality. It crystallizes his wisdom, elevation and lucidity in his permanent search for truth, which is of course the primary objective of every philosopher worthy of such an epithet.
Accessible to a wide cultural spectrum of the public (not just film critics!), this is an objective, restricted, and even comparatively unpretentious document.
What ideas are still important to us in the face of inevitable death? What are you going to do with your life while there's still time? Carvalho, like his predecessor Mario Ferreira dos Santos (1907-1968), is a philosopher that "Brazilian culture" cannot - or refuses - to absorb. Both hover above institutionalized national consciousness as kinda extraterrestrials, while below them the establishment and its educational forms 'take care' of citizenship.
Of course, you can't judge a person by the size of his library. (Otto Maria Carpeaux's library, for example, was surprisingly small, considering that its owner had written "History of Western Literature" and was one of the greatest encyclopedic minds in Brazilian culture.) But Olavo's library is impressive in itself. Throughout the film, he briefly discusses, in addition to his pillars Plato and Aristotle: Eric Voegelin, Ortega y Gasset, Saint Augustine, Anaximander, Boethius, Josiah Royce, Antonio Gramsci, Raymundo Faoro and many others.
This film opens up the philosopher's personality. It crystallizes his wisdom, elevation and lucidity in his permanent search for truth, which is of course the primary objective of every philosopher worthy of such an epithet.
Accessible to a wide cultural spectrum of the public (not just film critics!), this is an objective, restricted, and even comparatively unpretentious document.
All negatives reviews are about ideological views. Not Cinema.
roitmanbattagliese2 November 2020
Awesome retrat of life of the unique Brazilian philosopher live in Brazil.
Olavo was compared with Gianbattista Vico by others philosophers.
In this movie we can see the simplicity and power of the huge personality who changed alone the historical journey of a Nation.
Olavo was compared with Gianbattista Vico by others philosophers.
In this movie we can see the simplicity and power of the huge personality who changed alone the historical journey of a Nation.
The greatest Brazilian documentary of all time.
ricardofuruta1 June 2017
This documentary is an coronation of one of the greatest philosophers of our time. It highlights the core of his thoughts, and invite us to share a little bit of his personal life. The aesthetic cohesion of the film is impressive, a great job. The team made a miracle, been known that this film is the first to be financed entirely by crowdfunding, without any support from the government and great corporations. This Brazilian guy is the responsible for the disruption of the leftist hegemony in the country and by himself is been rebuilding the high culture from the abyss. Simply a masterpiece.
A waste of time.
olavomanzanotrindade19 July 2019
I'm actually unsure about what this movie hoped to accomplish. The so-called philosopher does not express enough opinions for this to be considered a documentary about his work and it doesn't show his past, so it cannot be considered a biographical work either.
On the other hand, I believe Olavo de Carvalho could be an interesting subject for a documentary. He has opinions - controversial opinions! - but hthe movie simply ignores that in exchange for a blind love that could only be appreciated by other followers of the philosopher.
Technically speaking, this was boring at best. The photography is predictable, dull, and even laughable sometimes - like when the camera shows the entire crew listening to Olavo as if he was a Messiah. The horribly recorded drone scenes barely have a reason to be there. For some reason, there's even a script - a documentary with a script, for God's sake! Why would you do that?
Technically speaking, this was boring at best. The photography is predictable, dull, and even laughable sometimes - like when the camera shows the entire crew listening to Olavo as if he was a Messiah. The horribly recorded drone scenes barely have a reason to be there. For some reason, there's even a script - a documentary with a script, for God's sake! Why would you do that?
behind understanding
fos-9661225 November 2019
AMAZING!!!
tavinho-lkpk1 September 2019
Very good film
gabrielsartori16 April 2019
The film is empty, even though it is visibly digestible.
jessicacorreapantoja21 May 2021
Warning: Spoilers
The film has an excellent cinematography, but the dialogues are extremely weak and superficial. I watched hoping for deeper dialogues, anything, but I felt gastritis that even omeprazole couldn't help. Apparently all the investment of the film was in photography, and they should have invested for Olavo de Carvalho have finished his studies.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
