The film National Evaluation Commission of the Italian Bishops’ Conference, led by Father Davide Milani, is committed to a review and re-launch project. “We have initiated a process – says the president – to ensure that the Commission is keeping up with the changes of the cinematographic and audiovisual sector. Of course, being a CEI organ, there are the formal steps to be taken, but in the meantime the road was open. The goal is to make our service more dynamic, suited to the times and less mechanical. ” In keeping with a tradition that began in the thirties of the last
Who would have thought? The Catholic film censorship in Italy does not exist. What may seem like the discovery of 2016, it is nothing but a fact that has always accompanied the national film evaluation Commission Service (CNVF) of the Italian Bishops’ Conference. Often confused as a sanction and overshadowed by an aura of negativity, the work of CNVF moves in the opposite direction with respect to the criticism received. It clearly confirms the Commission President, don Davide Milani , while engaged in a project to review and re-launch of this technical and pastoral body of the CEI. “We have initiated a process – explains – to ensure that the Commission is keeping up with the changes of the cinematographic and audiovisual sector. Of course, being a CEI organ, there are the formal steps to be taken, but in the meantime the road was open. The goal is to make our service more dynamic, suited to the times and less mechanical. “
How do you make a dynamic contribution that is seen as censorship? ” We must clear away, once and for all, from a basic misunderstanding:
this is not censorship.
our – reiterates Milani – it is a positive task, it is a service rendered to the families, to the Christian community but also to the world of culture in general. It is obvious that ours is a very specific point of view – the Catholic one – that, however, without prejudice and preconceptions, look at the works, reads, analyzes, from the experience shared by those who know the cinema “. It is on this line that move the 18 commissioners who make up the CNVF. These include lay people and religious engaged in various capacities in the field of social communication and the media, as well as teachers, journalists and experts. Three perspectives of reading that guide its work: the artistic value, morally and pastoral use of the film. The last two evaluation criteria (morally and pastoral use) based on the purpose typically ecclesial obviously without claiming to exhaust in these two perspectives, all other possible readings. In fact, clarifies the president CNVF,
“When we look at the film, did not bother to let other people’s artistic expression in a pre-established grid, but we allow ourselves to be provoked by this, trying to return the our feelings in a case which will then be used by parishes, community halls, individual, faculty, associations … in short, the recipients are diverse and heterogeneous. “
a valuable history. to take cognizance of the great efforts made by the Commission, from the thirties of the last century (when it was still called Catholic Film Center) today, just remember a few numbers: 150 “messages Motion Picture” (published in print until 2010, Every six months); almost 7 thousand online reviewed films, from 1997 to today; 250/300 analyzed films each year, with peaks in the golden age of cinema; many theme paths offered by the site, along with the areas of research that can be done.
“It is a valuable history – underlines Milani – who went through all the major socio-cultural hubs of the country. Consider, for example, to 150 paper volumes that allow the reconstruction of the entire film history, including the film of which no one has ever given account. And these show that more than other books do not have. Or we think of the sixties, when about 12 thousand screens in Italy, 6 thousand were parish and from the Commission’s work depended so half of the Italian salt. “
Open to change. Is it really true then, that review again the decades – from the thirties to the present day – is tied up with major developments of cinema, costume, culture and society. Changes that CNVF has faced, always looking to the future. The last, in time level, took place in 2008, chaired by Monsignor Dario Edoardo Viganò, now prefect of the Vatican Secretariat for communications: the changes were introduced to the Commission regulation and the criteria of evaluation of the films (still to years Eighty). In the light of those new, it has been undertaken in recent years, a first path of renewal with Don Ivan Maffeis, president from 2014 to 2016, and now with Don Milani. “The goal – illustrates the current president – is to use a language understood by users and incorporate industry innovations, under the fruition and technological profile. For this, I guess the
A dynamic evaluation criteria,
that are able to talk to the new viewing environments. So, while we formulate the evaluation of the film, it becomes essential to take into account the environment in which the work is seen. ” And here comes back the discourse of censorship: “The Commission – again points out the president – does not raise the green or red paddle to indicate whether the film can be seen or not. This is not! We seek instead to accompany the viewer to be conscious user to a specific communicative language – the film – which responds to its codes. is not as simple as it seems: like in football, all believe they have the skills needed to do technical analysis. The work of CNVF wants to provide this critical support. “
How is evaluated a movie? ” Here you need a major premise, “says Milani:
“the evaluation does not work if decontextualized from the viewing environment. Absolute little work to define an acceptable film or not. Instead, there is a suitable film for the viewer as it responds to its state of preparedness, the context in which it will be delivered, to the tools at its disposal to understand it at the time of the vision. “
Currently the films are classified in two words: the first expresses the overall assessment, while the second indicates the ease or difficulty reading the movie or the motivation of the overall evaluation. For example, recommended, recommended, recommended, futile (first word); simple, weak-willed, vulgarity, scabrous (second word). “As I said – I take Milani – we must not imagine a pre-established grid in the minds of the commissioners. Reviews are indications pointing at the viewer, his sensitivity. With a specific philosophy: ours, like it or not, refers to the Gospel and to the ecclesial experience. And it is this point of view to give authority to our opinions, in a time when online you can find everything. You could say: we put the identity and that makes a difference. From here it’s off to dialogue with everyone. Indeed … For the future we are thinking, just, to also propose to lay our medium of film ratings “. Nothing but censorship!
No comments:
Post a Comment