THE STORY – Based on true events, the film explores the story of a concentration camp deportee from Spain who turned out to be fictitious. This is the account of the life of the immensely charismatic man who for years served as the self-elected speaker of the Spanish Association of Holocaust Victims, and who maintained, before the public and even within his own association, as well as within his family, a highly complex fabrication. He claimed to have been a prisoner in a Nazi concentration camp—which turned out to be a lie.
THE CAST – Eduard Fernández & Nathalie Poza
THE TEAM – Aitor Arregi, Jon Garaño (Directors/Writers), Jorge Gil Munarriz & Jose Mari Goenaga (Writers)
THE RUNNING TIME – 101 Minutes
After decades of adopting the role of Holocaust survivor, Enric Marco was eventually caught in the act of his immense fabrication. He claimed to be part of the population of 9000 Spanish citizens who were sent to concentration camps in the wake of Hitler’s reign. Marco also claimed to have lived through the horrors of the Flossenbürg death camp.
The story shocked Spain and the world, which brought international intrigue towards Marco’s elaborate scheme. In tandem with the spirit of the outrageous titular subject, directors Aitor Arregi and Jon Garaño followed the infamous fraud for more than a decade. Eighteen years ago, before receiving the opportunity to adapt the charlatan’s biography to the silver screen, the directorial duo initially proposed a documentary treatment about the impostor’s notorious scandal. They talked repeatedly with the real-life Marco about their proposed non-fiction endeavor. Out of the blue, Marco traveled to Germany, and Arregi and Garaño insisted on going with him. However, Marco declined the offer. It wasn’t until after the trip that he confessed that he went to Germany with a different film crew. As such, Arregi and Garaño were disappointed about Marco’s backstabbing act.
Years later, Marco followed up on Arregi and Garaño’s offer after being let down by his documentary portrayal in “Ich bin Enric Marco” (2009). The duo organized a three-day interview, where they followed a basic question-and-answer formula. They proposed a hybrid docu-fiction interpretation of the recorded talking-head interview with Marco. While the imposter of the hour was pleased with their proposition, his narcissistic side was more interested in a literary offer that would adapt his unusual life into a novelistic form. Nothing came from the recorded interview footage. The project was abandoned until Marco’s death when the filmmaking duo finally bit the bullet and began production on a fictionalized feature.
With the interview footage, they passed their discarded archive to Eduard Fernández. In “Marco,” Fernández disappears in the titular role. The fraudster’s hunched posture, insatiable cadence, and expressive mannerisms disguise the 60-year-old Spanish actor. Along with impressive makeup and hairstyling that successfully aged Fernández into an 80-year-old phony, the portrayal alleviates the more conventional aspects of the fictionalized narrative. Since Arregi and Garaño knew Marco personally, the direction of Fernández’s performance stems from the duo’s own experiences interacting with his sensationalist lifestyle. While Fernández’s impressive interpretation of the historic fraudster manages to carry his iconic brand of two-faced complacency, the foundation of Arregi and Garaño’s film feels vitriolic at heart.
Whereas Marco’s questionable crimes shouldn’t be excused from the public view, Arregi and Garaño’s fictionalization never aims to go deeper than the surface-level exploits of their titular protagonist. “Marco” doesn’t challenge the viewer to view the conman’s acts from a different perspective. Instead, the film reiterates the obvious in favor of narrative conventionality. Conversations regarding Marco’s mental state are rarely touched upon. A more detailed character study would have appropriately dissected the anatomy of Marco’s rampant narcissism.
Arregi and Garaño attempt to break the meta-textual barrier by opening their film with a jarring fourth wall break. In the first scene, during a quiet flashback sequence, the directors leave the remnants of their slate and sound sync in the edit. The artifice of cinema is apparent from the opening scene. Through the simplicity of a singular shot, Arregi and Garaño are notifying the viewer about their deception. Just like Marco’s fabricated tale, the fictionalized cinematic rendition shouldn’t be taken to heart as the complete truth. In the realm of moving images, “Marco” aims to deconstruct acts of storytelling under the instruction of recontextualized history. Unfortunately, while the subject matter is undeniably riveting, the ethical intrigue and interiority of the titular lead fails to captivate beyond the film’s surface-level ruminations.
