Venice Film Festival 2020, an edition tainted by Blanchett’s verdict

An edition of Venice promoted with the highest note until the day before yesterday, where everything worked perfectly, social distances and seat reservations included, spotted by a jury that did not prove itself at the height of a cinematographic art exhibition (as we will never tire of emphasizing the self-denomination of Venice). Nomadland certainly not a masterpiece, but a good average and crafty film (wouldn’t it have been more courageous to investigate the economic crisis that pushed the protagonist to live in a caravan instead of praising the nomadic life?), excellently played but directed by a director who seems to wonder only whether to frame a sunset or choose sunrise.

Not to mention the director’s award given to an inert film like the Japanese one, where precisely the staging is hidden from first to last plane, or the Grand Prix that went to the most reactionary of all the titles in competition, where the fact that military coups are the most cruel and ferocious Revolutionaries killers is not enough to digest a movie that portrays torture and torture with complacency and empathy of blatant immorality. Perhaps, instead of worrying only about inclusions and the like, it would be convenient to rethink the central themes of cinema: what is the right thing to shoot and how to do it. Finally, Italy, which is mistreated by this verdict, since the best actor award knows a lot about nonsense. Favino too smart not to be surprised by a Coppa Volpi going for a supporting character (like his own) instead of the two true leads, both notable, of a failed movie. It is not the first time that a jury has ruined the coupon created by the festival (of course, Scorsese has not forgotten what happened to Those good guys) but perhaps it is convenient to open a little more serious reflection on the reasons that lead to privilege glamor over skills. Especially in those who are tasked with awarding important prizes such as Lions.