Author's judgement: 
The year that has just ended has been horrible for Italian cinemas: according to data taken from Cinetel (Anec and Anica), 2018 takings decreased by over 30 million compared to previous years. Many wonder why and how it is possible that, despite a glorious history and a promising present of our film production universe, viewers in our country go less and less to the cinema. Among the many reasons, we propose one that concerns this week's film: The invisible witness, directed by Stefano Mordini and main protagonists Riccardo Scamarcio, Miriam Leone, Fabrizio Bentivoglio and Maria Paiato.
The plot is suggestive and proposes a classic setting of the thriller genre: in a hotel room, locked from the inside, in the mountains, a murder takes place. A young and shrewd entrepreneur finds the body of his lover next to him and when the police burst in, he is suspected of being the author of the woman's death. Apparently all the clues lead to him and, through a lawyer note, he will try to prove his innocence. Obviously we will not reveal the ending which will be sufficiently surprising.
The intention of the writers is good and, these days, a good thriller never hurts. Too bad, however, that two narrative canons are used for many abused aspects. The first refers to the "Nordic atmospheres" typical of Scandinavian school films (one name above all: rose Larsson with his Nordic trilogy). To set a film of this kind, winter gray and white snow are excellent backgrounds to generate that necessary sensation of mystery, silence, opacity. It all works, as long as there is the ability to mix exterior shots well with acting skills. In this case, it doesn't seem to have worked and while in the first part everything takes place with its own logic, in the second part there is an often incomprehensible twist. The second canon is that of indefinite temporal dislocation: the story has no references to when the important events take place, the cornerstones of the story, in what sequence. It can work in a mystery but, again, provided that everything can appear logical and plausible. In this case, on the other hand, it only generates confusion and the viewer just has to take note of the artifices and scene jumps.
Note on Actors: It is very difficult to find one good actor for all parts. Versatility, the ability to adapt to radically different characters, is not common to all. On the contrary, it is easier for many good actors to be used more because they are "fashionable" rather than for their skill. This appears to us to be the case Riccardo Scamarcio now distributed on many films such as parsley, together with all the tour company that rages in Italian cinemas (see on FirstOnLine last week's review with The King's Musketeers). So let's go back to the premise: there are many good reasons why Italian cinema is doing badly and we have written about it several times. One of these is the difficulty in finding good subjects, entrusted to skilled hands in directing and convincing actors in acting. When the market persists in always proposing the same more or less heated soup, there is little wonder and it is then useless to wage war against Netflix which, however, has the merit of seeking new paths and new models of production and distribution. The invisible witness appears precisely the paradigm of this situation, where good intentions are not lacking while good realization is lacking.
