Filmmaker Roberto Bentivegna recently stopped by the Chelsea to film a short murder mystery.
Thanks for giving us another ghost to be on the look out for! We hope he’s talking hypothetically when he says that he can’t think of a better place to kill oneself than the Chelsea Hotel. Oh, and if anybody knows the story about Milos Forman and the dwarves we’d be interested in hearing it.
How’d you get interested in film?
It’s something I’ve always wanted to do, ever since I was 8 years old. I saw Terry Gilliam’s “The Adventures of Baron Munchausen” and was totally overwhelmed by its energy and creativity. I know that the film didn’t do so well when it was released, and a lot of people hated it, but it really sparked something in my brain. Music is the other big thing in my life, so I had to pick between the two things. I don’t think either one is particularly safe, financially, but safety is boring and overrated. I don’t really want to give myself any back-up plans. I’m 24, doing an MFA at Columbia University in Directing, so I am in that stage of life where I’m starting to fear hunger and homelessness a little bit. But I could always play guitar in the subway or make wedding videos, I guess.
What’s the most rewarding aspect of creating a film? In terms of the craft itself, I think that the planning is the most exciting and satisfying part. During that period, I am incredibly naïve and actually believe that my shotlists and rehearsals will magically engrain themselves into the finished film, and that nothing will affect that. Of course, this is almost never the case. As far as I know, animation is probably the only “genre” in which every single shot is designed and executed as conceived. Hitchcock storyboarded all of his films extensively but he worked in a very specific style that didn’t allow for much freedom. It’s important to be flexible and open up to the possibilities of the location, or the actors, or even the weather. Nothing should be locked.
Which filmmakers do you most admire? I adore Stanley Kubrick’s work for a variety of reasons. Firstly, he gained artistic independence very early on and never let go, which is rare for a director. Secondly, his framing and imagery is closer to painting and photography than it is to “cinema”, and yet he is probably the most cinematic of all filmmakers. Finally, I am a big fan of genre-blending, and don’t think I could only work in the confines of one genre. So it’s very refreshing to see Kubrick’s filmography and notice that virtually every film he made was different from the previous one. That, to me, is the sign of a true artist: constantly changing and re-inventing himself.
I also appreciate Luchino Visconti, Federico Fellini, Martin Scorsese, Terry Gilliam, Michael Powell, Werner Herzog, Steven Spielberg, David Cronenberg, Jean Renoir and Brian De Palma. That’s just a tiny list. I adore all filmmakers because I know how difficult it is to make a good film, and how underrated- ironically, considering how popular it is- it is as an art form.














