This is an unique film by João Moreira alles, quite hard to discuss and think about. What it is about, indeed? What is its object? First of all, it is a film about past and memories. It is also about making a film (as a meta-movie, about the film he did not finish thirteen years before), but it is obviously also about Moreira Salles family's former butler Santiago, as the title states. Is Santiago an author of ideas and interests (with many opinions and tastes detailed along the documentary) or is he an object for João Moreira Salles's curiosity and childhood remembrance? Santiago had been a butler for decades and, while mentioning colleagues' work as similar to slavery, also admires aristocracies from the most varied places and times. While loving and knowing well "high" art, he also loved pop culture and fighting sports (from boxing to pro wrestling, besides Hollywood). Santiago had a life dedicated both to serve and to the past (not only his past, but the past of the whole humankind, at least of its leaders, and perhaps more from Italy than elsewhere). It is clearly a film about class too. Moreira Salles family's luxury disturbs. João Moreira Salles seems to unveil it as if he were in a confessional... or alternatively he is just reaffirming that he is not ashamed for being so economically privileged. Santiago has traveled throughout the world (collecting pieces of history in libraries from different countries) and consuming "high" art in the most important theatres, but he was not free to have a recess in his own birthday if there were a special dinner to be set... and he feels proud if his birthday is celebrated in a toast with the very best Champagne sparkling wine during his work. It is a movie about contrasts, in the border between many different intentions and objectives, which sometimes seem opposite. So much story (and history) written and told by Santiago is blurred through pure aesthetic impressionism, with footage of furniture and close caption of randomly extracted pages among the thousands he wrote. Santiago himself relates his whole life to dead people (either in his own writings or in his youth). He admits that his loneliness was no problem as he had already lived so much, and that the dead were his friends. João Moreira Salles would make it clear that all those decades of interaction did not make them friends. Santiago shows and talks about whatever he wants, but also João Moreira Salles keeps in the final cut all the commands his assistant directed, somewhat harshly, towards the retired butler, to whom spontaneity was denied. Perhaps like when he worked for the Moreira Salles family, when he could do whatever he wanted (such as playing the piano) just when the family was out of home. The distance of Santiago in relation to the family was not only to João Moreira Salles's parents, but also to him. The filmmaker admits it by explaining the lack of close shootings of Santiago and, worse, in the striking and grotesque end before credits. Then, Santiago seems to be considered more as an object, like a furniture, or as a freak show attraction than as an experienced human being whose life and deeds may be interesting for themselves. Is the movie an innovative film about everything, or is it no more than a Parnassian piece of quasi-sadistic vanity? I do not now the answer. Possibly the film is all of it at once, and that is what makes it remarkable.
