The Dreamers (2003), Bertolucci

For anyone that has seen a Bertolucci film, The Dreamers is quintessential Bertolucci. The setting, the cinematography, and the story all fit into the image that Bertolucci creates in many of his films. For being 63 years old when he made this film, The Dreamers succeeds in having a youthful feel to the point that it almost seems to be the work of an up and coming new director as one critic thought upon first viewing the film (film review, A.O. Scott). Maybe this is because of the incestuous sex and politics that create a quite shocking and perverted image of youth. Bertolucci's in your face cinema makes the viewer uncomfortable but also question what it is they are watching and what purpose it serves. While The Dreamers may not be a film for the light-hearted or reserved individual, Bertolucci's film making skills and cinematography were very well done. The scenes in the apartment feel like another world, in stark contrast to the streets below. The colors are warm the lighting is dim and sensual; he creates the feeling that what happens in this apartment is not quite real. Some people relate this film and this apartment to scenes from Bertolucci's other controversial film Last Tango in Paris which was also a sexually driven film, taking place partly in a Parisian apartment.

Bertolucci also has quite a fixation with Paris as a backdrop for his films. The city in itself is often related to ideas of free thinking and sexual freedom and the era that it takes place in, the 1960's, was at the height of sexual liberation throughout the world. Therefore, it seems that The Dreamers could not take place in any other place but Paris.

As far as characterization, Bertolucci uses Matthew as a reflection of the viewer. While Matthew may engage in actions that we could never dream of doing, the core of his charter objects what he sees; he knows that what he seeing and experiencing is wrong, yet his love for Isabelle keeps him there in the belief that he can separate her from Theo, until he realizes that his actions are futile. Matthew is the only person who stays "true." While he explores his sexuality he overall is the voice of reason in the film. Even Matthew liberal spirit cannot accept Isabelle's and Theos "kinky fairy-tale world." (A.O. Scott).

I found The Dreamers to be somewhat a modern neo-realist film. It's film hovers around the periphary of an "idea," esplorino, but never actually concluding anything about it. The characters are literally "dreamers." They live in their own idealized world, outside of reality. Theo and Isabelle glamorize the world outside while Matthew at the end walks away, finally accepting that Theo and Isabelle are still dreamers, unable to grow up and accept reality.


http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-dreamers-2004
http://www.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9C0CEFD7133BF935A35751C0A9629C8B63

The Conformist (1970), Bertolucci

For me this film really stood out from the other films that we have watched because of its obvious stylistic differences, and more overt political opinions. In this film Fascism is explicitly stated as being a main theme in the film and is what drives the plot; a Fascist, Macercello must assasinate his anti-Fascist former professor Signor Quadri. Also the words that Marcello's sick father is muttering "I'll never be tired of repeating. If the State doesn't model itself on the image of the individual, how will the individual ever model himself in the image of the State? etc...etc..slaughter and melancholy." While what he is saying is "crazy nonsense," to the characters, Bertolucci is sending a message to the viewer and making a statement about fascism. How can the State and the individual become one? The answer is slaughter and melancholy, meaning that these dreams are impossible and will only end in tragedy.

Bertolucci's stylistic choices become become an intergral part of the plot. The frenzied flashbacks are quite confusing but also reflect the confusion and conflict of the main character of Marcello and his own confusion and conflict with his past as well as his present. For example there is the scene when Marcello is stuck in the middle of the dancing people and the camera zooms in on him in the middle with a look of stress and and panic on his face. The scene is a visual representation of Marcello's internal state; he too feels trapped in his duty to kill his professor, unable to escape. Another scene is when Marcello is in the Professor's office and the professor is shown in shadow as they are talking about shadows.

Something that I found in the reading by Bonadella, is that he says that Anna Quadri is a lesbian, yet in the film, I saw homoerotic leanings, I was not utterly convinced that she was a lesbian just as Marcello's homosexual encounter in boyhood did actually mean he was homosexual. Sexuality is an important part of the film, and vital in the character development, especially when we discover the scene of his homosexual boyhood encounter. The scene is not only powerful but gives a whole new understanding about Marcello. From a psychoanalytic point of view, if personality is developed in childhood, then Marcello has no hope of changing; he is already "damaged goods," and at the end of the film we see just that. Marcello, who had tried to repress his past for so many years finally brings everything to the surface. Along with the fall of Fascism comes Marcello's parallel fall. Unable to escape his past he is a prisoner of fate.

Accattone (1961) Pasolini

After reading the chapter on Gramsci and the Italian Cinema, I noticed some strong Gramscian themes in Accattone, most notably the use of language and landscape. Linguistically the film was spoken in Roman dialect which was obvious in the characters' use of "man yar eh." The use of language not only set the tone for the movie giving it place and time,  but also spoke to the idea of education. These people, as was obvious by the way they spoke, were not particularly educated. Language was highly tied to education, as the more educated you were the more your language (way of speaking, being able to read and write), would show your education. The film also tightly tied the characters to their landscape and the way that they are a part of the landscape, navagating their way through it and always on the move. What was also important about the landscape was the lack of place that it gave to the film, a part of its "mythic" quality. There was nothing identifying about the landscape; instead it was the characters who defined it, who acted upon it in the sense that the landscape never changed but instead played the backdrop for the characters to act upon. 

Something I did not see in this movie that was presented in the reading was the idea that Accattone represented homosexuality while not acutally being homosexual in the film. I was curious to see how this would play out in the film, especially in the scene when he puts on a lady's hat. By the end of the film I found that the points people had mad in support of Accattone being a representation of homosexuality were vague at best. While the film is of course up to interpretation, the fact that Accattone seemed uninterested in sex with Stella or the fact that he put on the lady's hat don't really provide much evidence in support of this theory. These scenes could alternately be read as scenes where Accattone is asserting his masculinity but I also think showing his childishness. The scene of him putting on the womans hat reminded me a lot of something a child would do, whcih does not necessarily have homosexual unertones but instead shows Accattone's immaturity and lack of respect for women. The fact that he doesn't seem to be interested in engaging in a sexual rapport with Stella is a little more complicated however, but I believe this could also be read as his respect, but also his want to turn her into a prostitute. If he sleeps with her it would be harder for him to send her to the streets. 

Lastly and most notably, the scene of Accattone's death to me has highly ambiguous. I don't think it can be said whether he was saved or not. Although his outward efforts to change we obvious, I think the scene of his death represented a big question mark. We will never really know whether he repented or not and the scene leaves the viewer to decide whether Accattone was indeed Vittorio. 

Roberto Rossellini: Rome, Open City

I found Rome, Open City to be quite a fascinating film in its superb realism. The film was filmed on what film Rossellini could find, and was filmed on location, and on a low budget. It also had a very documentary type feel which made the film feel more realistic. Rossellini wasn’t known for his strong narratives, and Open City is no exception, but I found that the lack of narrative was what made the film what it is. It is a film about war, and Rossellini didn’t want this message to be drowned out by a melodramatic narrative. Instead the narrative was merely a device to move the film along. The true story was in the characters and the scenery. 

Something that I noticed about the film was that it was quite “cold.” What I mean by this is that there was a lack of resolution. For example when Pina is killed we don’t hear anything else about it. As viewers we barely even notice her death as the film pushes along leaving what has passed in the past. This continuation is representative the realities of war; that little time can be focused on the past when one’s future is at stake. The film doesn’t put rose colored sunglasses on the situation. The priest doesn’t miraculously get away with his actions, Pina does not miraculously survive the shooting, the bad guys don’t somehow get punished for their crimes. These factors are what make the film what it is. When a scene is finished it is finished, and there is no going back. It is a film about war, about the everyday people in Rome during the Nazi occupation, and that is what we get as viewers. 

Open City is a film that was written about what was happening at that moment. The images we see of Rome were the reality, not just a movie set. Many of the actors are non-professional actors and Rossellini relied heavily on improvisation as well. In fact while I was watching the film nothing seem scripted. I felt as if these were real people saying exactly what they wanted to say. Overall Rossellini’s use of on sight filming, mismatched film, non professional actors, lack of narrative, and use of improvisation, all things that would seemingly ruin a film when put together, made for a fantastic piece of honest and real work that really evokes Rome’s Nazi occupation. 

Luchino Visconti "Bellissima" (1951)

If there is one thing I can state for sure about this film is that it is annoying. I don't mean this in the sense that the film was not enjoyable or meaningful; quite the contrary. When I use the word annoying I am referring to the emotions I felt while watching the film. The first thing that struck me was that I literally started to get a headache from how much yelling there was in the film. It is as if Visconti took the most "galline" of all women and put them into one film and then pressed play for two hours. The second thing that made this film "annoying" was the ignorance and selfishness of Maddalena to what she was doing to her young daughter. In this sense, the use of the word "annoying" means that the director did a really good job in making the viewer connect to the film, in making the viewer feel. The point of the film was to see this mother's desperation, neuroticism, and naivety…I was annoyed or “bothered” so much that I even started to get a little angry! The film did a really job in getting a reaction by it’s characterization of the “gallina,” the sleazy nature of the film industry, but ultimately the sacrifices a person is willing to make to become a star.

The film was also a bit ironic in the parallels it drew between the narrative of the film and the situation of the film industry in Italy during the time period. The 1950's saw the rise of beauty pageants like Miss Italia, that in the end were basically contests searching for "beautiful new faces" for the film industry. This film draws on this same idea of the beauty pageant winner, but instead it is young girls competing against each other for their big break, or in reality their mothers. Indeed the children rarely speak in the film as the mothers speak in their place, in many ways exploiting them and trying to find the fame that they never had. The rise of the "star" figure in Italy and the beauty pageants that often created these figures created the dream of stardom among the populace. This film broke down the romanticized view of become a star. At the end in the film testing room Maddalena hears the story of the film editor, whom she recognizes from a film she had seen. The girls story about the “truth” of the industry debunks the myth of stardom. But what really changes Maddalena is when the directors laugh at her daughter’s screen test and call her a dwarf. By the end of the film Maddalena’s dreams for her daughter are crushed and the “ugly face of fame” is revealed. In my opinion the film remains a favorite even today because it is still pertinent. When the film started I immediately thought of shows like "Toddlers in Tiaras," where the same thing is happening that is happening in this film. The film is not only well-constructed and well-acted, it is also criticizing its own industry! Notably the lead performer, Anna Madnani was an actress by profession, and  did not come from the beauty pageant circuit, keeping the film in line with the values it seems to preach. It is not enough to just be “Bellissima.” 

Overall the film achieved what it wanted to achieve. It was enjoyable yet also "annoying," but salvages the main character and the story in the end when Maddalena refuses to sign the film contract for her daughter.

Lost in Translation by Sofia Coppola

Lost in Translation really has nothing to do with Italians or Italian Americans but what renders it a possible film for study is that it's director, Sofia Coppola, daughter of Francis Ford Coppola, is the director and thus she is of Italian descent. What I think makes the film "Italian" however is its style. While watching the film I was brought back to the films of Fellini and the Italian neorealists because the film was once again character driven. As viewers we are shown a glimpse of the life of two people in Tokyo and their search for happiness and belonging. The things that happen around them are secondary to their relationship and the things that are happening inside them. In this way I see the influence of Italian film on the movie. There was even a reference to La Dolce Vita in the film, a film by Fellini himself, and a story that in my opinion somewhat parallels the story of Charlotte and Bob; they are two people who meet in a city and find comfort in each other.

The second thing that I noticed is while the film deals with two peoples from America going to Tokyo, their experience could be seen as the "immigrant" experience of the Italians who came to America and the struggles they went through to try and fit in. Bob and Charlotte struggle with the language, the culture, and a sense of belonging, and instead of integrating themselves into the Japanese lifestyle, they stick together, the two "Americans" in Tokyo. This also parallels the idea of Little Italy and that when the Italians came over instead of dispersing into American society they formed there own "Little Italy," sticking together, continuing their culture and speaking their language. This is much the same thing that Charlotte and Bob are doing in the film. They are creating their own culture within the dominant culture.

The Godfather by Coppola

The Godfather is another Italian-American based film, but what really separates this film from the others that we have watched is that the story is very plot driven. While we do have complex and changing characters like The Don and Michael, we see that their personal internal changes are due to the plot or the "action" of the movie, while many of the other films we viewed character driven. The action of The Godfather was the changing force of the characters in the movie; the environment/plot acted upon them instead of them acting upon the plot.

While the set-up of the movie may be something new in comparison to the other films, many of the same Italian-American themes that we saw in the films of Scorsese are still present, most notably the idea of family loyalty and the Church. The family is the central theme of this film, for if it wasn't for the family, there would be no story. 

Protecting one's own becomes a central theme in The Godfather although many times it leads to violence, but surprisingly this film makes the viewer feel sympathy for the Corleone family, and because of this the violence almost seems justified. When I was watching the film I thought about it like this: everyone is bad, but who is the least bad. Coppola creates a Corleone family quite different from the book in fact, and these changes he made act in favor for the like-ability of the Corleone family. Coppola knew that he couldn't create a movie where his viewers hated the main characters. This dichotomy between loving and hating the Corleone's is what renders the film so intriguing. While the family at the beginning of the film is strong and loyal, the film perpetuates itself on the downfall of the Corleone family. The Don is shot, Michael takes over and at the end kills his sisters husband, and by the end the Don is dead and Michaels attempt to keep his family together is really just tearing them apart.  

The Church is also a main institution in the film. Here, the Church seems to support the violence that happens in the film in the sense that the characters go out and kill, yet repent in the Church therefore "justifying" there actions and being forgiven for them. The Church once again plays a confusing role in the characters' lives as it represents Old World Values that the characters are trying to apply to a new life in America. The hypocrisy this creates is evident, and one of the most volatile and cinematographically beautiful scenes is the scene of the baptism where Michael is literally and symbolically becoming the "Godfather." It is his baptism into his new role as the Don. Yet as Michael swears to denounce the devil and to believe in God, we see his men out shooting down their enemies. The hypocrisy is blatantly obvious. 

Overall I really liked this film for it's entertainment value, but what made me enjoy it even more is that it's cinematography, character development, and soundtrack all worked harmoniously together to create the world that is The Godfather. It dealt with many different aspects of the Italian-American experience and how the Italian Old World Values mix with the the new American values creating a cultural dichotomy for the people living in this world. The character's feel attached to both cultures and can't seem to find their identity.