|
|
|
|
Critical
Writings
-> Academic Journals -> Newpaper Articles
& Reviews > Film
Articles and Reviews: FILM
Life Is Beautiful
Directed by Roberto Benigni
Cast: Roberto Benigni, Nicholetta Braschi, Giorgio
Cantarini
What a marvellous idea for a story:
a father determines to hide from his son the horror
of their situation in a Nazi concentration camp by
devising an elaborate, improvised game to keep the
boy entertained, and help explain away the severity
of their experiences. Their fellow inmates are cast
as other contestants, constantly scoring and losing
points by how they react to the tribulations visited
on them by their captors, as they all compete for
a grand prize. There would surely be lots of room
here for dissolving the traditional boundaries between
comedy and tragedy, for producing some black satire
and farce, for laughing in the face of adversity.
Yes, it must have looked good on paper. Alas, it doesn’t
quite work in actuality.
|
|
Back
|
|
|
|
I really wanted to like this film,
honest. Like I say, what a great idea, plus I’m
a Benigni fan: apart from his Italian films, his turns
in Jim Jarmusch’s Down By Law and Night on Earth
are dearly cherished. The trouble is, he does tend to
do the same turn all the time - he’s a brilliant
comic actor - but here his rambunctious innocent abroad
grates garishly, and is at odds with and not equal to
the subject matter.
The film begins with the Candide-like Guido arriving
in Arezzo in 1938 to seek his fortune, and after a series
of slapstick, accidental encounters with beautiful schoolteacher
Dora (Nicoletta Braschi), then betrothed to a local
Fascist official, falling in love with and wooing her.
Cut to five years later, and they are married and have
a son, Joshua. But now the occasional bigotries the
Jewish Guido once ignored have become enshrined in Racial
Laws. Guido and Joshua are deported to an (unspecified)
concentration camp, and Dora, though a gentile, insists
on going with them. The film is not so much divided
into two halves, as the characters’ lives are.
Guido and Dora remain the same, it’s just that
in the second half they find themselves in an extreme
situation, which forces them to react accordingly. Indeed,
Guido is already unknowingly rehearsing how he will
shield his son in the camp, when Joshua’s inquiry
as to why signs outside shops read ‘No Dogs or
Jews’ is met with the riposte that people can
put any signs they like outside their shops about animals
or people. “‘No Zebras or Chinese’
I saw the other day.” “But we don't have
a sign outside our shop,” counters Joshua. “Very
well, do you want one? What animals do you not like?
Spiders? OK, ‘No Spiders or Visigoths’.
I hate those Visigoths.”
Where the movie falls down for me is not, as might seem
the most obvious objection, that warm-hearted slapstick
as an antidote to the Holocaust offends sensitivities
or sensibilities. Rather it is because this central
conceit of the power of the imagination to overcome
dire circumstances would have been much more successful
if we had been shown more of the horror of the camp
for it to work against. That would have really been
testing it. It is generally a good idea to be able to
laugh in the face of the unthinkable, but here we don’t
get enough of the unthinkable to think it was unthinkable.
Visually, the camp looks like exactly what it is, a
film set. And we get no sense of the immense strain
carrying on such a pretence would undoubtedly have been
for Guido. Benigni has called his film ‘a fable’,
and said he didn’t want audiences to look for
realism in it. But still, a little more would have helped.
Sure, we don’t need to be told yet again that
the camps were tragic. We already know this. But nor
do we need to be told that they were absurd. We already
know this, too. What would have been interesting to
explore is that they were tragic precisely because the
perpetrators couldn’t see the absurdity. We need
to see more of what they actually did, in order to see
if putting a clown’s red nose on the face of authority,
a tradition Benigni inherits from the Commedia del’Arte
via Dario Fo, really works in all situations.
In my experience, when imagination comes up against
no imagination, no imagination usually wins, at least
in the short to medium term, unless imagination gets
out altogether rather than just goes on. This is because
no imagination is invariably more concerned about and
adept at using the existing power structures to reinforce
itself, and to create new ones of its own. And what
else was the Holocaust, except a failure of imaginative
sympathy on a grand scale (unless your imagination is
ethically comfortable with genocide)? There is a passage
in Primo Levi’s If This Is A Man where he describes
looking around the camp at the other prisoners during
morning reveille and thinking: ‘What if all this
were nothing but a joke? This cannot be true...’
Trouble is, it was. And the high suicide rate among
survivors, sometimes years later, particularly those
who tried to make some sense of it creatively (Paul
Celan, Levi himself), would tend to indicate that the
whole thing wasn’t merely a bad few years at the
office. It was no game.
This said, there are some good moments here, mostly
from the earlier part of the film. The scene where Benigni
lectures a roomful of primary school children on the
racial superiority of Italians, using his own body as
an illustration, is hilarious. It is him doing what
he does best. And Guido’s dealings with interminable
Italian bureaucracy will ring true for anyone who has
ever lived there. The satire can be sharp too, in places,
if a little heavy-handed. We get an Italian woman deprecating
the German education system, for posing maths problems
to six year olds like how much money the state will
save in a year if all the epileptics, cripples and mental
defectives are eliminated - not because the question
is morally questionable, but because it involves the
use of algebra, or multiplication. We also get a doctor
who Guido exchanged riddles with pre-war, while working
as a waiter. The doc turns up in the camp, on their
side, and tells Guido he wants to see him secretly about
something very important. Guido thinks it’s a
way out, but the doctor only wants his help in solving
another riddle. So obsessive is he that he only sees
what he wants to see. Like most first rate comedians,
Benigni is here deadly serious. It is these characters,
the ones who would pride themselves on being serious,
who aren’t at all.
There is, however, a slightly ingratiating tone to the
whole proceedings, like being offered sweets and lemonade
by a doting, naively cockeyed-optimistic maiden auntie.
The ending, especially, when Guido’s much heralded
first prize of a real tank actually rolls into the camp
and stops in front of Joshua, is embarrassingly nauseating.
We know about the subversive value of comedy in the
face of atrocious and repressive political systems,
most notably from the Eastern European and South American
magic realists. But this film ultimately winds up merely
sentimentalising the Holocaust.
Yes, life is beautiful. But it is also quite ugly betimes.
No more so, I’d imagine, than in concentration
camps. It would have been a difficult trick to pull
off, but a little more of the ugliness, for the laughter
to triumph over or even contend with, and this would
have been a very great film indeed.
First published in Film Ireland
|
|
|
|
Home
Biography
Fiction
Critical
Writings
Travel
Writings
Awards |
|
|
|
|