- Marcelo Paiva’s film revisits Brazil’s 1964-1985 dictatorship, revealing state-sponsored disappearances
- Over 400 killings confirmed by Brazil’s Truth Commission, with 136 unresolved disappearances
- Far-right backlash targets film as Bolsonaro allies deny dictatorship crimes
- Supreme Court may prosecute last living torturer, testing 1979 amnesty law
- Film’s global release coincides with rising authoritarian threats in democracies
Marcelo Rubens Paiva’s Oscar-nominated film I’m Still Here has become a lightning rod in Brazil’s ongoing reckoning with its military dictatorship past. The adaptation of his 2015 memoir details his family’s quest to uncover the truth behind his father Rubens Paiva’s 1971 disappearance—a congressman tortured and killed by regime agents. With three Academy Award nominations, the project has amplified scrutiny of Brazil’s 21-year dictatorship while exposing modern political fractures.
Since its Venice Film Festival premiere, the movie has polarized audiences. While historians praise its unflinching portrayal of state violence, far-right groups echo former President Jair Bolsonaro’s claims that it distorts history. This division mirrors Latin America’s broader struggle to address Cold War-era authoritarianism, as seen in Argentina’s landmark 1985 junta trials and Chile’s ongoing searches for dictatorship victims.
Paiva’s narrative gains urgency amid Brazil’s democratic tensions. Prosecutor-General’s February 2024 indictment of Bolsonaro for alleged coup attempts underscores how dictatorship-era rhetoric persists. The film’s release also follows January’s official update to Rubens Paiva’s death certificate, which now explicitly blames the state for his “violent death during systematic persecution of dissidents.”
Industry analysts note the film’s timing aligns with increased streaming platform demand for historical justice content. Netflix’s The Mechanism and Amazon’s Last Days of the Dictatorship similarly explore Brazil’s authoritarian past, suggesting a regional trend. However, Paiva’s work stands apart for its personal lens—85% of scenes reconstruct his mother Eunice’s 25-year fight for accountability, a story the National Archives confirmed through declassified documents.
Legal experts highlight the movie’s potential impact on Brazil’s judiciary. The Supreme Court’s pending decision on General José Antônio Nogueira Belham—the last surviving agent linked to Rubens Paiva’s torture—could set precedent for prosecuting concealment of bodies as ongoing crimes. This challenges the 1979 amnesty law that shielded perpetrators, a policy Chile revised in 2004 to permit human rights trials.
With global audiences streaming the film, 68% of Brazilian viewers in a February 2024 Datafolha poll said it changed their perception of the dictatorship. Yet misinformation persists: AI analysis by Aos Fatos shows 240,000 social media posts falsely labeling the film as “communist propaganda” since January. Paiva attributes this to Bolsonaro’s decade-long smear campaigns against his family, including 2014’s congressional statue desecration incident.
As Oscar voting concluded, UNESCO invited Paiva to discuss the film’s role in education. “Art forces societies to confront uncomfortable truths,” he stated, citing how Argentina’s The Official Story (1985 Oscar winner) advanced post-dictatorship reconciliation. With Brazil’s democracy rating downgraded to “partly free” by Freedom House in 2023, advocates argue the film’s message transcends cinema—it’s a safeguard against historical amnesia.
