672-675 3 Films by Rossellini Starring Ingrid Bergman

Discuss releases by Criterion and the films on them. Threads may contain spoilers!
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
matrixschmatrix
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 11:26 pm

Re: Journey to Italy (Roberto Rossellini, 1954)

#126 Post by matrixschmatrix » Tue May 17, 2016 6:20 pm

Ultimately I do think the ending is a triumphant one, and if both Katherine and Alex have lost something in achieving it- Alex has obviously lost nothing worth having, but Katherine has perhaps lost something of the genuine and beautiful romantic streak within her, the quest for something spiritual and worthy of the poem she has kept in her all those years- then that too is part becoming more human. I think both I and the movie have a lot more sympathy for Katherine, and one could make the case that she is accepting too great a compromise in staying with Alex, but even there I think the resolution is less the final embrace that can never be broken than a sense that they're going to try to be a couple, to connect in a way they had never really attempted previously.

It's more that I think the cynical conclusion, the one in which the retreat is built into their advance, is part of what makes the ending entirely believable to me. If it were the ending of Nights of Cabiria, where they totally lose themselves in the ecstasy of movement, it would seem too much change to be believable, but the ending is one in which at least one aspect of what brings them together is the anxiety of being part of the crowd alone, without a partner- and we know what their partnership has entailed, up until now.

User avatar
Trees
Joined: Sun Sep 27, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Journey to Italy (Roberto Rossellini, 1954)

#127 Post by Trees » Mon May 23, 2016 7:50 am

ando wrote: Wouldn't it have been perfect if Bergman was suddenly trampled to death in the stampede during the adoration/final crowd scene? It would have been exactly what the narrative was headed toward.
Now THIS is an ending I could support! I watched this picture and really did not care for it. The story is pedestrian, some of the acting is hammy. It's not well written, nor is it particularly well directed, in my opinion. It wasn't a bad film, but neither was it good. It seemed more like a TV show than a feature film, to me.

I watched this film back-to-back with Kieślowski's Blue on a long train ride. There was no comparison... the Kieślowski picture was far better, in basically every way. There was real, gut-wrenching emotion in Blue. The cinematography and acting and writing were top notch, compared to the rather dull Journey to Italy.

User avatar
Drucker
Your Future our Drucker
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 9:37 am

Re: 672-675 3Films by Roberto Rossellini Starring Ingrid Ber

#128 Post by Drucker » Mon May 23, 2016 9:08 am

You are right there really is no comparison.

tag gallagher
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:41 am
Contact:

Re: 672-675 3Films by Roberto Rossellini Starring Ingrid Ber

#129 Post by tag gallagher » Mon May 23, 2016 9:25 am

I come late to this discussion, not having been notified till today that it was taking place.
Regarding the script and sources for the movie, you'll find information in my book, the revised version of which may be freely downloaded, only 5mb: http://led46yds2b.1fichier.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Regarding the ending and the movie itself, I don't know why people crave tragedy to the extent of denying the obvious. True, we do not know what will happen to Alex and Katherine after their big kiss; but this is true of every happy ending since people began writing stories. It's perverse to ignore everything in the movie, to be insensitive to everything that's been happening to the characters, and then to insist that the ending is perverse. Open your heart!

In fact, the trajectory of the movie has been emphatic and inevitable. Start by watching the movie's credits and opening shot. Listen to the words being sung, loudly. Rossellini is telling you the end already.
This is the land where all words
sweet or bitter
are always words of love.

The lovers' happy ending is inevitable, and it's apparent in every scene. As Rossellini said, there are three characters, the man, the woman, Naples. And at every moment "Naples" keeps intervening, pushing the lovers together.
Note the scene in their hotel room the first evening, before they go down to dinner. I've parsed their exchange in detail both in my vid on the discs and in my book, where each of them reaches out timidly to the other, only to feel rebuffed, and then to try again.

tag gallagher
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:41 am
Contact:

Re: 672-675 3Films by Roberto Rossellini Starring Ingrid Ber

#130 Post by tag gallagher » Fri May 27, 2016 10:53 am

Happy endings are usually beginnings. Snow White kisses her prince, Cinderella kisses her prince, The Ringo Kid and Dallas ride off into the sunrise. And it is enough for us. We don't question their wisdom, their maturity, their future, the sufficiency of their motivation. But when Alex and Katherine kiss at the end of Journey to Italy their new beginning is not enough for some of us. Ditto when Karin screams on top of the volcano, her new beginning is not enough for some of us. And when Irene stays in the insane asylum, we don't like her new beginning either.
A happy ending is an aesthetic form, like a cadence in music. In real life, all stories end in death, there are no happy endings. Which is why happy endings always promote tears.
Rossellini's happy endings remind us the contingency of human consciousness. His movies cry out for a world with place for both the living and the departed. Miracles are constant.

User avatar
hearthesilence
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
Location: NYC

Re: 672-675 3 Films by Rossellini Starring Ingrid Bergman

#131 Post by hearthesilence » Fri May 27, 2016 11:45 am

I'm late to this discussion too. It's fine to have skepticism, but a viewer eventually has to make a decent effort in seeing how or why an ending fits in the overall scheme of the movie instead of departing from their own expectations.

User avatar
ando
Bringing Out El Duende
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: New York City

Re: 672-675 3Films by Roberto Rossellini Starring Ingrid Ber

#132 Post by ando » Fri May 27, 2016 12:28 pm

tag gallagher wrote: A happy ending is an aesthetic form, like a cadence in music. In real life, all stories end in death, there are no happy endings. Which is why happy endings always promote tears.
This alignment of death with unhappiness is childish. Often, the best - and happiest result, in life and art - is death. It must occur for life to continue. This dimwitted couple don't get it and will spend forever looking for happiness. You can see it in the first frame and endure it for the remaining 90 minutes.

User avatar
Sloper
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 10:06 pm

Re: 672-675 3 Films by Rossellini Starring Ingrid Bergman

#133 Post by Sloper » Fri May 27, 2016 12:44 pm

I'll come back to this properly in a few weeks when I'm not buried in essay-marking, but my point wasn't quite that the ending hadn't been anticipated at all. I can see how it's foreshadowed by a lot of what happens in the film, and Drucker outlined this very well earlier in the thread. But this layer of the narrative seems trite to me - as, I have to say, does the idea that Naples has some magical marriage-repairing quality that transforms even the bitterest language into 'words of love' - and I think something more complex and interesting is also going on at the same time. It's in this sense that I see the ending as a 'betrayal of what the film is really about', but I admit that my use of the word 'really' here is biased and problematic. I'm sure my own pessimism colours my reaction to this film, but my heart is not 'closed': I'm a sucker for the endings of, for instance,
SpoilerShow
After Tomorrow, Brief Encounter and Rossellini's own Fear
in which a seemingly doomed marriage is suddenly and miraculously consummated or repaired.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Europa '51 (Roberto Rossellini, 1952)

#134 Post by Mr Sausage » Mon Dec 09, 2019 6:20 am

DISCUSSION ENDS MONDAY, December 23rd.

Members have a two week period in which to discuss the film before it's moved to its dedicated thread in The Criterion Collection subforum. Please read the Rules and Procedures.

This thread is not spoiler free. This is a discussion thread; you should expect plot points of the individual films under discussion to be discussed openly. See: spoiler rules.

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

I encourage members to submit questions, either those designed to elicit discussion and point out interesting things to keep an eye on, or just something you want answered. This will be extremely helpful in getting discussion started. Starting is always the hardest part, all the more so if it's unguided. Questions can be submitted to me via PM.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Europa '51 (Roberto Rossellini, 1952)

#135 Post by therewillbeblus » Mon Dec 09, 2019 1:01 pm

This is what I just posted in the 50s thread:
therewillbeblus wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 1:04 pm
Europe ‘51 is a wonderful picture of the transformation of a person from polar opposite sides across the spectrum of humanism. If Stromboli was a portrait of the painful road to achieve the willingness to change one's spiritual position, this takes that idea (the most difficult part of the process, and why it took a whole film to detail) and runs with it by widening the scope of focus to the path of transforming selfishness turned to selflessness. Sure, Rossellini is turning Bergman into Francis and providing a social commentary on how unwelcoming our cultures are to such a force of good, but it’s also an incredibly optimistic film that proposes further hope not for Bergman but perhaps the rest of us if we followed suit. The smile at the end signifies a full life, as she refuses to resign her principles and accepts her issued fate without committing cognitive dissonance, like Joan of Arc, while all the people she helped cheer her on from outside. Are any of these people from the first 99% of her life before the transformation? Is that not some indication of a happy ending? Rossellini doesn’t think it takes a saint to be treated as one, or perhaps saints are just like you and me, but one thing is for sure and that's that the pulsing gratitude at the end is so overwhelmingly beautiful that Rossellini somehow turns tragedy into a transcendental euphoria.
Most readings of this film I've come across point out its pessimism, but while there is a dose of hopelessness present in a macro sense, in showing how Francis wouldn't "work" pragmatically in today's time, the film doesn't feel cynical or nihilistic. I also fail to see how it's fair to draw this point from one person adopting this attitude alone against a fixed system in society (This has always been the case according to systems theorists, and if it only took one figure to disrupt a system with ease - whether towards good or bad aims - we'd have bigger problems to worry about with those implications of our vulnerabilities!) Back to the film, just because Rossellini demonstrates significant barriers to this spiritual way of life, I can't see him advocating for people to stop trying. The message is clear to me that being a force of good will still change the world, as Bergman has helped a series of people willing to come to her like Francis' children. Just because she isn't as "free" to practice these principles as he was doesn't limit the power of the actions themselves, or the capacity for anyone to impact people in the same, positive way. If anything, this film feels like a call for more people to adopt this attitude, as Rossellini himself tried to do, and regardless of whether one affects the larger system or issues help in small interactions, those actions are worth committing. This fits with Rossellini's view of broad existentialism in doing the best one can, acting on their morals fearlessly, while we live this life - a present focused-mindset that doesn't weigh the worth of one's actions by the objective results they will yield. If this is how we reach spirituality, in stripping our selves of the baggage of psychologies, specifically fear and ego functions, then is this film still not optimistic or at least confident in Bergman's path as one she would and should take again, regardless of the consequences?

I'm curious if anyone else read the film this way, or at least ambiguously as a film with both a sad and happy ending?

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Europa '51 (Roberto Rossellini, 1952)

#136 Post by knives » Tue Dec 10, 2019 8:09 am

I kind of agree. More so than a spiritual I see this as a therapeutic film. It's no secret that Rossellini went through his own experience with the death of a child. Obviously he didn't become a saint as a result, but from misery he did change his films to be more poetic and less just a popular showing of the political moment. Like everything this goes back to Year Zero which saw him move from a political to a spiritual commentator. In that sense the film is optimistic about who Rossellini has become.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Europa '51 (Roberto Rossellini, 1952)

#137 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Dec 10, 2019 2:45 pm

I agree as far as Rossellini's own reflective participation in the work, but I feel that the audience's engagement may reach the same result of spiritual shift through different avenues. While Rossellini's reflection of self is present in a lot of his early 50s films he is more interested in exploring the most extreme fantasies or metaphors to reach that therapeutic value. For example, both Stromboli and this film are nightmares-become-fantasies in the swaying of intense emotions and physical demonstrations of action. Rossellini uses these stories to therapeutically evaluate his own stance by going to such extremes in them that are so fantastical they defy his reality. Setting this as an unreachable goal or expression of the ultimate spiritual awakening (Stromboli) for himself certainly allows for him to achieve optimism, motivation, and strengthening his own spiritual drives through melodramatic conventions, but I think that he is just as keen on doing this for the audience, which is where I suppose my interests lie. Thus what is therapeutic for him becomes more philosophical for us, as we are not making the film and infusing our own history into it as it molds into its construction, nor are we playing with conventions to mimic our fears, wants, hopes, dreams. We are observers who are taking in these ideas filtered through these conventions, and have our own spiritual awakening as a result of a process of relating to Rossellini's therapy, feeling and shifting perspectives rather than working through any of our own baggage that planted the artistic seed as Rossellini did. We then project all of these fears, wants, hopes, dreams, various ideas and baggages, onto the material to mold it to us after it's already been created by the artist. We may have a resulting therapeutic experience, or purely a spiritual one (though I'd argue they can be one in the same), or just an emotional response without any more information to yield change, which is perfectly fine on its own. My point is that the film may be very intentionally therapeutic for Rossellini as the artist in his own process of building it, but like a lot of his early 50s work best exemplified by Flowers of St. Francis, he gives us a canvas with which we can access more easily without as much concrete parameters in how or why we will access it. We are offered an opportunity to join him on his (more defined and personally therapeutic) spiritual journey, though he is humble enough to allow us to form that journey ourselves along any kind of process (therapeutic-psychological, therapeutic-spiritual, therapeutic-emotional, as a distanced melodrama, as any of those signifiers sans "therapeutic," etc.) that will give us the degree of optimism and spiritual experience that he has given himself, whilst knowing that it will be and must be individualized - hence the ambiguity of his work.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Europa '51 (Roberto Rossellini, 1952)

#138 Post by Rayon Vert » Sat Dec 14, 2019 12:14 am

therewillbeblus wrote:
Mon Dec 09, 2019 1:01 pm
I'm curious if anyone else read the film this way, or at least ambiguously as a film with both a sad and happy ending?
Thanks for having set up a good question that gives me an idea around which to organize thoughts!

Just rewatching this, I don’t see how this film can be described as pessimistic, unless one thinks that representations of the life of Jesus - or any other spiritual rebel transformed as martyr because of society - are pessimistic. One reading would indeed see this, yes, given Flowers as a recent film of Rossellini’s, as how "Francis wouldn't 'work' today", to use your words, but I think such a reading would ignore that Irene’s story here, the radical mystic-in-action (à la Simone Weil to use a fairy contemporary figure) confronting a limited world, is the archetypal story of the rebel saint, starting with Jesus himself. I’d argue the discussion among the authorities near the end, which centers on the recognition of Irene’s impossibly radical Christian spirit, shows the film has this understanding. The outward “failure” is a sign itself of the spiritual success. (As, yes, expressed also in that last look of Irene’s seeing the love-in-action of her “disciples”.) In that way the film very much feels at one with the Christian philosophy and therefore quite traditional even in the very "radicalness" of its message.

Whether the film works on the viewer therapeutically, in terms of fostering hope, I have a hard time giving a general answer to. The film seems to exist in part to show up the shallowness of the bourgeois world, first, and second to argue that the socialist paradise dream (represented by Andrea’s views) is another false, i.e. spiritually insufficient, option. At the very least engages the viewer to think about modern social life and those perspectives.
therewillbeblus wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 1:04 pm
Europe ‘51 is a wonderful picture of the transformation of a person from polar opposite sides across the spectrum of humanism. If Stromboli was a portrait of the painful road to achieve the willingness to change one's spiritual position, this takes that idea (the most difficult part of the process, and why it took a whole film to detail) and runs with it by widening the scope of focus to the path of transforming selfishness turned to selflessness.
The comparison with Stromboli is a good one. What I would nuance in the parallel, and why Stromboli works strongly for me whereas this doesn’t nearly as much, is that the former film is precisely about that inner journey, for the whole length of it, like you've said, and it keeps the viewer in its grip for the duration. Here, by contrast, Irene’s transformation occurs relatively early in the film, and even though she still suffers and emotes afterwards, the rest of the film is more about how showing how the world reacts to such a figure. Personally, relative to Karin in the earlier film, I start losing a fair amount of interest in Irene as a character as soon as she achieves this transformation.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Europa '51 (Roberto Rossellini, 1952)

#139 Post by therewillbeblus » Sat Dec 14, 2019 2:38 am

Great thoughts, RV! I really like your comparisons to Jesus in the goals in the embodiment of a Saint-like figure, specifically that they are centered on society as an area to mold with positive action coming from within, and yet divorced from society’s impact on their actions. It’s a one way street of emitting positive utilitarian principles into demonstration without a possibility of being persuaded to question such actions because one’s beliefs and identity are so fixed in confidence.

I prefer Stromboli as well, but I think that’s because I love that Rossellini takes a film so show that path to willingness, to the breaking down of the complex ego towards surrender which begets that change within and prompts spiritual growth and acceptance. It’s so relatable, the process of giving up control, universal even (literally everyone encounters and to some degree reaches this developmental milestone just by growing up), but it doesn’t stop- it’s a consistent process that must be continuously applied to various areas of life in both general and specific circumstances. In the most extreme cases, it often takes being completely trapped to require such an intense drainage of the psyche towards spirituality, and Rossellini somehow captured this with a camera.

However, I do love Europe ‘51 because it’s a more hopeful film, and I actually find the second half with Irene becoming Franciscan the best parts by far. Watching her show unconditional devotion and an untainted honesty and commitment in her actions is so powerful in the wake of her tragedy, that it makes me believe that spiritual (not necessarily religious, or actually at all) growth can be found and maintained for anyone. It makes me want to go out and do more, and makes me think, even know, that I can; and that if I do I will be rewarded for it not by society but by that spiritual sensation from within, and Rossellini makes a good argument that this is all that really matters.

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Europa '51 (Roberto Rossellini, 1952)

#140 Post by Rayon Vert » Sat Dec 14, 2019 1:28 pm

Perfect encapsulation of Stromboli's meaning re: surrender/acceptance (or "let go and let God"), tw. I agree it's a universal principle of life, in addition to being a truth at the center of every spiritual tradition, whether you're religious or not. Though some of us having to keep learning it over and over. ;)

Some other random thoughts. I don't think Irene ever truly becomes a saint here, i.e. completely divested of ego. Near the end she's asked about what guides her, and she says it's hate for herself that propels her towards love for others. So not quite the achievement of ego death, but maybe that makes her still more relatable as a person. Perhaps, though, that non-verbal reaction of hers at film's end signals a further transformation towards complete "sainthood".

The director's "spiritual" films of the early-to-mid 50s were criticized for having left behind social commentary and neo-realism. This really isn't the case here. The film starts with a remark (can't remember exactly) by two people less well off in the city as the camera then shows Irene's expensive car rolling by. Irene's following the path of "love" after her transformation makes her leave her privileged world for living among the poor and oppressed (again, Jesus). We also glimpse the reality of factory life. Meanwhile the film constantly foregrounds the general historical reality, world political events currently occurring, the perceived threat of war again, and constant recognition of the previous war's effects. One way this happens are the suggestions of the child's death as a result of war, i.e. Andrea's comments of the "how can a child not be affected by witnessing war?" kind, and the notion that the child's feeling abandoned by her mother was caused by the shift in the attention she gave to her husband after he returned from the war.

One thing occurring in the drama surrounding the child that I don't think the film really resolves or addresses is the strong Oedipal theme at the beginning. The boy wants her mother's attention exclusively, his father is obviously a competitor, and there's a sexual component when the boy (in the Italian version I was watching at least) chastises her for being "naked" when she comes to tell him to stop acting up during the middle of the party in her revealing dress. The father also "seals" the boy's demise by being so insensitive to his distress during that same party. The theme is brought up but is just left hanging when the tragic events unfold.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Europa '51 (Roberto Rossellini, 1952)

#141 Post by therewillbeblus » Sat Dec 14, 2019 2:00 pm

Rayon Vert wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 1:28 pm
Some other random thoughts. I don't think Irene ever truly becomes a saint here, i.e. completely divested of ego. Near the end she's asked about what guides her, and she says it's hate for herself that propels her towards love for others. So not quite the achievement of ego death, but maybe that makes her still more relatable as a person. Perhaps, though, that non-verbal reaction of hers at film's end signals a further transformation towards complete "sainthood".
Absolutely, though (I know this is a contentious opinion) I don’t think anyone can be divested of ego; and don’t believe in true altruism, as there’s always some subconscious or unconscious ego drive present even in the most “selfless” of actions, tied to some internal principle that feeds one’s conscience and stability of the self. However this is entirely subjective and in other non-western cultures people score higher on the altruism scales because their social contexts can be more collectivistic, so perhaps I should say I don’t think it’s possible for those who grow up in western cultures.

But it doesn’t matter what the unconscious driving force is here, as her reality is that she commits these actions due to strong convictions that refuse to be compromised by her milieu’s social constructions. I agree that her own selfish (in definition of the term, no negative connotation) motivations only fuel this call to action and the fact that her “self” is involved in the energy she brings to the actions only make them more humane and authentic. Here action trumps the specifics of the intent, although those underlying pieces definitely make her more relatably human in her spirituality than if she became an angelic personification of nirvana. Seeing her spiritual awakening override her restraints of humanity (i.e. self-preservation) is as humbling and inspiring as any film in memory.

User avatar
Sloper
Joined: Tue May 29, 2007 10:06 pm

Re: Europa '51 (Roberto Rossellini, 1952)

#142 Post by Sloper » Sat Dec 14, 2019 5:41 pm

Rayon Vert wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 1:28 pm
One thing occurring in the drama surrounding the child that I don't think the film really resolves or addresses is the strong Oedipal theme at the beginning. The boy wants her mother's attention exclusively, his father is obviously a competitor, and there's a sexual component when the boy (in the Italian version I was watching at least) chastises her for being "naked" when she comes to tell him to stop acting up during the middle of the party in her revealing dress. The father also "seals" the boy's demise by being so insensitive to his distress during that same party. The theme is brought up but is just left hanging when the tragic events unfold.
Also worth noting the father's later confession of his jealousy over Andrea, and his suspicion that Michel wasn't really his son - Irene's moral crusade becomes sexually threatening to him. There are a lot of interlinked jealousies and resentments here. Irene and Michel formed an intense, intimate bond during the bombing raids, and Michel misses that state of mortal danger and the maternal love that came with it (and the absence of his father) so much so that he's willing to injure himself to get it all back. Irene's decadent bourgeois lifestyle is also a 'competitor', drawing her away from him. So when she abandons that lifestyle to help people who are still living in a state of crisis even though the war is over, this is her way of posthumously fulfilling Michel's wishes, and of course her husband (who is so invested in that bourgeois lifestyle) reads Irene's behaviour as marital infidelity, filial impiety (towards her mother), and as rendering their dead son illegitimate; she’s undermining all the pillars of bourgeois respectability. I’m not sure what to make of all the complex Oedipal stuff going on here, beyond saying that: a) I love how Michel’s jealousy at the start is mirrored (and sort of retroactively vindicated) by his father’s jealousy towards the end, and b) more generally, it’s astonishing how many profound and surprising things Rossellini had to say about the aftermath of the war. Kind of an obvious statement, but I thought I should say it before moving on to the next bit...
therewillbeblus wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 2:38 am
However, I do love Europe ‘51 because it’s a more hopeful film, and I actually find the second half with Irene becoming Franciscan the best parts by far. Watching her show unconditional devotion and an untainted honesty and commitment in her actions is so powerful in the wake of her tragedy, that it makes me believe that spiritual (not necessarily religious, or actually at all) growth can be found and maintained for anyone. It makes me want to go out and do more, and makes me think, even know, that I can; and that if I do I will be rewarded for it not by society but by that spiritual sensation from within, and Rossellini makes a good argument that this is all that really matters.
It seems to me that she isn’t only rewarded with a spiritual sensation from within, but by the emotional reciprocation of her feelings from the people she helps. What you said in your earlier post about audiences having the space to react to the film in their own way (whatever personal and therapeutic meaning it might have had for Rossellini) resonates very strongly with me, because I don’t have an ounce of spirituality in me and I don’t primarily see the film in terms of ‘spiritual awakening’. To me it feels very grounded in emotions and relationships. Irene seeks out reiterations of the emotional bond Michel wanted to cling to: she wants to be with people in moments of crisis, stress, death (or near-death, or near-suicide) and just be there for them, telling them that they’re not alone, making them feel loved and cared for.

My problem with the film has to do with the black-and-white contrast between the ways in which people respond to Irene. The poor people she helps are grateful and treat her as a saint; the bourgeois types all think she’s crazy. I guess this serves the radical, confrontational point that Rossellini is making, but I can’t help finding the ending a little bit trite. Flowers of St. Francis felt like a more authentic portrayal of how messy and awkward and comical the process of loving your neighbour is, in practice. The prostitute is belligerent at first, but quickly succumbs to Irene’s kindness; for a minute there it seemed like Masina’s character might be taking advantage of Irene, but no she turns up at the end weeping sincerely over her benefactor’s incarceration… I don’t know, something about it doesn’t ring true for me, but I’m perhaps being overly cynical. Tag Gallagher would certainly think so, judging by his reaction to my (and others’) scepticism over the ending of Journey to Italy a few years go. But I’m not saying that I want the film to show Irene failing miserably in her attempts to do good – just that a little more nuance in the way others react to her would help me to open my heart to this story.

I see this film as occupying a place somewhere in between The Passion of Joan of Arc and Red Desert, and the comparison might help to explain what I’ve just been saying.

In Dreyer’s film, there’s a wonderful moment towards the end where even the most brutal, unsympathetic of the judges burst into tears at the prospect of Joan’s devotion and integrity. It’s not that they suddenly believe – as others do – that Joan really is a saint. Their reaction creates a space in which the audience can feel the tragic force of what’s happening, even if they don’t buy into Joan’s religious experience. I don’t believe in God or angels or miracles, but I also don’t think Joan is mentally ill. I think she’s wrong (factually, not morally) but it’s a measure of the film’s power that I felt like a patronising dick head even as I wrote that. I’m genuinely, deeply moved and humbled by the idea that a person can be as human and fallible and scared of being burnt alive as she is, and yet also be so dedicated to doing ‘the right thing’ that they will willingly go to the pyre in order to do so. It’s an amazing story, and the film sells it by doing justice to the full spectrum of Joan’s emotions and the emotions of those around her. She tries so hard to get through to people, and when she does get through to them it feels hard-won, and earned. There’s a lot of emotional complexity in Europa ‘51 as well, but as with Journey to Italy, I feel like there are also moments of over-simplification that dull the story’s impact, especially at the end.

In Red Desert, there’s a tension between different perspectives on the protagonist’s behaviour: is she mentally ill, or is she the only sane person in Ravenna? What makes Antonioni’s film so clever is that it forces you to see Giuliana from the ‘robot’ perspective a lot of the time, and even to share the frustrations of her prick of a husband. Her predicament is moving and horrifying because you can feel the strength of that community/environment that says ‘stop making a fuss and just conform’. Unlike Irene, poor Giuliana
SpoilerShow
fails every step of the way, never quite managing to form an emotional connection with anyone – not by being kind to strangers, not even by caring for her seemingly afflicted son who, in a lovely inversion of the Rossellini film, turns out not to need his (suicidal) mother at all.
In Europa ‘51, Irene just seems to have too much incentive to carry on with her new way of life, and no real incentive to return to her old one. I think that lack of tension is problematic. But maybe I’m missing and/or mis-interpreting something?

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Europa '51 (Roberto Rossellini, 1952)

#143 Post by Rayon Vert » Sat Dec 14, 2019 6:01 pm

Sloper wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 5:41 pm
Flowers of St. Francis felt like a more authentic portrayal of how messy and awkward and comical the process of loving your neighbour is, in practice. The prostitute is belligerent at first, but quickly succumbs to Irene’s kindness; for a minute there it seemed like Masina’s character might be taking advantage of Irene, but no she turns up at the end weeping sincerely over her benefactor’s incarceration… I don’t know, something about it doesn’t ring true for me, but I’m perhaps being overly cynical. (...)

In Europa ‘51, Irene just seems to have too much incentive to carry on with her new way of life, and no real incentive to return to her old one. I think that lack of tension is problematic.
Just to say I feel those things too, and they may be contributing factors to my feeling a little lukewarm about the film.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Europa '51 (Roberto Rossellini, 1952)

#144 Post by therewillbeblus » Sat Dec 14, 2019 9:52 pm

Sloper wrote:
Sat Dec 14, 2019 5:41 pm
What you said in your earlier post about audiences having the space to react to the film in their own way (whatever personal and therapeutic meaning it might have had for Rossellini) resonates very strongly with me, because I don’t have an ounce of spirituality in me and I don’t primarily see the film in terms of ‘spiritual awakening’. To me it feels very grounded in emotions and relationships. Irene seeks out reiterations of the emotional bond Michel wanted to cling to: she wants to be with people in moments of crisis, stress, death (or near-death, or near-suicide) and just be there for them, telling them that they’re not alone, making them feel loved and cared for.
See I have a very loose definition of spirituality, as do many people I’ve come across, and would define it as any experience that removes one from the neuroses of the self towards a more peripheral perspective of life (not a connection to god but to the world, nature, or other people). You may not think you have an ounce of spirituality in you but I think what you’re describing as your positive experience with the movie is similar to mine, I guess we just categorize it differently. I think Irene’s ability to emerge from the self-pity of her tragedy to extend herself emotionally to others is about as “spiritual” as it gets.

tag gallagher
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:41 am
Contact:

Re: 672-675 3 Films by Rossellini Starring Ingrid Bergman

#145 Post by tag gallagher » Mon Jan 06, 2020 10:05 pm

I think people experience the movie as the happy ending it is, when they relate more intimately to the characters from the very first scenes.

User avatar
ryannichols7
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 2:26 pm

Re: 672-675 3 Films by Rossellini Starring Ingrid Bergman

#146 Post by ryannichols7 » Thu Nov 02, 2023 4:12 pm

revisited Stromboli last night as part of a run through Rossellini's greater filmography and was initially beyond annoyed at Criterion's lack of subtitling English dialogue in films that include other languages. but as the movie went on I learned to live with it - while it made Paisà borderline unwatchable for me (thankful for the BFI's edition!), I think it actually helped Stromboli in a weird way. since I last watched the movie I've become familiar with The Naked Island (basically a silent film) and this movie reminded me a lot of that one in how tuned in with its environment on a remote island is. Ingmar Bergman would hit on this a bit in the 60s with his Faro films too, so it's pretty interesting how these directors all had some sort of synergy with the isolationist feeling of these films. in Paisà, the dialogue is so crucial to the film (much to my behest, I'm not a huge fan of it, but I also don't like omnibus films usually) but in Stromboli I was able to put less focus on what Karin would say, adding another dimension to her inability to communicate with the locals of the island. the smoldering burn of the island itself became all the more fascinating, even in the more melodramatic, Gone With the Wind-esque moments that blended Hollywood melodrama with Rossellini's pure poetry. not a perfect film by any means, but an incredibly fascinating one. already still thinking about it this morning.

that said, as if it wasn't overkill enough to have the animal killings in the movie, Criterion including full length clips of both the tuna hunt and the ferret/rabbit scene in Adriano Apra's interview were borderline sadistic. who on earth made that call? I don't advocate films being cut ala the BBFC, but these aren't exactly scenes I wanted to see again! I don't remember ever watching the documentary about Stromboli that appears on the disc, but I'll be doing that in short order.

tag gallagher
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 11:41 am
Contact:

Re: 672-675 3 Films by Rossellini Starring Ingrid Bergman

#147 Post by tag gallagher » Thu Nov 02, 2023 7:34 pm

I'm pretty sure Criterion Paisà has English subtitles and would be surprised if Stromboli doesn't. Yes it'd be nice if they'd include, say, Italian subs when people speak Italian, et al. I subbed a couple dozen Straub movies and usually included subs in the original language as well as English.
If you want Stromboli neighbor movies, try Dieterle's VOLCANO/VULCANO, with Magnani same year as Stromboli, editions in English or subtitled Italian. It's said she'd scream curses across at Rossellini every night.

Post Reply