Film Festival of PompeiFrom the stage, the accusation against the absence of institutions: "Culture cannot be left alone"
The second edition of the International Film Festival of Pompei It opened to applause, prestigious guests, and a strong audience participation. On the stage of the Nexus Cinema at Maximall PompeiThe event, which featured prominent figures in Italian cinema, industry professionals, and event representatives, reiterated the importance of an event created to promote film culture and the region's cultural heritage.
But alongside the enthusiasm and satisfaction at the launch of the event, a topic also emerged that inevitably sparked debate.
During the inaugural speeches, in fact, both the president of the Festival Annarita Borelli both the artistic director Enrico Vanzina They highlighted the absence of the city's institutions, underlining how the Municipality of Pompeii was not present at the event and recalling that the demonstration did not receive municipal patronage.
A public appeal that did not go unnoticed and which represents the starting point of this reflection.
A festival built with passion and sacrifice
Throughout the evening, it was repeatedly emphasized how this second edition was organized thanks to the commitment of those who chose to contribute freely to the event. Actors, artists, professionals, and collaborators donated their time and expertise to support a project that aims to defend and promote Italian film culture.
This was a point that was forcefully emphasized on stage. It wasn't just about organization.
We talked about passion.
We talked about love for cinema.
We talked about the desire to build something important for the area without asking for anything in return.
The call of Annarita Borelli and Enrico Vanzina
The words of President Annarita Borelli and Artistic Director Enrico Vanzina brought attention to a simple but fundamental concept.
Culture needs support. Not necessarily just financial. Above all, it needs presence. Attention. Participation.
Because the presence of the institutions represents a signal to citizens and to all those who invest energy in the realization of cultural initiatives.
When a festival manages to involve personalities from the Italian cinema world and mobilize dozens of people who work for free for a cultural project, the presence of the institutions takes on a value that goes beyond any financial contribution.
When culture is perceived as a secondary priority
The impression that emerged from what was heard during the opening evening was that culture too often risks being considered a secondary element in political priorities.
Yet events like the Pompeii International Film Festival represent much more than a simple film festival.
They are opportunities for growth. They are training tools. They are opportunities for young people.
They are moments of exchange between different generations. They are spaces where values, skills, and knowledge are passed on.
In a city like Pompeii, known worldwide for its historical and cultural heritage, culture should be one of the fundamental pillars of public action.
Available to publish any clarifications
As always, this newspaper remains available to publish any clarifications, additions, or interventions from the Municipality of Pompeii, so that each position can be represented and understood by citizens.
Because the comparison and pluralism of ideas are essential elements of democratic debate.
However, one fact remains difficult to dispute: during the opening night of the second edition of the Pompeii International Film Festival, a public appeal was made from the stage regarding the absence of the institutions.
A reminder expressed by the president Annarita Borelli and from the artistic director Enrico Vanzina, who wanted to highlight how an event built with passion, sacrifice, and voluntary contributions felt the lack of the institutional support that many would have expected.
And it is precisely from those words, heard in front of the audience, that this reflection was born.
An interesting article that highlights real problems but doesn't tell the whole truth. It seems to me that there are shared responsibilities and also practical limitations. A more open dialogue between citizens, institutions, and cultural operators would have been useful, without controversy but with facts, but the will is lacking and incomprehensible choices are being made.