Film Review: “I’m Still Here”

Rubens Paiva was a Brazilian congressman who vehemently opposed the military coup and takeover of the Brazilian government in 1964. The dictatorship (which lasted into the 1980s) was at its strongest point during the first few years of the 1970s. It was during this time the brutal miliary regime captured, tortured, and executed many of those deemed unfriendly to the movement – including Paiva.

In 2015, Paiva’s novelist son Marcelo wrote his autobiography, detailing his father’s capture and disappearance through the eyes of an 11-year-old boy. Brazilian director Walter Salles has now adapted Marcelo’s account into “I’m Still Here,” recipient of a multitude of Oscar nominations – including not only best International Feature Film but also Best Picture.

During the opening scenes (which take place in 1970), we meet the Paiva family, including Rubens (Selton Mello) and his wife Eunice, played by Fernanda Torres, who has been nominated for Best Actress – an honor not typically bestowed upon those in foreign-language films. We are also introduced to young Marcelo (newcomer Guilherme Silveira) and his four older sisters. Although the Paiva family is large, each family member is completely unique, and we never have issues with confusion.

His congressional days long behind him, Rubens now works in private practice as a civil engineer. By all accounts a good and decent man, he is presented as a fun-loving father, while Eunice is more the glue that holds the family together – and keeps everyone’s schedules straight. The Paiva’s are well off and live in a large house on the beach in Rio de Janeiro.

While oldest daughter Vera is in London for her freshman year of college, Rubens is taken away one night by military personnel, who leave two soldiers behind to “guard” the house during Rubens’ absence. The other family members are not captives – they are free to come and go – but the strongman presence is annoying. The efforts by the two youngest siblings to interact with the soldiers is a source of humor, although we sense Eunice’s growing suspicion and uneasiness with each passing day.

Finally, Eunice and second-oldest daughter Eliana (a high-schooler) are taken to a nearby prison for questioning. They are shown pictures of people considered unfriendly to the dictatorship and asked to identify anyone they know. Rubens’ picture appears on several pages, but so does that of the Paiva children’s favorite schoolteacher. Eliana is taken home after one day, but Eunice is kept in solitary confinement for what we assume to be a week or two.

Upon returning to her home, Eunice hires an attorney to help her find her husband. After the passage of some time – at least until after Vera is home from London for her 1971 summer break – the lawyer overhears of Rubens’ torture and death. Keeping this news from her children so they may better go about their studies and their daily lives, Eunice takes on the unenviable task of attempting to obtain confirmation from the government that Rubens has actually died. Hence the somewhat awkward title, “I’m Still Here.”

With the passage of time, Eunice earns her law degree in middle-age, and becomes an expert on indigenous rights and an advocate for others whose family members have “disappeared” at the hands of the military regime. When democracy is restored to Brazil in 1985, Eunice is asked to serve as a special counselor for the new government. She is now considered in hero in Brazilian history.

It is striking how similar “I’m Still Here” is to two other 2024 films. Iranian director Mohammad Rasoulof’s “The Seed of the Sacred Fig” is an original story which concerns a longtime government bureaucrat newly assigned to rubber-stamp the executions of young rebels caught protesting the dictatorial Iranian government. Again, by all accounts a good and decent family man, his two oldest daughters are just beginning to take an interest in the growing protest movement.

While “Sacred Fig” eventually goes in a wildly different direction from “I’m Still Here,” the similarities in the initial plot set-ups are compelling. As it is a true story, “I’m Still Here” should be the more powerful film of the two. But it is not – perhaps due to the urgency of the Iranian story. The oppressive Iranian regime is happening right now; whereas Brazil long ago returned to a democratic government.

It is also noteworthy that Eunice uses her situation to become an advocate for others experiencing similar situations – almost exactly mirroring the efforts of the protagonist in Jacques Audiard’s “Emilia Perez,” who becomes a fighter for others harmed by the organized-crime drug trade in Mexico. Here again, “Emilia Perez” is a work of fiction, but the similarities are astonishing. Furthermore, both actresses – Fernanda Torres in “I’m Still Here” and Karla Sofia Gascon in “Emilia Perez” – are up for Best Actress. Both performances are astounding, although Torres succeeds as the strong, understated, workmanlike hero; Gascon’s performance is the far more emotional of the two.

Hitting theatres late in the run-up to the Oscars may be a hindrance, although Salles obviously has no control over the timing of his film’s American release. Suffice to say that “I’m Still Here” certainly belongs in the discussion of this year’s best cinematic efforts. It’s an important film, and well worth a look. All the performances are outstanding, but particularly that of Torres.