lewianbra

Oliviero Toscani is an Italian Photographer, well known for his provocative Benetton ad campaign in the 1980s and nineties. Toscani was invited, in 2001, to curate (a part of?) the new Biennale in Tirana, at a time when Albania just came out of a state of isolation. The organiser, however, didn't have any direct personal contact with Toscani but communicated via email (also a new thing and easily subverted at the time) with him - well, it wasn't really Toscani himself, rather somebody who curated for the Biennale four very controversial artists, one of them a pedophile, another one an Al Quaida fighter. The film is a documentary about this hoax. Apparently there were legal proceedings that stopped the parts filmed for the documentary at the time from being published for 20+ years. Actually the terrorist attack against the World Trade Center happened very shortly after the opening of the Biennale, and nobody wanted to be associated with Al Quaida, or, of course, pedophilia.

Anyway, in 2024/25 we get this nice little film showing some background but also in some ways contributing to the hoax. The viewer, in the end, will not be sure about everything, and what is real and what not so much is part of the attraction of it.

This was surely entertaining (a bit of familiarity with the world of modern art helps) and I liked the Toscani character. Chances are there is also some kind of art philosophical side to it, what can art do and how does it interact with reality? This, however, is a bit dated. Not sure whether art has moved on from this kind of "happening", but such things, and the associated thoughts about art, existed long before 2000 and much longer before 2025. So don't expect innovation and exciting new points of view here, despite its connection to pedophilia, porn, and terrorism. Anyway, it's not the worst way to spend your time.

This film has been made by Denise Zmekhol, the daughter of the architect Roger Zmekhol. His apparently best known building was the Skin of Glass in Sao Paolo, built in the 1960s. Many years after his death, in the 2010s, Denise travels to Sao Paolo to revisit the building to reconnect with the memories of her father. At this time the building was run down and inhabited by homeless squatters.

The architecture of the Skin of Glass, and a bit of other work by Roger Zmekhol, plays some role here, the building is the focal point of the film, and I watched this in an architecture film event, but there is much more to the film.

It is a deeply moving film about family relations, Brazilian history and politics, Sao Paolo and its social conditions, and a bit of psychology. It is a sad film with some optimism. It tells the story of the building as well as some other stories (like that of Roger's life, but also the squatters and homeless are featured), with some unexpected twists. It also has symbolic and poetic value and is about dreams and what they become.

I didn't have high expectations for this film, but was strongly impressed in the end. Maybe as there is so much going on, depending on your motivation to watch this, there will be some stuff that you are not interested in, but anyway. I think it's a very engaging film, and it has a lot of soul. Strongly recommended.

Very good and interesting documentary about children that were removed from their families in two communities in 1990s Italy, based on statements that the children made, of which we see some video recordings. Some of their parents were convicted for child abuse and spent many years in prison; this documentary has been made about 20 years later when they had completed their sentences.

The documentary has 5 episodes between 50 and 60 minutes. It is somewhat slow at times, but overall there is enough interesting material that deserves the elaboration over such a time span. Also, the story is somewhat convoluted with many people involved.

The position conveyed by the documentary on the case is quite clear, but to its credit, it gives enough space to those that are on the other side of the argument. This is actually a major attraction of the documentary. You can hear many people involved with their quite different points of view, and you may wonder yourself who is right and who is wrong here. To me it doesn't seem as obvious as one of the other reviewers portrays it. Of course it is also in the nature of such a documentary that the material doesn't quite suffice to dissolve every possible doubt (although it may be enough for some).

Up until the end you hear rather incompatible points of view from people who mostly (on both sides) come over as credible. The main psychologist, heavily criticised as major villain by some, actually conducts herself quite well here. You may wonder all the time "how can this be?" - even if you settle for the explanation that is apparently favoured by the people who made this documentary (which for sure has something going for it, but not everything).

It is a sad story with impact on everyone who is still alive, the children, the parents, also other people involved. It is also a story well worthwhile spending 5 hours of your time on. Should children always be believed? Probably not. But here?