Benedetta

Dutch grandmaster Paul Verhoeven has never made a secret of his very ambiguous attitude towards religion, often comparing it to a mass-delusion shared by the majority of the world. However, he has also admitted to his fascination with faith on numerous occassions, and in his movies, religious allegories are never far away: from Alex Murphy in RoboCop seemingly walking on water, to a catholic cross used to trap someone in a coffin in Blackbook.

Religious visions had already played a prominent part in Verhoeven's Dutch classic The Fourth Man and his American debut Flesh + Blood, but Benedetta is his first foray into organized religion as a setting for a full movie. Though based on a book about a real historic figure, Benedetta is far from a simple biopic. We learn enough of the life of the titular character, but Verhoeven is far more interested in exploring our human shortcomings, and one question in particular: to what extent can people really surrender to faith, and all the rules and regulations that come with their system of belief?

The cynic side of his vision is pretty clear in the beginning, when we learn that a religious order is just like any other business model, only accepting novices for financial compensation; their laws, standards and knowledge seem arbitrary and without any logical basis (usually in favor of men); and independent girls who display too much of a critical opinion about religious rules are quickly silenced. While sister Benedetta (Virginie Efira, who played the neighbor in Verhoeven's 'Elle') suddenly receives a series of visions of Jesus, it makes her believe that she was meant to lead, rather than just blindly follow her superiors. And the sudden arrival of the young and handsome novice Bartolomea strongly challenges her views and former teachings.

Both events serve as story catalysts that severely upset the order of things: Benedetta has always been thaught that lust, especially for another woman, is sinful, but when the free-spirited Bartolomea shows her the carnal pleasures, it is clear that such beliefs don't go very deep. Verhoeven almost revels in showing that some of the higher-ups in the church aren't very strict with there vows either, especially when these don't serve their self-interests. But when Benedetta's miracles and inexplicable acts elevate her standing at the expense of others, it becomes clear how easily some people can hold on to ruling dogmas and regulations as long as they believe that these serve the common good; but as soon as these threaten their own power, status and desires, all religious charity and love for the fellow man go out of the window, and sinful human shortcomings such as jealousy, pride and greed quickly take over.

Verhoeven introduces yet another one of his strong but flawed protagonists, by making Benedetta a woman who manages to rally other people to her cause, in spite of the anti-feminist sentiments of the era. He shows that even though the divine may be largely a physical and mental illusion, the power of religion isn't necessarily evil, and can be used for good. At the same time, his Benedetta is definitely no saint: he explicitly allows for the possibility that her miracles are partially manipulated. However, he cleverly doesn't answer the question whether she truly believes that God is using her body for his works, or that she is knowingly manipulating everyone from the start under the pretense of piety.

As expected, production design and cast are great. Virginie Efira can easily sell her naive character, but we still believe that there can be a calculated demeanor under that. Daphne Patakai is amazing in a very brave role as the whirlwind Bartolomea, and Lambert Wilson is just the right guy to play a pompous and self-serving church leader. Possibly the best work comes from Charlotte Rampling as the abbess, whose moral ambiguity seeps through best; she can believably switch between a money-hungry leader, ruthless opportunist and devout believer, even within scenes.

After his more subtle movie 'Elle', Verhoeven is back to his old trade: all the animalistic sides of human beings, like sex, violence, blood, feces, rape and torture, are amply represented. Some people seem to get hung up by the almost 1980s-grade amounts of nudity that they believe takes away from the feminist undertones, but the man himself has made it clear during the film's promotion that there is (and should be) nothing abnormal about sexuality and nudity in films about the human condition. Indeed, he doesn't hold back in that regard, with the creative use of a Maria statue as the film's most memorable moment. Verhoeven, always the provocateur, seems to openly challenge the contemporary negative attitude towards sex in movies, as if to say that we shouldn't be so squeemish about a bit of skin, or reduce a movie simply to the amount of naked women in it. And indeed, after some initial awkwardness in the audience, I felt that most viewers gradually went with it.

Despite all the Verhoeven ingredients being present, I don't feel that this is another one of his masterpieces, though. Where he normally has a brisk pacing and keen sense of dosing, the first half meanders a bit because there is a lot of set-up to be done. Another complication is that Benedetta's visions are depicted in an almost B-movie kind of way, which is almost unintentionally comical. The second half is where the slowly built-up conflict pays off, and although the movie doesn't have as many memorable scenes as some of his classics, one nasty torturing scene and a riveting climax surely make it an experience you will not soon forget.

This is an adequately made morality tale in the vein of The Name of the Rose, highly recommended for people who are interested in history and religion, and for fans of Paul Verhoeven.

Some film critics in Greece thought that this movie is a hybrid of parody and satire in its attitude towards organized religion. I disagree. Although the treatment of religious themes is rather blasphemous by pietistic standards the amount of human misery and suffering portrayed does not allow the viewer to conceive the movie as satire at least solely as such. Surely the religious visions and the sexual adventures of Benedetta treat religion irreverently but the consequences for her and her protégé Bartolomea have nothing humorous about them. In that time, unlike ours - at least in the West- no jokes were allowed concerning religion.

Misery, violence, intrigue abound in the plot and lust, although explicit, is just one of the sins portrayed. Ambition, struggle for power and precedence, avarice are the prevailing motives of the characters. Christian charity pales before those demonic passions although it is not totally absent.

The plight of the poor, the intrigues of the powerful, the omnipresence of the plague, the violence of the soldiery offer a bleak picture of society. One is reminded of Flesh and Blood by the same director situated in about the same historical period. Both have a central heroine with superb survival skills to help her navigate through insurmountable adversities.

Humour and satire exist but the general atmosphere is so ominous, so laden with menace, violence and disease that you are left saddened with the misery inherent in the human experience of 17nth century Tuscany. Nothing betrays the artistic splendour of the Renaissance, just a bleak struggle for survival and mastery, for power and precedence, for wealth and prestige where Christianity is used to serve those ulterior motives.

It is a sad movie. That said Virginie Efira and Daphne Patakia are gorgeous both artistically and sexually. But I think Charlotte Rampling in the role of the abbess gives the more memorable performance as a character full of ambiguity and contradictions. Lambert Wilson shines as the satanic nuncio although his character is rather flat in his evil propensities.

The costumes and the representation of the era are superb and the religious visions of Benedetta are far-fetched and subversive. Pietistic believers are going to be offended and will probably say: would he dare to do the same with Muslim religious symbols? But I do not think that the movie is anti-Christian. It shows how lofty ideals are used by flawed humans to further very earthly ambitions.

It is true though that without divine solace the society portrayed by Benedetta would be impossible to live in. Watch the movie and form your own opinion.

The basic virtue of film is its high realism. Sure, exposed with the tools of Paul Verhoeven. A film about faith, power, manipulation, survive, leadership and a splendid portrait of counter reformation atmosphere, from innocence to faith as refuge , from the discover of lust to the dark side of a person appartaining to one world.

The second virtue can be the impecable work of Charlotte Rampling as Mother Felicita.

Not the less, the performance of Daphne Patakia , remembering, at the first look, Rosalinda Celentano in the Passion Of Christ, mixing wildness and profound innocence, lovely simplicity and fears .

About Virginia Efira , her beauty seems for me the basic tool to build the character. I do not ignore the performance but the beauty represents just the axis for give a fair portrait of Beneditta.

The statue of Holy Virgin was, I admitt, a serious motif to be scandalized . But, in same measure, I see its use as a portrait of lost of the innocence of childhood.

I am conscient than I saw this film as Greek Orthodox Christian . The Catholic world, in so many stories, is discovered in this film almost scene by scene. That is the reason for who I admired its realism. Because it is a panel with so familiar pieces defining, sure, in popular mind, Catholicism.

A beautiful film, having as sin the not most inspired construction of visions. But, sure, the message is the significant one and the large gallery of portraits , few like Mother Jacopa being useful for remind, as delicate sketch, not comfortable truths.

It will be called subversive. There will be appreciation. There will be hate and there will be love, but if people took their time to read Paul Verhoeven's book about Jesus of Nazareth as a historical figure, they shouldn't be surprised about this film, which is based on a true story, Judith Brown's study Immodest Acts, about the rise and fall of the lesbian nun Benedetta Carlini.

I had so much fun watching this movie. Great acting, excellent story. Peak Paul Verhoeven, even at the age of 82. Apart from the usual Verhoeven elements, there are profound questions about the State and the Church, especially regarding interpretation of the Bible and the determination of God's will. Benedetta is a believer in a cynical world. For certain reasons, she needs a private place - in a world where 'private' isn't highly appraised and because of that, she'll have to turn to cloister politics. Benedetta is a great film about morals and who decide about them and when. I'll re-watch it very soon.

At the age of 83, it is wonderful to see Paul Verhoeven mojo's still on fire after all these years. His latest offering Benedetta (2021), a provocative lesbian affair in a 17th-century nunnery set amidst the bubonic plague is more than erotic drama as Verhoeven manages to mix dogmas of faith & superstition in the narrative. It definitely lives up to its billing as one of his best film, exceptionally well made all around and stays true to form throughout. Along the way, it has a true and sad story to tell, but it is an entertaining film with funny characters and Jesus Christ cameo with a sword-slinging fight sequence. The film might feel inconsistent in its satire on the Catholic Church but it definitely hits hard where it counts. The best is in the 2nd half, there is an intriguing balance between the satire and the obscene, waddling constantly between the two, with wild moments.

The film has few shortcomings, but they are completely outweighed by its main advantage - cinematography, soundtrack and the wacky screenplay. On the acting side we have a stable interpretive work of all those involved, but the one who stands out the most is Virginie Efirahas, some of the best acting of the year.

Overall, 'Benedetta' is an Paul Verhoeven movie at its best. It is a mischievous film in the very spirit of Ken Russell's The Devils (1971) and Nunsploitation classics. It might feel off-putting before becoming entertaining and it succeeds in doing this in all aspects.