Marcelo Mari

Para que serve uma crítica de cinema em um jornal antifascista? Scarface e o retrato de uma civilização (1933)

Introduction

Para que serve uma crítica de cinema em um jornal antifascista? scarface e o retrato de uma civilização (1933). Compare jornais antifascistas brasileiros (La Difesa, O Homem Livre) dos anos 30. Explore o papel da crítica de cinema e cultura na resistência ao fascismo em São Paulo.

Abstract

Este artículo compara dos periódicos antifascistas publicados en Brasil: uno, La Difesa, dirigido a la comunidad italiana de São Paulo; el otro, O Homem Livre, dirigido al público brasileño. Ambos medios fueron clave en la campaña antifascista brasileña y en la formación de un frente único antifascista en la ciudad de São Paulo en la década de 1930. La semejanza entre los dos periódicos radica en la primacía asumida por La Difesa en la lucha sin cuartel contra el fascismo, que fue acompañada por la visión política de O Homem Livre. La diferencia entre los dos periódicos se centraba en la importancia concedida a las cuestiones de arte y cultura por el diario brasileño.

Review

The proposed article, with its intriguing title, "Para que serve uma crítica de cinema em um jornal antifascista? Scarface e o retrato de uma civilização (1933)," promises a unique and timely exploration into the intersection of cultural critique and political activism. The abstract clearly outlines a comparative study of two key anti-fascist newspapers in 1930s São Paulo, Brazil: *La Difesa* (Italian-community focused) and *O Homem Livre* (broader Brazilian public). The article's focus on these publications, their shared political vision in the anti-fascist struggle, and their distinct approaches to cultural engagement offers a valuable contribution to understanding historical media and the formation of political fronts during a critical period in Brazilian history. The explicit mention of *O Homem Livre*'s emphasis on art and culture issues is particularly promising for contextualizing the title's central query. However, there is a significant and unaddressed disconnect between the article's evocative title and its provided abstract. While the title directly poses a specific question about the function of film criticism (specifically referencing *Scarface* from 1933) in an anti-fascist newspaper, the abstract makes no mention of cinema, film criticism, or any specific cultural artifact like *Scarface*. It merely states that *O Homem Livre* gave "importance to questions of art and culture" without elaborating on the *how* or *what* aspects of this cultural engagement. This omission leaves the reader wondering how the core question posed in the title, and the specific example used, will be addressed within the scope of the comparative newspaper analysis described in the abstract. To ensure coherence and accurately represent the article's content, the author must reconcile this discrepancy. If the article indeed delves into the specific role of film criticism and the analysis of *Scarface* as implied by the title, the abstract must be revised to clearly articulate the methodology and findings related to this cultural analysis, explaining its connection to the anti-fascist agenda. Conversely, if the article's primary focus remains a general comparison of the newspapers' broader political and cultural engagement without a deep dive into film criticism, the title should be adjusted to better reflect the abstract's scope. Addressing this alignment will significantly strengthen the article's clarity and ensure that readers' expectations, set by the compelling title, are met by the content summarized in the abstract.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.