La chica que mató a sus padres

The actors did a good job, but the storyline is a bit boring at times.

Also, I thought they would go through the murder itself and what happened after that, since it is when the psychopathy of Suzanne is more evident, but they didn't explore that much.

All in all, not an exciting movie.

This is one of the two films released simultaneously about the most famus of the Brazilian crimes, in which university student Suzane killed her parents with her boyfriend and his brother. The exact participation is exactly why we have two films. One with her own version, and other with her boyfriend's.

This will only appeal to Brazilians, because of how famous the entire affair is. It is not particularly interesting as a crime, for fans of the genre. The film focuses on the events that led to it, not the act per se. Which is a good decision, people want to know how they were able to do such a brutal murder, without remorse.

The idea of two films is interesting, and though they are very similar (most scenes shot only once), the films should be seen in sequence (the order doesn't matter). They are short, under 90 minutes each.

Acting is surprisingly OK, I believe most people expected an exploitation spectacle. It has a lot more dignity than that. Nothing fantastic, but it will be enough for the millions who are curious to understand what is not understandable. I would have liked to see more of the crime, the lack of images leaves a lukewarm sensation. I dont like brutality at all, but you can only "feel" this whole story within a brutality scenario.

Real life crimes aren't as well explored in Brazilian cinema as they could be. Which is why I think the idea to dramatize a famous crime was a perfectly valid attempt. And some of the details shown are very interesting, The choices made, though, fell flat in an attempt to maybe try a new formula. The choices I refer to are skipping the whole police investigation, not making any attempt to build up suspense and straight up spoiling all the facts to the audience in the first 5 minutes. The two-part movie was made with the only purpose of making a point that the testimonies of two perpetrators are conflicting in a few key points. The result is that the two parts are mostly redundant and feel like you're watching two slightly different cuts of the same movie. The conflicting testimonies aren't a strong enough premise to revolve the whole project around, and could be clearly shown to the audience in maybe 10 minutes in the third act. The events the movies are based on happened almost 20 years ago, but the script just assumes that it's useless to make a compelling narrative because everyone already knows how it ends. A sad waste of potential.

Between the closed caption English and the English audio, the story was all over the place. Even though I got the gist of it it was hard to follow. Very laughable at moments. I don't know who's giving this movie 10-star ratings. It's pushing it with a four for me.

Exepctation was high! A intriguing crime that shook the midia. A privileged daughter who kills her parents. I've red somewhere here that watching the movie, it felt like it was fake. Sure did! Fake dialogs, fake scenes, fake situations, typical movie made by who doesn't know how to tell stories. It's lke that all actors got together and decided to make a movie in the night before, very poor drama. And what about 2 films about pratically the same narrative. Similar and often same takes used to tell the story. At least, with just one movie with 2 visions could earn an extra star.