Thanks for the memories!

To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

I though Lirio Ferreira would be a good director. I have listen many good references of is work. Sangue Azul was the first film I saw. But I was very unsatisfied. As the other review says very beautiful images, but no story, no tension and a lot of deplorable small circus scenes, as to fulfill the film time. Also the homosexual relation of the "strong" circus man has no reason in the history. Very, very poor film.

I saw Sangue Azul at Berlinale film festival in February 2015. Huge screen, great projection, and a public that is here to celebrate movies. Perfect circumstances you'd think. And they were, for me. This is the kind of movie that you have to dive into, and let yourself go. I did, and was totally swept into the world created by director Lírio Ferreira. Just briefly, the story revolves around a prodigal son, who returns to his native island,far off in the Atlantic waters between Brazil and Africa, as a member of a circus troupe. He had left as a child 20 years earlier, and his return opens up all sorts of wounds and desires. Will he re-assimilate, or will he not? The thing is, it's not really about the plot - the movie is much more observational, sensual, magical, and in many ways, intentionally vague. It does not offer all the answers, we are invited to draw our own conclusions. Some might criticize it for that, but to me, that is something I like. Think Terrence Malick's movies, in that those, too, are rather observational, as opposed to being clearly plot- or character-driven. Similarly to Malick's movies, the film has breathtaking camera work and magical images (by Mauro Pinheiro Jr.). It was an intense and very cinematic experience. I was, frankly, a little disappointed that the applause after the movie presentation wasn't more enthusiastic, since the director was there, and in my book, he gave us a beautiful masterpiece.

I saw this film at the Berlinale 2015, where it was shown at the first evening as an alternative to the sold-out main opening event. The plot that was promised on the festival website, actually disappeared under the landscapes and the beautiful people, at least I could not discover anything dramatic in the proceedings. The son who was sent away when he was young, meeting his sister who was left behind with the mother, their reunion could turn into a heavy drama while wondering what problem the mother wanted to solve 22 years ago. Alas, I missed it completely, possibly too much distracted by the overwhelming images of island and sea and people. The two hours running time would have been sufficient to cover the issues at hand very profoundly, but it did not happen at all.There were a lot of "gimmicks" added to the movie, most of them just for the sake of it, at least that is my impression. Firstly, why do we see a Teorema in this story appear, if only to refer to a well known classic (Pasolini 1968)?? Secondly, why starting in B&W, to change later on to color (explanation: to emphasize that the island we see is not heaven, though it looks like it). Thirdly, a few times we see the camera upside down. Neither of the explanations given during the Q&A were clarifying, just adding to the feeling that it were indeed gimmicks to impress the audience.Nice view of the landscapes on the island and ditto under water. Nice to see how a circus tent is being set up in spite of stormy weather. We see the people on the island, and we witness many circus performances (different each time) while the circus is staying on the island for several days in a row. We also saw many men sleep (or not) with different women, but I did not count whether the couples belonged together or just were one-night's. We also saw a couple where the man was denied sex several times, and we saw him openly help himself. And, finally, we saw a men inviting an other man to have sex with him, and they did without much hesitation. Since I was not sure it was important for the plot (if any), I did not keep track who had sex with who, so it merely confused me without adding to the story line.There were four chapters plus an epilogue (Sin's legend), but I thought it merely adding to aforementioned list of gimmicks than supporting the structure of the drama (if any). Anyway, the whole movie drags on too long, and too little happens to keep our attention to the promised drama. I did not identify myself with any of the protagonists, but maybe I'm not the standard target group for this type of movie. Yet, to end with a positive note, beautiful to watch the people in their homes and in a sort of community hall, as well as the impressive landscapes above and under sea level. Label it as a documentary, and we would have been impressed by the camera work, showcasing some sort of heaven on earth.