The documentary presents a probably honest and even ambitious attempt to portray a plural debate about multiple core issues in the dramatic changes Brazilian politics suffered since 2013, but the outcome was irregular, superficial (despite pretentious) and sometimes based in conventional wisdom (particularly once it comes to "free market" dogma and to corruption debate), and seems a little boring and inconsistent, with some ambiguities. The film begins with a debate between economists about the cause of the crisis that drove Brazil to the heterogeneous massive protests in June 2013. On the one hand, Laura Carvalho explains how employer associations pushed up Dilma Rousseff's government to implement neoliberal policies and, after it had predictable bad outcomes, they supported ousting her from office. On the other hand, Marcos Lisboa does what every cynical neoliberal agent does: he did support austerity and blamed the state, exactly when countercyclical policies were implemented improving Brazilians' lives. Philsopher Marcos Nobre talks about constraints any government faces: from "center" traditional conservative parties to the bankers' hegemony. He also mentions how neoliberal policies let people to feel representative government as not really representing them. Other interviewees highlight the effect of internet and the fragmentation of interpretations and views, besides the increase of political engagement.
The text narrated by Fernanda Torres has ups and downs, with good or naive moments, sophisticated or conventional wisdom lines, besides a lot of abiguity when it comes both to economic austerity and to the economic consequences of Dilma Rousseff's government breakdown. The lines on police violence and the support given by the press were important. In the narration, the transition from the first heterogeneous protests to the polarization between leftists activists desiring universal social policies and neoliberal ones repeating Minimal State mantra was also well done. Then, the entrance of peripheral people in protests and student occupation in public schools in following years were also addressed, and so was the institutional participation and election of women and LGBT movements and candidates. Most of reactionary agenda in Brazil has been discussed in a superficial but important way.
Carwash lawfare and Lula's prision (well discussed by Reinaldo Azevedo and Marcos Nobre), fake news, Rousseff's impeachment process (correctly criticized by psychoanalyst Maria Rita Kehl; alternatively, the excuse used to oust her is contrasted by the clear explanations given by her lawyer José Eduardo Carozo on one side and the harsh critics by economists Samuel Pessôa and Joel Pinheiro da Fonseca who still sustain the government had commited a fraud on the other side), and the hatred for Workers Party and corruption were debated and presented as leading Brazil to the far right-wing and to struggles without rules.
Then the film discusses how to define Rousseff's impeachment process, not considering it properly as a coup, but mentioning euphemisms that also considered it as a breakdown of democratic pact. Then, "vampire" Michel Temer behavior and the protests against him was discussed (again, a psychoanalist, Tales Ab'Sáber, is the most precise voice, presenting his rise to the office as intended to implement Capital's economic agenda and reforms; political scientist Camila Rocha also discusses well the "new right"). Reactionary politics represented by Bolsonaro and Olavo de Carvalho is discussed afterwards.
Until the end the movie tries to balance in the thin line trying not to take any side, what leads to its aforementioned inconsistency.
