the cheese thief
by Douglas Messerli
Pier Paolo Pasolini (screenwriter and
director) La ricotta / 1963
Pasolini’s 35-minute film La Ricotta appeared first as one of
four films gathered as an omnibus production titled Ro.Go.Pa.G., the
unmemorable title representing the names of the directors who make the movies
included, Robert Rossellini (Illibatezza / Chastity), Jean-Luc
Godard (Il nuovo mundo / The New World), Pasolini’s work, and Ugo
Gregoretti (Il Pollo ruspante / Free Range Chicken).
Of
the four, Pasolini’s work was certainly the cause célèbre, if for no
reason other than the director, accused of holding contempt for the state
religion, was sentenced to four months in jail, which he avoided by paying a
fine, the sentence later being declared void by an appeals court.
But
the film is also the most interesting of the four, even if they all bring up
fascinating issues.
Pasolini’s work is primarily a piece about movie-making, starring the
great Orson Wells as the stand-in director for Pasolini himself, the
huge-bodied American—in reality always seeking out roles to bring in some money
in order to support his own directorial projects—somewhat smugly sitting back
in utter disinterest in this particular film shoot, while quoting, at one
point, from Pasolini’s diatribe against the Italian people themselves from his
script from a year earlier, his 1962 film Mamma Roma.
As
with most movie-filming much of the time is spent with actors and extras
standing around, finding ways to entertain themselves between the few takes
from the actual movie in process. The movie being filmed, clearly a series of tableaux
vivants and friezes of Christ’s Crucifixion, are filmed in color, while the
rest of Pasolini’s picture, except for the opening credits, is shot in
black-and-white. This obviously separates the cinematic art, which in this case
is imitating the visual art of Renaissance painters such as Jacopo da Pontormo
and Rosso Fiorentino, and the everyday occurrences going on around the around
the artistic-cinematic evocation. If the film is intended to be sacred and even
holy, the black-and-white sequences represent an insulting, vulgar, and at
times even barbarous world which sustains the visionary expression.
In
the vast amount of free time between moments of shooting that these figures
have to themselves, they dance to the pop music of the day, eat, pet the dog,
fret, plot, and even pick flowers.
And
then there is the extra who plays the good thief, Stracci (“rags,” played by
Mario Cipriani), who is so poor that he is willing to accept the job just for
the food he is fed. He eats, falls to sleep, and still wakes up hungry,
realizing that his family, his wife and four sons, are visiting the nearby
countryside that afternoon. With the free meal he is provided, he manages to
feed them, but he goes hungry.
Meanwhile,
as his family members sit it in the open grass enjoyably sharing the little
sack of vittles with which their father originally provided, we observe the
actor who plays the image of God pass by with a curious look in their
direction. The street savvy eldest son rises, telling his mother he’s going on business,
and that we may soon get a job as an extra. It is clear that by providing sex
to the passing actor he may be able to serve the company
A
moment later, a couple of actors, one of them the handsome Christ of the movie,
followed by cute boys also pass by, clearly moving in the direction of the
little decayed structure in the near distance to have sex. The second son,
better looking than the first, also rises, telling his mother that he too has a
job to look after.
Stracci is strapped to the cross, but the Diva, at that very moment,
approaches the director demanding that her scene be shot immediately or she
will leave. So Stracci, Christ, and the blasphemous thief are left on the
ground to wait. Some of the crew members determine to entertain them as they
wait—with another sort of dance—this gesture, in particular, meant to mock the
immobile and now obviously suffering Stracci, his face seating in the sun, by
asking a woman who obviously is sexually experienced with the crew to do a
striptease.
Refusing at first, she finally agrees to do it, raising Stracci’s
heartbeat and other body parts as he frustratedly remains strapped into
position, unable to move. Finally, the director issues the call for those on
the crosses to be unstrapped, and Stracci rushes back to his cave to eat the
cheese he has hidden there. As he gorges on this meal of his dreams, other cast
members, who catch him the act, gradually bring him leftovers from the company
table, sausages, liquor, cakes, and numerous other edibles to consume while
they openly mock him for his enormous appetite, without realizing that in his
poverty he has never had so much food set before him, let alone the opportunity
to put it into his stomach.
Stuffed, belching, and suffering from all the food, Stracci is called
once again to strap up for the final shoot of the Passion. The crosses are
moved up the hill and implanted, while below a crowd of well-dressed press
members and the returned stars from the other scenes climb the hill, cameras
snapping at their progress. The wind and lighting are checked out. The
prompter, just to make sure that the dense-headed Stracci remembers his line,
asks him to repeat it, which, despite his obvious indigestion, he successfully
does. He is asked to repeat the line again, Stracci looking up to heaven with
true conviction as he repeats:
Lord, remember me when
Thou comest in Thy Kingdom!
“Action” is finally called, as all wait for Stracci to repeat his line yet again. But he only looks down as we have seen his face fall into place a moment ago. The director calls again for action, but Stracci does not respond. He is dead on the cross, killed not through suffering the torture of nails pounded in his hands and feet, but through the satiation of his lifelong starvation. His heart obviously could not handle the stress of all the food he has managed to stuff into the emptiness of his mouth.
Christ has not been crucified, but the poor thief of cheese has, praying
to God as he has left this earth. Isn’t this man as sacred as the man, the son
of God, on the cross next to him? Is it sacrilegious to represent the good
thief, in this case, as a figure equal to and perhaps just as important as the
man who symbolizes the Christian faith? The Christ in the film is just an
actor, while the thief, alas, is simply an ordinary man.
Los Angeles, July 29, 2021
Reprinted from World Cinema Review (July 2021).






No comments:
Post a Comment