1940s Italian Cinema
and Neorealism
The Italian Neorealist movement can be compared in importance and worldwide influence to the Russian Montage school or German Expressionism in the 1920s. Neorealism was a literary and cinematic movement which attempted to deal realistically with the effects of the Second World War and the social problems that were engendered during the conflict and immediately afterwards. Neorealist cinema was relatively short-lived and never particularly popular within the country, yet its effects were far reaching and can still be seen today in the work of many directors around the world, particularly in Britain . Neorealism can be regarded both as a theoretical approach and a practical style of filmmaking that gives priority to and, in a sense, celebrates ordinary working class and peasant experience. Many film historians claim that Neorealist filmmaking was a continuation of existing traditions that were apparent in the cinema of Mussolini’s era, yet it is clear that under Fascist control the movement was largely suppressed. Following the fall of Mussolini a distinctive and radical cinema emerged with the clear aim of capturing contemporary social conditions, representing a clear break with film production in the twenty years of Fascist rule.
An earlier example of a film which used aspects of contemporary life as a basis for its narrative was Alessandro Blasetti’s ‘Sole’ (1929). This successful drama was based on Mussolini's vast project of draining the Pontine Marshes . But the arrival of sound delayed interest in realism as the Italian studios exploited the popularity of Neapolitan love songs in musicals, and existing stage plays in romances and boudoir farces. These films were also known as 'white telephone films' because the action inevitably centred on a white telephone in the heroine's bedchamber.
Fascist Control of Cinema
The fascist government of Benito Mussolini, which came to power in 1922, made less direct intervention in the mass media than its German counterpart. There was little overt censorship of the screen despite the fact that Mussolini, like Goebbels in Germany and Stalin in the USSR , personally previewed virtually every feature made in his country. He did, however, make several absurd proclamations such as requiring audiences not to laugh at the Marx Brother’s ‘Duck Soup’ (1933), a hilarious send-up of tin pot dictatorships like his own.
Censorship came in a subtle form in the Fascist state. In 1934 a government body, the Direzione Generale della Cinematografica, was set up to steer a 'general direction' for cinema. The head of this body, Luiggi Freddi, rejected the Nazi interventionist policies in the German film industry of the time and instead encouraged a Hollywood-style 'cinema of distraction'. So long as Italian cinema ignored democracy, Italy 's social and political problems and was uncritical of the fascist regime, the government actively supported it.
This ‘support’ took many forms. In 1932 Mussolini established an international showcase for Italian product in the glamorous, historical setting of Venice . The Venice Film Festival remains second only to Cannes in importance as a European venue for new films. Government subsidies, taxation of foreign films, the establishment of a national film school (unprecedented outside the Soviet Union ), and indirect government control of the distribution and dubbing of foreign films from 1938 boosted the Italian film industry enormously. The importance of film to the Italian State was emphasised when Mussolini opened the enormous Cinecitta film studios in Rome where the sixteen soundstages allowed a doubling of output for the industry. (Cook 1996)
In 1940, as Italy joined forces with the Axis powers, Mussolini banned American films spurring a further surge in domestic production. By this time the government had effective financial and ideological control of the Italian film industry through massive subsidies - in the form of loans that did not have to be repaid if the film was popular or politically useful. Top jobs at the studios were offered to political favourites in order to facilitate government loans. Benitto’s son Vittorio Mussolini, for example, was made head of Europa Films, Italy ’s largest studio. The result of political cronyism and nepotism on this scale was that indirect censorship of Italian film production was increased.
The stifling of any discussion of civil rights, or Italy 's various social problems amongst filmmakers during the fascist regime, and the enforced emphasis on escapism may, in part, explain the incredible energy of the Neorealist movement in the immediate post-war period. Neorealism was a movement with strong theoretical and literary influences, defined almost in opposition to the restrictions of Fascist control. Much of this theory, ironically, emerged from the film school established by Mussolini, the Centro Sperimentale under the direction of the clandestine Marxist, Luigi Chiarini. Centro Sperimentale attracted students such as Roberto Rossellini and Michelangelo Antonioni who would become internationally celebrated directors. From Centro Sperimentale came an important theoretical journal 'Blanco e nero' (Black and White) which was amongst the first to call for films about the problems of 'ordinary people' in 'real settings'.
Neorealist Cinema
Influenced by the theories of Soviet realism and the practical influence of French 'poetic realism' (Antonioni and Visconti had worked with French directors) young Italian directors began making the films that critics, such as Cesare Zavattini had been calling for: showing 'the reality buried under the myths of Fascism'. (Zavattini 1970)
Luchino Visconti’s ‘Ossessione’ (1942) which moved the events of James Caine’s novel ‘The Postman Always Rings Twice’ very successfully to rural Italy , can be regarded as kickstarting the great era of Italian Neorealism. While the film used well known actors in the leading roles, they blended in with the ragged peasants of the impoverished village and town that served as a setting for the story. As Knight (1957) comments:
‘Here were the faces of real Italians, the sights and sounds of everyday Italy mobilised on the screen to tell a powerful and affecting story. It was a revelation, a film so far beyond anything produced in the twenty years of Fascism that its impression upon other Italian filmmakers could only have been profound.’
Unfortunately, as an unauthorised version of Caine’s book, and competing against Warner Brother’s own version of the novel, it was not allowed into the United States until 1975. Hence it is Roberto Rossellini’s remarkable ‘Open City’ (1945) which is usually regarded as inaugurating the Italian neorealist movement. ‘Open City’ deals with the Italian resistance to Nazi occupation of Rome shortly before the American army liberated the city. Filmed on crude newsreel stock of varying quality (some of which was bought from street photographers) and shot in real locations using natural light, Rosselini’s film has the grainy look of a documentary. ‘Open City’ was based on real events of the winter of 1943-44 and, as in ‘Ossessione’ professional actors played only the leading roles. The film’s intensity and power astonished audiences outside Italy . Many people thought they were watching a documentary when they saw the f, in fact, the film incorporated footage shot from rooftops and cars during the Nazi occupation. Hence, Nazi soldiers in some scenes are real, in others they are played by actors.
‘Open City’ is regarded as a key film in the Neorealist movement and it brought Rossellini international recognition. His following film ‘Paisan’ (194 ) is a gritty account of the last months of the war which tells six different stories filmed at various locations around Italy . ‘Paisan’ is even more documentary-like than ‘Open City’ and dealt frankly with its themes, not only in the harrowing battle sequences, but also in its depiction of the frictions between the American forces and local Italians.
Other filmmakers turned away from the subject of the war to explore the postwar problems of Italy . Probably the most famous of all the Neorealist films is Vittorio De Sica’s ‘The Bicycle Thieves’ (1948). ‘The Bicycle Thieves’, scripted by Cesare Zavatini, dealt with the effects of widespread unemployment (22% at the time of the film’s release) by following the fortunes of an impoverished working-class family. The husband and wife are forced to sell their bedsheets in order to buy a bicycle so that the husband, Ricci, can work. This bicycle is then stolen and the film follows Ricci and his adoring son, Bruno, as they try in vain find the bicycle. Meeting indifference from the police and church, Ricci finally tries to steal a bicycle himself, much to the shock of Bruno. The boy’s shame and disillusionment turns, in the final scene of the film, to painful acceptance of his father’s weakness and the son takes Ricci’s hand as they walk away into the crowd. (Bordwell 1994)
‘Bicycle Thieves’ was acted entirely by non-professionals and an actual factory worker played the part of Ricci. The seemingly rambling narrative lacked any facile conclusion, or happy ending, but managed to be compassionate, contemporary and emotionally moving. ‘Bicycle Thieves’ was awarded one of the four Academy Awards for best foreign film earned by De Sica.
From Luchino Visconti, the director of ‘Ossessione’ came another important Neorealist film, ‘The Earth Trembles’ (1948). ‘The Earth Trembles’ is a documentary-style study of working fishermen filmed entirely without actors on location in Sicily . The dialect of the fishermen was reportedly so strong that even some mainland Italians could not understand it. Yet the film was meticulously planned with a highly artistic arrangement of mise-en-scene, smooth camera movement and Hollywood-style editing. Orson Welles is reported to have remarked of the sumptuous photography that Visconti was the only director in the history of the cinema to photograph starving peasants like fashion models in ‘Vogue’ (Cook 1996).
The differences in style between the major directors of the movement: Visconti, De Sica and Rossellini, has led some critics to suggest that Neorealism is less unified than once thought. However, as Gianetti (1996) remarks, there is also a moral or ethical dimension to the movement, which the directors share. This (ideological) characteristic may broadly be summarised as humanist, rather than explicitly Marxist, with an emphasis on emotions over abstract ideas. In terms of Neorealism’s general stylistic features Gianetti notes: an avoidance of neatly plotted stories; the use of actual locations, particularly exteriors; an avoidance of literary dialogue in favour of conversational speech, including dialects; and a ‘documentary’ visual style with an avoidance of artifice in editing, camerawork and lighting.
All of these characteristics can be found in what is regarded as the last great work of the Neorealist movement, ‘Umberto D’ (1952) , by Vittorio De Sica. The film, typically, has a loose, episodic structure that evolves organically from the situation of the character, an old age pensioner who is failing to make ends meet. After a series of humiliations he is finally thrown onto the street by his landlord and is only prevented from committing suicide because he does not want to leave his dog alone in the world. Scripted, like ‘Bicycle Thieves’, by Zavattini it probably came closest to his desire for a film that would show everyday life, without imposed storylines, the gloss of artistic affection, glamour or sentimentality.
‘Umberto D’ was violently attacked by Italian politicians as misrepresenting the nation and, like several other Neorealist films, was liable, according to the undersecretary for entertainment, Giulio Andreotti, to be refused an export license. In truth, the outrage was unnecessary: the Neorealist movement’s energies were waning as the Italian film industry, and the economy generally, improved. From 1949 the rapidly growing studios were offered a degree of protection from American imports and a government loan scheme with ‘political’ strings attached not unlike those found under Mussolini’s rule. Robbed of even limited finance, and lacking the ideological urgency that characterised the end of the war, directors gradually moved on to more personal themes, or produced populist comedies, melodramas, muscle-bound classical yarns and other studio-friendly material. However, the impact of Neorealism continued to be felt amongst such diverse and important directors as India ’s Satyajit Ray , France ’s François Truffaut , America ’s John Cassavetes and Britain ’s Ken Loach.