THE STORY – The shooting of Franco Maresco’s film on Carmelo Bene is interrupted. Maresco accuses the production of “filmicide” before vanishing. A friend steps in, investigating as a chance to explore one of Italian cinema’s most corrosive authors.
THE CAST – Franco Maresco, Umberto Cantone, Bernardo Greco, Francesco Conticelli, Marco Alessi, Francesco Puma, & Antonio Rezza
THE TEAM – Franco Maresco (Director/Writer), Claudia Uzzo, Umberto Cantone, & Francesco Guttuso (Writers)
THE RUNNING TIME – 100 Minutes
There is a genuine question at the heart of “Bravo Bene!” that will have many wrestling with as they watch the film. Can you enjoy a piece of art, a documentary in this case, with little to no connection to the subject matter at hand? There is always an element of new experience when it comes to documentaries. Their function is to inform their audience about a certain topic, often including novel information that has not yet been known. Discovery is part of the process, but there is also something to be said about a necessary foundation that is needed to fully comprehend the topics being explored and the thematic conclusions being reached. Without this basic framework, it makes for a difficult film to experience and an even harder exercise to judge. Is what’s not working an actual failure in storytelling, or are you simply not getting the inside jokes? Even if the latter were true, any film should be able to stand up to the scrutiny of any viewer and tell a compelling story. This film seems far too invested in local celebrations to be truly introspective, and therefore, its impact can only go so far.
Noted Italian filmmaker Franco Maresco documents his own troubled production of a dramatization of Carmelo Bene, a famous actor and poet. The production is constantly getting interrupted and stalled. At first, it’s because of an accident that occurred with one of the actors on set, which forced filming to stop. A series of altercations and creative disagreements with various members of the cast and crew have also led to this forced suspension. Maresco chooses to step away and leave the project in limbo. In his place, his friend, Umberto Cantone, starts an investigation of his own. He’s on a path to contact those who knew Maresco and give insight into his often crazed and dizzying cinematic visions. In an effort to better understand what went wrong with this production and grasp a deeper understanding of his friend’s vision, the greater context of his career and artistic ambitions are also pulled into focus for a greater understanding, as difficult as it may be to fully comprehend.
To watch Maresco is oftentimes a maddening experience, but one that is certainly of his making. His method of using an endless number of takes recalls the precise and particular nature of Stanley Kubrick. He even resembles him a bit, with his disheveled hair and pronounced beard. However, Kubrick would never have condoned such heavy improvisation with his actors. It’s one of the major contributing factors to the endless delays and setbacks. Having no previous familiarity with this director, getting the chance to watch his process is fascinating. Collaboration is often combative, and to see him getting into intense conversations with those working beside him is a great reminder of the conflicts that can arise when creatives try to realize a particular vision. That is always a valuable exercise to witness.
However, that brief glimpse about his method of filmmaking is about the only universal perspective this movie has to its name. Most of this narrative is steeped in personal history regarding his filmography and personal cinematic journey. These items are discussed, but there’s an aura to the conversation that feels insular. References to famous entertainment figures in Italian cinema may draw a gleam of recognition from those familiar with these people, but anyone on the outside will not really understand the intention. A collaborator from Maresco’s days of working in television, an actor-turned-critic, is on the receiving end of much ire in his voice-over and is consistently put down. Are his opinions bad? He projects a dismissive tone in his television appearances, but it doesn’t really justify him being refused the use of a private restroom, as the tone suggests it’s a moment of deserved mockery. The film is cobbled together with a litany of references that seem designed to play to a specific audience, and if you aren’t in that grouping, you will probably struggle to connect with the larger message.
Even as someone on the outside looking in, there is an analysis to “Bravo Bene!” that is captivating. The portrait of an artist is what’s most interesting, as the film peels back the layers of what drives this crazed vision to the screen. Within that depiction are many amusing anecdotes, such as the lead actor of the abandoned project who has an endearingly silly presence and a religious taxi driver who constantly interjects with his holy platitudes. It plays with the perception of fact versus fiction, especially since the director has such importance at the center of this story. However, without knowing his tendencies and inclinations, Maresco is not particularly interested in clueing you in either. You may have those questions, but the interpretation of any answer has to come with this previous context, and you have either already been gifted this aspect or you remain lost. For those in the know, this could be an engrossing look at an intriguing artist as he finds an avenue to create a special work. But many will struggle to find value, instead finding this piece to be a tedious endeavor.
