Vittorio de Sica= neo-realism director Sophia Loren= sex symbol Alberto Moravia= famous up-and-coming author
The year is 1961, and it is 13 years after bicycle thief. The 50's have gone by and Italy has been all consumed by its decade of Commedia all'Italiana. Sophia Loren is an established sex symbol actress. Moravia is a famous author whose novels are being scripted for movie production. De Sica is an established director. The recipe is just perfect. But the result is a terrible minestrone of different styles, tensions, trends, to produce a schizophrenic bizzare production.
There are numerous neo-realistic scenes of peasants in the Agro Pontino, of living inside the capanne with hay roofs, of getting off trains in the middle of the countryside and carrying luggage on your head the way old peasant women used to do it.
But then there are intruding snippets of comedy, like the old man eyeing the breasts of Sophia Loren and turning his head away when he realizes he's been caught watching (audience laughed), and a caricaturistic portrayal of a german officer that has studied phylosophy in the Universita' di Roma that lists the ambiguities and paradoxes of italians.
What is one to make of this movie? is it a comedy? is it a mix comedy with serious peasant life portrayal?
Towards the end of the movie, a terrible dramatic event makes it clear that the movie must be categorized as a Drama. But then, why all those comedic overtures? It is as if multiple assistant directors worked on the production at different times, each taking its turn. Even the orchestration of the different caracters made no sense. Giovanni, which we see at the beginning of the movie in a powerful entrance, is never to be seen again. Absurd.
The biggest mistake was to cast Sophia Loren. She was too fine to portray the character of a peasant. She looked much more middle class than peasant class, and it simply didn't help at all on the credence of someone abandoning the conforts of city life for the hardships of living in the hills of the Agro Pontino. She was probably cast because producers wanted her role, being it a cash flow for box office sucess. She is too expressive, to volunteering for outbursts of gestures, verbal communication, for her role of a quiet peasant. And she was too beautiful.
The year is 1961, and it is 13 years after bicycle thief. The 50's have gone by and Italy has been all consumed by its decade of Commedia all'Italiana. Sophia Loren is an established sex symbol actress. Moravia is a famous author whose novels are being scripted for movie production. De Sica is an established director. The recipe is just perfect. But the result is a terrible minestrone of different styles, tensions, trends, to produce a schizophrenic bizzare production.
There are numerous neo-realistic scenes of peasants in the Agro Pontino, of living inside the capanne with hay roofs, of getting off trains in the middle of the countryside and carrying luggage on your head the way old peasant women used to do it.
But then there are intruding snippets of comedy, like the old man eyeing the breasts of Sophia Loren and turning his head away when he realizes he's been caught watching (audience laughed), and a caricaturistic portrayal of a german officer that has studied phylosophy in the Universita' di Roma that lists the ambiguities and paradoxes of italians.
What is one to make of this movie? is it a comedy? is it a mix comedy with serious peasant life portrayal?
Towards the end of the movie, a terrible dramatic event makes it clear that the movie must be categorized as a Drama. But then, why all those comedic overtures? It is as if multiple assistant directors worked on the production at different times, each taking its turn. Even the orchestration of the different caracters made no sense. Giovanni, which we see at the beginning of the movie in a powerful entrance, is never to be seen again. Absurd.
The biggest mistake was to cast Sophia Loren. She was too fine to portray the character of a peasant. She looked much more middle class than peasant class, and it simply didn't help at all on the credence of someone abandoning the conforts of city life for the hardships of living in the hills of the Agro Pontino. She was probably cast because producers wanted her role, being it a cash flow for box office sucess. She is too expressive, to volunteering for outbursts of gestures, verbal communication, for her role of a quiet peasant. And she was too beautiful.