Film-making and lawsuits: a word from the director

The idea for the film arose in 2007, after spending a month in the small community of Parajuru. My relationship with this village dates back to 1996 when I was one of the witnesses at the wedding of a very close Brazilian friend. Her parents owned a vacation home in Parajuru and she practically grew up there. Since then, I’ve been going there regularly. More than 10 years after this first contact with the village, my friend suggested me to buy a small house adjoining hers.

At the time, the president of the residents association warned me about the presence of “the Austrians” who were buying all the available land and who wanted to appropriate a nature reserve administered by the association to practice kite surfing. A year later, in August, filming was going smoothly. I went around and asked many people about what was happening in the village. The Austrian investors opened their doors to me and answered my questions without difficulty.

During filming, I made a commitment to organize a screening in the village of Parajuru. This was done in April 2009 in presence of numerous villagers, a few tourists, the local elite and representatives of Austrian investors.

After this screening, the reaction of investors was to file a complaint to the police, which was deemed inadmissible by the Commissioner for lack of motive. With the purpose of going further, Gisi Wisniewski Association sent me an extrajudicial notification forbidding the broadcast of the film, though acknowledging that the filming permit had indeed been provided. Therefore, it was the critical nature of the film that was causing them a problem.

 

Three months later, in July 2009, I learned from a friend that 8 lawsuits were brought against me, including a “criminal” charge. Back to Parajuru in January 2010, I received these 8 notifications. So, I hired a lawyer, as the trial for the criminal charge has been set for 14 May.

The charges were made against the film’s alleged defamatory statements, including the term “exploitation of slave labour” – which is not even used in the film. According to the accusers, I would have made these remarks during an interview at Mercosul Festival in Florianópolis. These terms are actually reproduced in an article published on the festival website, although I have never used them. Unfortunately, the interview was not recorded, but a university professor who was present at the time will testify at trial to confirm my version.

 

The lawsuits were filed by several persons related to the Austrian project who appear in the film – Alfred Kurt Slabihoud, responsible for the economic department; Isaura, Fred’s wife and head of the school; some students who work at the hotel – and also by Gisele Wisniewski Philanthropic Association. For example, the hotel’s gardener, who appears only for a few seconds without pronouncing a word, is claiming around € 2,000 in a libel action. The total damages claimed add up to approximately € 60,000, besides the € 6,000 of the attorney fees.

According to the lawyers following the case, there is nothing substantive to worry about. This would be nothing but pressure to prevent at any cost the distribution of the film. Nevertheless, we have to consider the possibility of collusion between local justice and Austrian investors – unfortunately, corruption cases are not rare in Brazil, especially in the north-east region. For this reason, a campaign in France and Brazil was organized to mobilize the press and to ensure a fair trial.