No More History Without Us

Specific Australian streaming or distribution details are not provided in the context. Given its nature as a 2025 festival-style documentary manifesto, Australian audiences should initially look for it at specialist film festivals like the Sydney Film Festival or the Environmental Film Festival Australia. Following a festival run, it may become available on curated streaming platforms focusing on world cinema or documentary, but no confirmed release information is available at this time.

The journey between Munich, a major European city, and Belém, a gateway city in the Brazilian Amazon, is a geographical metaphor for the film's argument. It visually traces the lines of connection between the centres of global power and finance (often in the Global North) and the site of extraction (in the Global South). This contrast likely highlights how decisions and narratives crafted far away directly impact the Amazon, and how the 'invention' of the forest as a garden is a project with international dimensions.

This is a pivotal and damaging colonial concept the film tackles. It refers to the racist historical pretext that lands inhabited by Indigenous peoples were 'empty' or populated by 'savages' incapable of meaningful ownership or governance. This idea was used to justify seizure and exploitation. The film asserts this prejudice is not a relic but remains organised globally, underpinning ongoing exploitation in the Amazon by dismissing the region's people as unable to speak for themselves.

Here, 'greenwashing' refers to the deceptive practices used by corporations, governments, or other entities to present an environmentally responsible image while continuing to exploit the Amazon rainforest. The filmmakers argue they are 'submerged in a sea' of such disinformation daily. The film likely exposes the gap between soothing PR about sustainability and the harsh reality of extraction, deforestation, and the erasure of Indigenous voices, positioning greenwashing as a key tool in maintaining destructive systems.

The film is fronted by two Amazonian filmmakers, Raphael Uchôa and Priscilla Brasil, who appear as the central figures denouncing the issues presented. Interestingly, the director is listed as 'Unknown' in the provided context. This could be a deliberate artistic or political choice, perhaps to centre the collective voice of the Amazonian community over a single auteur, or it may reflect the collaborative nature of the manifesto. The focus remains firmly on Uchôa and Brasil's perspective.

The film is positioned as a 'film manifesto', which strongly suggests a documentary or essay-film format. It is a work of denunciation and analysis, rooted in the real-world experiences and activism of its filmmaker protagonists. While it may employ creative or cinematic techniques to make its argument, its core purpose is to expose historical and contemporary truths about the Amazon, racism, and exploitation, rather than to tell a fictional story.

This is a film manifesto from two Amazonian filmmakers, Raphael Uchôa and Priscilla Brasil, who take a stand against the pervasive greenwashing and exploitation of the rainforest. They dissect the historical process that falsely frames the Amazon as an inexhaustible 'Garden of Eden' and confront the racist idea of a 'savage demographic emptiness' used to justify this exploitation. The film moves between Munich and Belém to expose how these prejudiced narratives operate on a global scale, arguing powerfully for Indigenous and local self-representation.