Pietro Minchiadura

Ah, I remember it well: we all arrived breathless at the agreed cinema 15 minutes late. Once there, we asked how long it had been going on: the charming escort reassured us by saying it hadn't started yet. We entered and understood: they were waiting for at least one chicken to show up and watch it. We were in a modest little cinema on the outskirts, me, a friend, and something resembling a transgender person. We were young and damned, the three of us in a venue. There was something intimate in the air. I think my grandmother showed up too.

...and you also lose the subjunctives along the way!

...and what about the commas, Trell? :PPP

Actually, it used to be less channelled, now it’s more predictable. But to say: unpredictability is in the gesture, not in the idea. On the stage of Ariston, we definitely know he will annoy Baudo. But I would really like to know who could have predicted that he would fluff his bird in front of millions of people. The idea was predictable, not the gesture.

But that’s a matter of script: I’m not saying it doesn’t repeat itself, I’m saying it’s not a hypocritical and rational comedy! In short, this Benigni cannot be compared to the Benigni of "Non ci resta che piangere," a Benigni who, among other things, is directed. Nero, starting from a bold observation about this film, makes a global consideration about Benigni's comedy, and in my opinion, it’s not correct to use this episode of the Tuscan's career to generalize. He may have a script, he may certainly overuse certain gags: call him repetitive. But not cold and calculating in his comedy. That’s a characteristic that pertains to that film.

none, pippo: script or no script, Benigni on stage is unpredictable, at least in the eyes of the spectator. Nothing that can be boxed into definitions like "cold," "hypocritical," and the like.

...Take an immense tragedy, a well-known film about an immense tragedy that is too easy to criticize, make a provocative review of it, garner the approval of some refined film critic, and earn applause from the audience. "Nero," the review was already there: once is acceptable, not twice with the same trick. I appreciate the excellent analysis, the careful drafting of the text: there are interesting points. But as usual, this page does not judge the film. What Vic said in the past about the pro-American aspect of this Benigni is true; the observation about the "saveRai" function of the comedian is true; the note on certain goodwill to which the film indulges is true. But these are considerations that "revolve" around the film and cannot corrupt the judgment about it. It may be true that Benigni is not a great director, but the film is overall good. The reasons? Too many. Just think about how this film is the only example of tragicomedy regarding the matter, and the direction is masterful. As for the consideration about Benigni's hypocritical comedy, if you must, you can refer it only to the films, not to the character itself, Nero. Because claiming that the comedy of the television gags to which Benigni has accustomed us is hypocritical and the result of a calculating and cold mind is a colossal nonsense.

I ask for a shield, it must have been this author's so unconventional style that has made me bitter!

Anyway, I think manalishi has a point: the reasoning makes sense. Kraftwerk contributed to the unz unz that many purists of chamber music condemn, indeed. The reasoning holds, but the assessment doesn't: 1) Autobahn is still quite experimental; 2) If we identify in Trans Europe Express and Radioactivity the unz-unzeria, we are far off the mark. Therefore, please distinguish the progenitors from the progeny.

But why isn't there a debate on the coexistence of the apocalypse and popular sentiment?