Roman Polanski
Che?

Recently, someone asked me if I had any intention of conducting a series of reviews on Roman Polanski's films, a sort of personal take on the Polish director. Although I have seen almost all of his films (I consider him one of my favorite directors), I haven't always been particularly enthusiastic about Roman's works. However, among the many films, the one I'm discussing today (namely "Che?", original title "What?") is certainly the most atypical and unjustly underrated.

Released in December 1972, it centers the action on the adventures of an American tourist named Nancy (a sunny and effective Sydne Rome) who is hitchhiking around the beautiful Amalfi coast. After accepting a ride from a group of young men, she nearly becomes the victim of a rape, but luckily, she finds refuge in a lavish villa (owned by film producer Carlo Ponti) perched on the sea. The problem is that she ends up in a sort of parallel universe inhabited by bizarre characters awaiting the death of the old wealthy owner of the mansion. This eccentric bunch lives according to a "Groundhog Day" rhythm, repeating the same actions every day as if nothing ever happened, all united by a strong attraction to Nancy's charms. She, imbued with incredible Voltairean innocence, is unable to grasp what surrounds her and wanders increasingly undressed through the house, noting events in a diary while falling prey to absurd erotic approaches (especially from the character played by Marcello Mastroianni, here in the role of a lecherous pimp, a presumed homosexual afflicted with syphilis and with masochistic tendencies). This frantic hunt for Sydne Rome's top-notch breasts will end when the protagonist, now naked and with one leg painted blue, escapes aboard a cart loaded with pigs headed who knows where (maybe Istanbul?), but as she herself shouts, it's just a film and it has to end somewhere (a brilliant metafilmic quote...).

As I mentioned earlier, the film might seem atypical in Polanski's cinematography, who is seen as an apprentice of Hitchcock, a master of suspense. In reality, if you look closely, some stylistic constants of the Polish director can be found even in "Che?". Firstly, there's always the dialectical tension between open and closed spaces. Nancy flees the road where she is in serious danger of being raped, only to end up in an environment seemingly safe but actually full of dangers for her, leading her to opt for another escape. Life in the villa follows an absurd theater dynamic (as per the standards of Beckett and Ionesco, which Polanski has always drawn inspiration from) although the overall atmosphere of the film is less distressing compared to his other works. Here, the plot seems to retrace Lewis Carroll's "Alice in Wonderland" in a more explicit way since Nancy (a modern Alice) does nothing but debunk the taboo of sex and its related perversions (particularly relevant considering the significant perception of sexual liberalization during those years).

All these elements should be considered when revisiting "Che?", a film that finds its strength in the inspired acting not only of all the actors (evidently, it was an ideal set for achieving this) but primarily of a sunny Sydne Rome, who carries the entire performance, managing to become increasingly nude without being mischievous in a decidedly surreal, sarcastic, and irrational story.

Sure, at times the film can seem hermetic and confused, but it is undoubtedly suffused with a light-hearted sixties helzapoppin air, and Polanski, perhaps to exorcise the recent pain of his wife Sharon Tate's violent death, seems to invite and encourage us to let ourselves be carried away by the dazzling flow of images in a plot with a whirlwind rhythm, punctuated by absurd and entertaining situations. Which, if you think about it, is nothing but the magic of cinema itself.