Thinking the unthinkable

Today, it seems that no one is uninformed about the environment. Every day the media shows us more evidence of climate change: extreme weather, melting icecaps, and rising seas. Most of us believe we can do something to prevent global disaster, such as recycling, or conserving energy.

It’s strange to recall that, before the 1960s, few people knew of the damage we were doing to the planet. However, one scientist had already realized the dangers ahead. And today, this same man believes it may be too late to save the world.

In the 1960s, Professor James Lovelock came up with one of the most famous theories on the environment – the GAIA hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, the earth’s atmosphere, soil, and oceans work in concert to provide an inhabitable environment for humans. If we disrupt these elements too severely, the earth may one day become uninhabitable.

In the decade before he developed the Gaia hypothesis, Lovelock had created a device to detect atmospheric chemicals. With this device, he discovered particular chemicals, called CFCs. Later, other scientists discovered that these CFCs had damaged the earth’s ozone layer. Before then, we hadn’t knows about the hole in the ozone layer.

By 1979, Lovelock had put forward his theories on the environment, in his first book. At that time, few people believe him. Before scientists such as Lovelock publicized environmental issues, the environment hadn’t been a very fashionable topic. In 2004, after many people had only just started to accept the reality of global warming, Lovelock became convinced that climate change was irreversible. In 2006, he wrote another book describing his latest ideas. In 40 years, Lovelock believes large parts of the world will be desert. We will need to make synthesized food to feed the world’s population.

‘Is Lovelock right this time too? Surely we can prevent this nightmare, if we all recycle, use renewable energy, and travel less by plane and car? Lovelock disagrees. According to him, it is now impossible to reverse global warming. We did not act quickly enough when we had the chance. Renewable energy and recycling are a case of too little, too late.

Ultimately, if the human race is to survive, Lovelock believes we need to use more technology, not less. In his view, only nuclear energy can provide sufficient power for the planet. Now over 90 years old, Lovelock may not live to find out if he is right. But we will…

Thinking the unthinkable

Today, it seems that no one is uninformed about the environment. Every day the media shows us more evidence of climate change: extreme weather, melting icecaps, and rising seas. Most of us believe we can do something to prevent global disaster, such as recycling, or conserving energy.

It’s strange to recall that, before the 1960s, few people knew of the damage we were doing to the planet. However, one scientist had already realized the dangers ahead. And today, this same man believes it may be too late to save the world.

In the 1960s, Professor James Lovelock came up with one of the most famous theories on the environment – the GAIA hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, the earth’s atmosphere, soil, and oceans work in concert to provide an inhabitable environment for humans. If we disrupt these elements too severely, the earth may one day become uninhabitable.

In the decade before he developed the Gaia hypothesis, Lovelock had created a device to detect atmospheric chemicals. With this device, he discovered particular chemicals, called CFCs. Later, other scientists discovered that these CFCs had damaged the earth’s ozone layer. Before then, we hadn’t knows about the hole in the ozone layer.

By 1979, Lovelock had put forward his theories on the environment, in his first book. At that time, few people believe him. Before scientists such as Lovelock publicized environmental issues, the environment hadn’t been a very fashionable topic. In 2004, after many people had only just started to accept the reality of global warming, Lovelock became convinced that climate change was irreversible. In 2006, he wrote another book describing his latest ideas. In 40 years, Lovelock believes large parts of the world will be desert. We will need to make synthesized food to feed the world’s population.

‘Is Lovelock right this time too? Surely we can prevent this nightmare, if we all recycle, use renewable energy, and travel less by plane and car? Lovelock disagrees. According to him, it is now impossible to reverse global warming. We did not act quickly enough when we had the chance. Renewable energy and recycling are a case of too little, too late.

Ultimately, if the human race is to survive, Lovelock believes we need to use more technology, not less. In his view, only nuclear energy can provide sufficient power for the planet. Now over 90 years old, Lovelock may not live to find out if he is right. But we will…

Thinking the unthinkable

Today, it seems that no one is uninformed about the environment. Every day the media shows us more evidence of climate change: extreme weather, melting icecaps, and rising seas. Most of us believe we can do something to prevent global disaster, such as recycling, or conserving energy.

It’s strange to recall that, before the 1960s, few people knew of the damage we were doing to the planet. However, one scientist had already realized the dangers ahead. And today, this same man believes it may be too late to save the world.

In the 1960s, Professor James Lovelock came up with one of the most famous theories on the environment – the GAIA hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, the earth’s atmosphere, soil, and oceans work in concert to provide an inhabitable environment for humans. If we disrupt these elements too severely, the earth may one day become uninhabitable.

In the decade before he developed the Gaia hypothesis, Lovelock had created a device to detect atmospheric chemicals. With this device, he discovered particular chemicals, called CFCs. Later, other scientists discovered that these CFCs had damaged the earth’s ozone layer. Before then, we hadn’t knows about the hole in the ozone layer.

By 1979, Lovelock had put forward his theories on the environment, in his first book. At that time, few people believe him. Before scientists such as Lovelock publicized environmental issues, the environment hadn’t been a very fashionable topic. In 2004, after many people had only just started to accept the reality of global warming, Lovelock became convinced that climate change was irreversible. In 2006, he wrote another book describing his latest ideas. In 40 years, Lovelock believes large parts of the world will be desert. We will need to make synthesized food to feed the world’s population.

‘Is Lovelock right this time too? Surely we can prevent this nightmare, if we all recycle, use renewable energy, and travel less by plane and car? Lovelock disagrees. According to him, it is now impossible to reverse global warming. We did not act quickly enough when we had the chance. Renewable energy and recycling are a case of too little, too late.

Ultimately, if the human race is to survive, Lovelock believes we need to use more technology, not less. In his view, only nuclear energy can provide sufficient power for the planet. Now over 90 years old, Lovelock may not live to find out if he is right. But we will…

Thinking the unthinkable

Today, it seems that no one is uninformed about the environment. Every day the media shows us more evidence of climate change: extreme weather, melting icecaps, and rising seas. Most of us believe we can do something to prevent global disaster, such as recycling, or conserving energy.

It’s strange to recall that, before the 1960s, few people knew of the damage we were doing to the planet. However, one scientist had already realized the dangers ahead. And today, this same man believes it may be too late to save the world.

In the 1960s, Professor James Lovelock came up with one of the most famous theories on the environment – the GAIA hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, the earth’s atmosphere, soil, and oceans work in concert to provide an inhabitable environment for humans. If we disrupt these elements too severely, the earth may one day become uninhabitable.

In the decade before he developed the Gaia hypothesis, Lovelock had created a device to detect atmospheric chemicals. With this device, he discovered particular chemicals, called CFCs. Later, other scientists discovered that these CFCs had damaged the earth’s ozone layer. Before then, we hadn’t knows about the hole in the ozone layer.

By 1979, Lovelock had put forward his theories on the environment, in his first book. At that time, few people believe him. Before scientists such as Lovelock publicized environmental issues, the environment hadn’t been a very fashionable topic. In 2004, after many people had only just started to accept the reality of global warming, Lovelock became convinced that climate change was irreversible. In 2006, he wrote another book describing his latest ideas. In 40 years, Lovelock believes large parts of the world will be desert. We will need to make synthesized food to feed the world’s population.

‘Is Lovelock right this time too? Surely we can prevent this nightmare, if we all recycle, use renewable energy, and travel less by plane and car? Lovelock disagrees. According to him, it is now impossible to reverse global warming. We did not act quickly enough when we had the chance. Renewable energy and recycling are a case of too little, too late.

Ultimately, if the human race is to survive, Lovelock believes we need to use more technology, not less. In his view, only nuclear energy can provide sufficient power for the planet. Now over 90 years old, Lovelock may not live to find out if he is right. But we will…

Thinking the unthinkable

Today, it seems that no one is uninformed about the environment. Every day the media shows us more evidence of climate change: extreme weather, melting icecaps, and rising seas. Most of us believe we can do something to prevent global disaster, such as recycling, or conserving energy.

It’s strange to recall that, before the 1960s, few people knew of the damage we were doing to the planet. However, one scientist had already realized the dangers ahead. And today, this same man believes it may be too late to save the world.

In the 1960s, Professor James Lovelock came up with one of the most famous theories on the environment – the GAIA hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, the earth’s atmosphere, soil, and oceans work in concert to provide an inhabitable environment for humans. If we disrupt these elements too severely, the earth may one day become uninhabitable.

In the decade before he developed the Gaia hypothesis, Lovelock had created a device to detect atmospheric chemicals. With this device, he discovered particular chemicals, called CFCs. Later, other scientists discovered that these CFCs had damaged the earth’s ozone layer. Before then, we hadn’t knows about the hole in the ozone layer.

By 1979, Lovelock had put forward his theories on the environment, in his first book. At that time, few people believe him. Before scientists such as Lovelock publicized environmental issues, the environment hadn’t been a very fashionable topic. In 2004, after many people had only just started to accept the reality of global warming, Lovelock became convinced that climate change was irreversible. In 2006, he wrote another book describing his latest ideas. In 40 years, Lovelock believes large parts of the world will be desert. We will need to make synthesized food to feed the world’s population.

‘Is Lovelock right this time too? Surely we can prevent this nightmare, if we all recycle, use renewable energy, and travel less by plane and car? Lovelock disagrees. According to him, it is now impossible to reverse global warming. We did not act quickly enough when we had the chance. Renewable energy and recycling are a case of too little, too late.

Ultimately, if the human race is to survive, Lovelock believes we need to use more technology, not less. In his view, only nuclear energy can provide sufficient power for the planet. Now over 90 years old, Lovelock may not live to find out if he is right. But we will…

Thinking the unthinkable

Today, it seems that no one is uninformed about the environment. Every day the media shows us more evidence of climate change: extreme weather, melting icecaps, and rising seas. Most of us believe we can do something to prevent global disaster, such as recycling, or conserving energy.

It’s strange to recall that, before the 1960s, few people knew of the damage we were doing to the planet. However, one scientist had already realized the dangers ahead. And today, this same man believes it may be too late to save the world.

In the 1960s, Professor James Lovelock came up with one of the most famous theories on the environment – the GAIA hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, the earth’s atmosphere, soil, and oceans work in concert to provide an inhabitable environment for humans. If we disrupt these elements too severely, the earth may one day become uninhabitable.

In the decade before he developed the Gaia hypothesis, Lovelock had created a device to detect atmospheric chemicals. With this device, he discovered particular chemicals, called CFCs. Later, other scientists discovered that these CFCs had damaged the earth’s ozone layer. Before then, we hadn’t knows about the hole in the ozone layer.

By 1979, Lovelock had put forward his theories on the environment, in his first book. At that time, few people believe him. Before scientists such as Lovelock publicized environmental issues, the environment hadn’t been a very fashionable topic. In 2004, after many people had only just started to accept the reality of global warming, Lovelock became convinced that climate change was irreversible. In 2006, he wrote another book describing his latest ideas. In 40 years, Lovelock believes large parts of the world will be desert. We will need to make synthesized food to feed the world’s population.

‘Is Lovelock right this time too? Surely we can prevent this nightmare, if we all recycle, use renewable energy, and travel less by plane and car? Lovelock disagrees. According to him, it is now impossible to reverse global warming. We did not act quickly enough when we had the chance. Renewable energy and recycling are a case of too little, too late.

Ultimately, if the human race is to survive, Lovelock believes we need to use more technology, not less. In his view, only nuclear energy can provide sufficient power for the planet. Now over 90 years old, Lovelock may not live to find out if he is right. But we will…

Thinking the unthinkable

Today, it seems that no one is uninformed about the environment. Every day the media shows us more evidence of climate change: extreme weather, melting icecaps, and rising seas. Most of us believe we can do something to prevent global disaster, such as recycling, or conserving energy.

It’s strange to recall that, before the 1960s, few people knew of the damage we were doing to the planet. However, one scientist had already realized the dangers ahead. And today, this same man believes it may be too late to save the world.

In the 1960s, Professor James Lovelock came up with one of the most famous theories on the environment – the GAIA hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, the earth’s atmosphere, soil, and oceans work in concert to provide an inhabitable environment for humans. If we disrupt these elements too severely, the earth may one day become uninhabitable.

In the decade before he developed the Gaia hypothesis, Lovelock had created a device to detect atmospheric chemicals. With this device, he discovered particular chemicals, called CFCs. Later, other scientists discovered that these CFCs had damaged the earth’s ozone layer. Before then, we hadn’t knows about the hole in the ozone layer.

By 1979, Lovelock had put forward his theories on the environment, in his first book. At that time, few people believe him. Before scientists such as Lovelock publicized environmental issues, the environment hadn’t been a very fashionable topic. In 2004, after many people had only just started to accept the reality of global warming, Lovelock became convinced that climate change was irreversible. In 2006, he wrote another book describing his latest ideas. In 40 years, Lovelock believes large parts of the world will be desert. We will need to make synthesized food to feed the world’s population.

‘Is Lovelock right this time too? Surely we can prevent this nightmare, if we all recycle, use renewable energy, and travel less by plane and car? Lovelock disagrees. According to him, it is now impossible to reverse global warming. We did not act quickly enough when we had the chance. Renewable energy and recycling are a case of too little, too late.

Ultimately, if the human race is to survive, Lovelock believes we need to use more technology, not less. In his view, only nuclear energy can provide sufficient power for the planet. Now over 90 years old, Lovelock may not live to find out if he is right. But we will…

Thinking the unthinkable

Today, it seems that no one is uninformed about the environment. Every day the media shows us more evidence of climate change: extreme weather, melting icecaps, and rising seas. Most of us believe we can do something to prevent global disaster, such as recycling, or conserving energy.

It’s strange to recall that, before the 1960s, few people knew of the damage we were doing to the planet. However, one scientist had already realized the dangers ahead. And today, this same man believes it may be too late to save the world.

In the 1960s, Professor James Lovelock came up with one of the most famous theories on the environment – the GAIA hypothesis. According to this hypothesis, the earth’s atmosphere, soil, and oceans work in concert to provide an inhabitable environment for humans. If we disrupt these elements too severely, the earth may one day become uninhabitable.

In the decade before he developed the Gaia hypothesis, Lovelock had created a device to detect atmospheric chemicals. With this device, he discovered particular chemicals, called CFCs. Later, other scientists discovered that these CFCs had damaged the earth’s ozone layer. Before then, we hadn’t knows about the hole in the ozone layer.

By 1979, Lovelock had put forward his theories on the environment, in his first book. At that time, few people believe him. Before scientists such as Lovelock publicized environmental issues, the environment hadn’t been a very fashionable topic. In 2004, after many people had only just started to accept the reality of global warming, Lovelock became convinced that climate change was irreversible. In 2006, he wrote another book describing his latest ideas. In 40 years, Lovelock believes large parts of the world will be desert. We will need to make synthesized food to feed the world’s population.

‘Is Lovelock right this time too? Surely we can prevent this nightmare, if we all recycle, use renewable energy, and travel less by plane and car? Lovelock disagrees. According to him, it is now impossible to reverse global warming. We did not act quickly enough when we had the chance. Renewable energy and recycling are a case of too little, too late.

Ultimately, if the human race is to survive, Lovelock believes we need to use more technology, not less. In his view, only nuclear energy can provide sufficient power for the planet. Now over 90 years old, Lovelock may not live to find out if he is right. But we will…

Crítica: Longa “O Tempo e o Vento” abusa de tom novelesco

Eleonora de Lucena
De São Paulo

Pores do sol avermelhados, bebês gorduchos nascendo, guerras que pouco se explicam, cruzes em cemitérios. Com esses elementos, Jayme Monjardim filmou sua versão de “O Tempo e o Vento”, obra-prima de Erico Verissimo (1905-1975). Saga da formação do Rio Grande do Sul, a trilogia passeia pela história por meio de famílias que se enfrentam e se encontram em guerras e romances. No livro mais famoso, o Capitão Rodrigo Cambará se apaixona por Bibiana Terra.

A obra completou 50 anos em 2012 e já foi adaptada para cinema, TV e teatro. Na fita de Monjardim, a narrativa é conduzida por Bibiana em seu último dia de vida, interpretada pela sempre excelente Fernanda Montenegro.

Monjardim fez um filme com belas paisagens. Os problemas aparecem ao condensar 150 anos de história: os personagens ficam esquemáticos e perdem densidade. Os diálogos às vezes parecem deslocados. Em outras, são substituídos por olhares que escorregam em vazios. Rodrigo (Thiago Lacerda) aparece um pouco melhor, embora exagere o aspecto brejeiro. Já a jovem Bibiana (Marjorie Estiano) carece de personalidade e carisma. Personagem forte na obra, Cleo Pires vive Ana Terra, mas com pouco vigor. Ainda bem que há Fernanda Montenegro dando alicerce ao drama.

O tom novelesco de filmar se impõe. Ciclos se sucedem sem muito contexto: um pôr do sol, poucas falas, a roca de fiar. Às vezes é cansativo e fica com gosto pasteurizado.

O filme revela cuidados de reconstituição e tenta dar uma dimensão épica à narrativa, com pitadas políticas.

Em meio a lançamentos imbecilizantes da atual safra de longas nacionais, “O Tempo e o Vento” é bem-vindo. Pode levar muitos a ler Verissimo. Mas a fixação pela fórmula global transgênica de fazer cinema deixa muito rasa uma história tão vigorosa, violenta e apaixonante.

O TEMPO E O VENTO
DIREÇÃO Jayme Monjardim / PRODUÇÃO Brasil, 2012
ONDE Anália Franco UCI, Kinoplex Itaim e circuito
CLASSIFICAÇÃO 14 anos / AVALIAÇÃO regular

Disponível em <http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/ilustrada/2013/09/1347908-critica-longa-o-tempo-e-o-vento-abusa-de-tom-novelesco.shtml> Acesso em 06 outubro, 2013. [Adaptado]

Crítica: Longa “O Tempo e o Vento” abusa de tom novelesco

Eleonora de Lucena
De São Paulo

Pores do sol avermelhados, bebês gorduchos nascendo, guerras que pouco se explicam, cruzes em cemitérios. Com esses elementos, Jayme Monjardim filmou sua versão de “O Tempo e o Vento”, obra-prima de Erico Verissimo (1905-1975). Saga da formação do Rio Grande do Sul, a trilogia passeia pela história por meio de famílias que se enfrentam e se encontram em guerras e romances. No livro mais famoso, o Capitão Rodrigo Cambará se apaixona por Bibiana Terra.

A obra completou 50 anos em 2012 e já foi adaptada para cinema, TV e teatro. Na fita de Monjardim, a narrativa é conduzida por Bibiana em seu último dia de vida, interpretada pela sempre excelente Fernanda Montenegro.

Monjardim fez um filme com belas paisagens. Os problemas aparecem ao condensar 150 anos de história: os personagens ficam esquemáticos e perdem densidade. Os diálogos às vezes parecem deslocados. Em outras, são substituídos por olhares que escorregam em vazios. Rodrigo (Thiago Lacerda) aparece um pouco melhor, embora exagere o aspecto brejeiro. Já a jovem Bibiana (Marjorie Estiano) carece de personalidade e carisma. Personagem forte na obra, Cleo Pires vive Ana Terra, mas com pouco vigor. Ainda bem que há Fernanda Montenegro dando alicerce ao drama.

O tom novelesco de filmar se impõe. Ciclos se sucedem sem muito contexto: um pôr do sol, poucas falas, a roca de fiar. Às vezes é cansativo e fica com gosto pasteurizado.

O filme revela cuidados de reconstituição e tenta dar uma dimensão épica à narrativa, com pitadas políticas.

Em meio a lançamentos imbecilizantes da atual safra de longas nacionais, “O Tempo e o Vento” é bem-vindo. Pode levar muitos a ler Verissimo. Mas a fixação pela fórmula global transgênica de fazer cinema deixa muito rasa uma história tão vigorosa, violenta e apaixonante.

O TEMPO E O VENTO
DIREÇÃO Jayme Monjardim / PRODUÇÃO Brasil, 2012
ONDE Anália Franco UCI, Kinoplex Itaim e circuito
CLASSIFICAÇÃO 14 anos / AVALIAÇÃO regular

Disponível em <http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/ilustrada/2013/09/1347908-critica-longa-o-tempo-e-o-vento-abusa-de-tom-novelesco.shtml> Acesso em 06 outubro, 2013. [Adaptado]