User Reviews

I haven't yet read London's "Martin Eden" (often called "semi-autobiographical" but see below). When I was done watched this movie I said to myself, "This is really a cautionary tale about how young proletarian intellectuals should avoid bourgeois philosophers like Herbert Spencer." But then I did some digging and I found (yes, this is a boast) - that is -exactly- how Jack London intended it to be read! So let's start off by saying that the team get high marks for discerning and staying true to London's main point - and (from what I've picked up) to other parts of the novel as well.

Let's dispose of a couple other things too - yes, the movie takes London's tale of the working class on the west coast of the US in the first decade of the twentieth century and plops it down in Napoli in the 1950's or so. You can lose yourselves in questions like "Why does anyone remember Herbert Spencer at all? Why does nobody mention Mussolini? Shouldn't the Communists be running election campaigns? What is the war coming up - is that World War I or what?" The movie's answer to this is basically, "Look, the working class and the capitalists are what they are. Just deal with it." And for me, I've decided that it works well enough.

So: we have a young worker, brilliant but uneducated, who by a stroke of fortune (as in a Horatio Alger story, I might say) gets introduced to a ruling-class family, and, fatally, to Elena Orsini (Jessica Cressy), the beautiful daughter of the house. She becomes his inspiration to begin a life of self-education and writing - pretty much regardless of anything she says or does, just in her role as the passive focus of his adoration and his readiness to project anything on her.

Martin is skeptical of socialist indoctrination, and values only individual freedom. He resists Elena's obvious attempts to turn him into a standard-issue businessman, but he doesn't see the less obvious and more pervasive "indoctrination" that have taught him what kind of culture to value, what kind of books to read, what kind of individualism to profess.

At the same time he values his working-class associates who are kind to him and support him. His individualist skepticism - reinforced by Herbert Spencer's doctrines of unstoppable evolution and the survival of the fittest - leaves him completely unprepared for what happens when, in a very abrupt turn, he suddenly succeeds. Now what does he do? Is he the "blond beast" himself now (yes, sadly, he has also picked up some Nietzsche as well now - a quite logical development, really)?

In addition to valuable ideas, this film has great acting and production values - it is enjoyable to watch. I was put off a bit by the physical transformation wrought upon Luca Marinelli by the dissipation of success, but maybe the filmmakers meant to make it clear that he just isn't the person he was.

Anyway, this is a very good movie, worth the rewatching, but it's important to bear in mind that it's not just about depression or alcohol or the perils of success or (god forbid) some kind of nihilistic outlook mistakenly projected on London himself. London is problematic in many, many ways, but nihilism wasn't one of them at this time. London, if alive, would, I think, be very happy to have young people get together and argue about what insights would have allowed Martin to avoid his sad denouement, starting, perhaps, with "Listen to women and take them seriously" and "Love has to be more interactive than just adoring a face."

The story is quite simple: a young sailor - who represents the writer himself, namely Jack London, being the novel largely an autobiographical one- he falls in love with a young, beautiful and educated girl of a bourgeois family The book is set in the San Francisco of the early 1900s , while the film is set in Naples and surrounding Campania in an indeterminate age , even if there are so many references to reconstruction of Italy after the www2

Martin, engrossed in knowledge, starts reading mountains of books and begins to write stories with the intention of elevating his social status and thus being able to marry Ruth His novellas are published, he achieves success, money, recognition as a writer, Ruth who had left him begs him to forgive her, ... but at the height of success instead of being one happy and accomplished person he becomes a cynic man, no longer believes in his passions and loses his enthusiasm. What happened ?

To understand this turning point it is necessary to know the political / social thought of Jack London; the history of love between the two young people is only a pretext, while the intention of the writer is to put in highlight and criticize other ideas and values:

• individualism is the first one; it is certainly a good thing to be able to rely on yourself, but if you are driven to excesses produces people who completely lose interest in the needs of the others and who are not able to see beyond their own personal interest
• The capitalist system, in the beginning of the 1900s in the hands of a minority of people, creates masses of low-paid workers, subjected to arduous work and in practice reduce people to a fate of slavery
• We also have a criticism of the educational system whereby knowledge is reduced to "status symbol ", while on the contrary culture should help people to improve and grow themselves

The soundtrack is very beautiful and suggestive: these are light music songs in vogue in Italy in the '50s and '60s , while the photographic narration of the story borders on poetry; often the main narrative is interspersed with old documentaries or clips of amateur videos that give the sense of poverty and of the hard life of the post-war years in Italy, the years that represent our roots, the basis of our current development

Quite faithful to the book for what regards the plot, but really different in ambientation: this movie transports London's story in a middle 900s Napoli and adapts the situation to Italian features. This choice, however, doesn't screw London's concept, that instead is maintained as well: the story of a man that for love tries to transform himself from a popular condition to a life of richness and knowledge.

But love, in this story, is just the narrative input: it is instead the tragedy of a man that wants to pass in bourgeois world and than discovers all human limits of that universe (made of lies and unrespectful behaviours) and at the same time loses part of the ancient world. The suicide is the unique form of freedom for this man strange between men. With an excellent interpretation of Marinelli and wonderful landscape and photography, this movie manages to maintain London's aims and at the same time gives them the beauty of italian atmospheres.

This incredible drama, by a very great director with a stellar and ever impressive filmography of great dramas, is definitely worth checking out - and a great, almost biographically accounted, showcase of the struggle, rise, and ultimately, fall of man.

The actors all do an incredible job, not unexpected when it comes to such great names, of course. The main lead is of course as ever in his roles, impressive, and conveys a vast range of emotions and character development. All of this accompined by a great, very human and very uniquely put together script for the ages.

The cinematography, cutting and editing is splendid, and the film is overall very beautifully put together for sure.

Overall, definitely a standout drama of the year, and one I would definitely recommend for any lover of film!