The hostage situation faced by Eloá Pimentel on the hands of her ex-boyfriend Lindemberg Fernandes Alves caused a major commotion in Brazi for five
long days where every moment was captured by news media, including live conversations on TV between a TV show host and the man, with everyone becoming part
of a dangerous and tense situation that in the end claimed the girl's life after a disastrous invasion by the police. It was a mess that sparked debate and
criticism to everyone involved: the police was blamed, the media was blamed, Lindemberg was obviously blamed since he created such violent scenario, and even
Eloá was blamed. But the question remained: who and what killed Eloá?
I still have some vivid memories about the case, watched most of it on TV and also remembered the whole repercussion created by the networks rivalry with each other and much of the blame for the whole incident, on the style of blood and guts for higher ratings, directed to Sônia Abrão and her afternoon program since she was allowed (somehow) to interview the kidnapper-future killer on live TV. You had four or five afternoon programs on the same case, showing aerial images of the girl's apartment, sometimes she'd appear on the window asking police to calm down - another hostage was her best friend.
But seeing this movie I learned a lot of things and public perception that I wasn't aware at the time of the events. Along with the extensive news coverage of the tragedy, we have the testimonies of five people (prosecutors and representatives from women's rights organizations) who worked on the case or followed it in the media. And they all bring new light to the case, pointing out to obvious things that were shared on air at the time such as the victimization of the kidnapper with reporters and hosts talking about how a quiet good man without a criminal record was driven to insanity by the girl (but at no point no one talks about about a 21 year-old man dating a 15-year-old girl), and the whole police work is put under scrutiny since they allowed the man to discuss to the media everything he was doing, with complete freedom, and they even allowed the friend hostage to return to the apartment after being released and she almost became a victim when of her return. And the obvious discussion about the role of media in perpetuating such scenario giving a platform for the kidnapper.
Lots of ethical questions were raised and the debate is very interesting for viewers to discuss with open-minded people. As for a lesson learned that the movie didn't show but it was something that I analyzed after its ending, is the fact that similar hostage situations, although frequent, were never treated on the same way as this one - there was some distance in other cases, some care and attention to details. So, a lot of things changed from 2009 in terms of media coverage of similar events, it got better (at least in here), but one or other escapes attention from some networks.
So here's a very thoughtful and comprehensive analysis of facts, very reflective and insightful which makes viewers deeply observe the role of media in developing stories and their commitment to viewers and to themselves; and also the role of society in accepting what's thrown upon them; and the police procedures because we've seen all around the world how the system works against innocent people and against low-life individuals and sometimes the latter get far much credit in not getting shot or taken down simply because they have a gun. Bottom of line: he survived and serving time; the friend was injured but lives on and Eloá is dead. Everything went wrong. 10/10
P. S.: a little time should be devoted to talk about the girl's father, a man that we later find out was a wanted criminal in another state. The desolated image of him being carried away to the ambulance was what caught the attention of people who knew him in Northeast and it was really unforgettable to see him crying, without forces and in completely pain - but he was a dangerous and wanted man all along. He's briefly mentioned in the documentary, but the information provided by a witness of the case makes a mistake while talking about him - he wasn't connected with the police, he was investigated by it.
I still have some vivid memories about the case, watched most of it on TV and also remembered the whole repercussion created by the networks rivalry with each other and much of the blame for the whole incident, on the style of blood and guts for higher ratings, directed to Sônia Abrão and her afternoon program since she was allowed (somehow) to interview the kidnapper-future killer on live TV. You had four or five afternoon programs on the same case, showing aerial images of the girl's apartment, sometimes she'd appear on the window asking police to calm down - another hostage was her best friend.
But seeing this movie I learned a lot of things and public perception that I wasn't aware at the time of the events. Along with the extensive news coverage of the tragedy, we have the testimonies of five people (prosecutors and representatives from women's rights organizations) who worked on the case or followed it in the media. And they all bring new light to the case, pointing out to obvious things that were shared on air at the time such as the victimization of the kidnapper with reporters and hosts talking about how a quiet good man without a criminal record was driven to insanity by the girl (but at no point no one talks about about a 21 year-old man dating a 15-year-old girl), and the whole police work is put under scrutiny since they allowed the man to discuss to the media everything he was doing, with complete freedom, and they even allowed the friend hostage to return to the apartment after being released and she almost became a victim when of her return. And the obvious discussion about the role of media in perpetuating such scenario giving a platform for the kidnapper.
Lots of ethical questions were raised and the debate is very interesting for viewers to discuss with open-minded people. As for a lesson learned that the movie didn't show but it was something that I analyzed after its ending, is the fact that similar hostage situations, although frequent, were never treated on the same way as this one - there was some distance in other cases, some care and attention to details. So, a lot of things changed from 2009 in terms of media coverage of similar events, it got better (at least in here), but one or other escapes attention from some networks.
So here's a very thoughtful and comprehensive analysis of facts, very reflective and insightful which makes viewers deeply observe the role of media in developing stories and their commitment to viewers and to themselves; and also the role of society in accepting what's thrown upon them; and the police procedures because we've seen all around the world how the system works against innocent people and against low-life individuals and sometimes the latter get far much credit in not getting shot or taken down simply because they have a gun. Bottom of line: he survived and serving time; the friend was injured but lives on and Eloá is dead. Everything went wrong. 10/10
P. S.: a little time should be devoted to talk about the girl's father, a man that we later find out was a wanted criminal in another state. The desolated image of him being carried away to the ambulance was what caught the attention of people who knew him in Northeast and it was really unforgettable to see him crying, without forces and in completely pain - but he was a dangerous and wanted man all along. He's briefly mentioned in the documentary, but the information provided by a witness of the case makes a mistake while talking about him - he wasn't connected with the police, he was investigated by it.
