The Criterion Collection

[rkish]

Originally Posted by jcs913

Rich, you can still rent the actual discs from netflix. Only the streaming is going away.

I hear ya John...streaming is the lazy man's way of seeing these films at a moments notice...and it saves rentals for other films of interest.

[cyniclaus]

Originally Posted by Harry Caul

I hope you mean today? Because if you want to call all Italian Cinema in general that I simply think you don't know it. I mean just as a example The good the bad and the ugly is not interesting? Or Hands over the City not relevant? A "newer" Italian Movie I did like was Vincere.

Well, I would never claim to be an expert on Italian cinema or even well-versed. It goes back to my point about it being hard to find a good Italian film since most of the famous examples are 1) dressed-up documentaries or political essays, 2) drown themselves in melodramatics or sexuality, or 3) pile on so much art, dream or symbolism that they lose their ability to convey an interesting narrative. Of course there are exceptions, but at times it can be frustrating looking for that needle in the haystack

I wasn't really considering spaghetti westerns or gialli in the context of this discussion. They are part of sub-genres that eclipse their Italian identity, with the Westerns often not even being filmed in the Italian language. That being said, I do greatly prefer Leone's westerns to anything ever put out by Hollywood. I guess from that perspective you could say that the spaghetti westerns and gialli are Italy's true claims to fame in 20th century cinema, much as Japan has it's samurai and yakuza films, or France its political and crime thrillers. What disappoints me is, unlike in the cases of the French or Japanese films, very little if any of the contemporary national culture is expressed through the films. The Italian people are amongst the most chaotic, passionate and vivacious spirits on the planet and that is so very rarely captured on film. The closest we get is the antiquated cliche of the "Italian lover".

[Harry Caul]

i think the italian Cinema went into the wrong direction in the late 70s with the money they made with My name is nobody and started to produce bad comedies. But the in the 60s they made great Movies. And I don't think Poliziottos, Giallos and Western had no Italian identity, maybe the identity is a little eclipsed. Gotta love Tomas Milian.
On the other hand I hope you don't think Battle of Algiers or Hands over the City are just a dressed up documentaries. And if you don't like GOMORRHA O.K it's still the old spirit of Italian Neo-Realismo, not for everyone I admit. And it's hard to reach the level the Book had like you said, but every book that had so much impact is hard to top.

[Schonfelder]

Originally Posted by cyniclaus

I guess from that perspective you could say that the spaghetti westerns and gialli are Italy's true claims to fame in 20th century cinema, much as Japan has it's samurai and yakuza films, or France its political and crime thrillers.

What about Neo-Realism ? Rossellini ? De Sica, Visconti, Cottafavi, Antonioni, Pasolini, Zurlini, De Seta, Olmi, Rosi, Bellocchio, Fellini, Moniccelli, Scola, Moretti...

[Schonfelder]

And yes, of course that Giallo and Spaghetti Westerns had to do with Italian identity... And from that genres you can get other great masters of Italian cinema, Leone, Bava, Sollima, Argento, Corbucci, Fulci, Martino...

[SpiderBaby]

Roberto Rossellini
Michelangelo Antonioni
Sergio Corbucci
Pier Paolo Pasolini
Mario Bava
Tinto Brass
Marco Ferreri
Gillo Pontecorvo
Liliana Cavani
Sergio Martino
Lucio Fulci
Valerio Zurlini
Vittorio De Sica
Ermanno Olmi
Francesco Rosi
Bernardo Bertolucci
Sergio Sollima
Luchino Visconti
Damiano Damiani
Marco Bellocchio (Fists in the Pocket is all I need)

And there are many other Italian films after that I am more interested in than Fellini's films, and I didn't even have to include Argento and Leone.

[Harry Caul]

Originally posted by SpiderBaby


Marco Bellocchio (Fists in the Pocket is all I need)

Give Vincere a try, if you haven't seen it. I was really surprised what the old Man delivered with this Movie.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Vince.../12612/#Review

[SpiderBaby]

Originally Posted by Harry Caul

Give Vincere a try, if you haven't seen it. I was really surprised what the old Man delivered with this Movie.

https://www.blu-ray.com/movies/Vince.../12612/#Review

Thanks.

Since we are on this subject,

there has been a film I have been wanting to see and wondering if any of you have seen it. It's The Long Night of '43 from Florestano Vancini. Just thought since we were talking about Italian filmmakers I would see if any of you have seen it. Here is the mubi page: http://mubi.com/films/28930

[Schonfelder]

Vincere was one of the best films i saw in theaters last year.

[ShellOilJunior]

Cinema Paradiso is a magnificent Italian film. Granted, the love angle is a bit sappy but the love of cinema conveyed is great.

The part when

[Show spoiler]the cinema is demolished is devastating.

[cyniclaus]

Originally Posted by Schonfelder

What about Neo-Realism ? Rossellini ? De Sica, Visconti, Cottafavi, Antonioni, Pasolini, Zurlini, De Seta, Olmi, Rosi, Bellocchio, Fellini, Moniccelli, Scola, Moretti...

I'm not trying to belittle the genre as it has its merits, but the persistance of Neo-Realism as the defining moment in Italian cinema is one of the problems. It was a decade-long period half a century ago and captures an era that bears little resemblance to contemporary Italian culture. I just find it a shame that after the 50's it's almost as if Italian cinema was unwilling or unable to put forth a unified effort to encapsulate the cultural change and emerging, vibrant national identity of the country, preferring to make slapstick for the proleteriat or self-important films that wallowed in nostalgia or symbolism for the inelligentsia and film festival crowd. This dichotomy reached it's most apparent in the 1980's where there was virtually no middle ground between the ribaldry and the royalty. It's as if Italian cinema stopped being able to take itself seriously without looking backwards or to the clouds. As Harry mentioned, they did find exportable niches with the westerns and giallos and started pumping those out, but these were just internationally-oriented Cinecitta inventions, not a reflection of Italian culture.

The best "authentically Italian" cinema I've seen has been from the last two decades, spearheaded inititally by directors such as Tornatore and Salvatores. But even now you need to wade through a sea of cookie cutter disposable box office flash grenades to find anything that has any true meaning or contemporary insight. Arguably, this has a lot to do with Berlusconi's virtual monopolization of the media that kept the studios in the gutter. Anybody who cares should watch Videocracy - available streaming on Netflix.

[octagon]

This is rather embarassing but after review it would appear the Italian section of my film history is pretty much limited to spaghetti westerns and the Emanuelle series.

Not that there's anything wrong with either of those, of course.

I'm just saying.

[P@t_Mtl]

Originally Posted by octagon

This is rather embarassing but after review it would appear the Italian section of my film history is pretty much limited to spaghetti westerns and the Emanuelle series.

Not that there's anything wrong with either of those, of course.

I'm just saying.

Most of the main Emanuelle movies are actually from France, not Italy

[Schonfelder]

Originally Posted by cyniclaus

I'm not trying to belittle the genre as it has its merits, but the persistance of Neo-Realism as the defining moment in Italian cinema is one of the problems. It was a decade-long period half a century ago and captures an era that bears little resemblance to contemporary Italian culture

If you look again at the names i and SpiderBaby mentioned, you'll see that a lot of them emerged years (sometimes decades) from Neo-Realism. Others have their work spanning for decades, like Rossellini or Antonioni. So, the argument that "Neo-Realism lasted a decade" is not valid, because what counts is that the directors that emerged there continued their work for decades (and even changed their styles along the way)
And really, "encapsulate the cultural change" is kind of subjective when we're talking about art, isn't it ? Next thing you'll say that a Michelangelo painting is outdated.
Art is timeless, and in the case of cinema, is much more important to judge the style of the director than the scenery and surroundings of a scene. And to be fair, Rossellini, who practically invented modern cinema, and Antonioni and Pasolini are still more "modern" than almost every director of today (or who came after them, for the matter).

Originally Posted by cyniclaus

or symbolism for the inelligentsia and film festival crowd.

Just had to quote this bit, because this kind of mentality is so wrong... So, every film that is not intended for the regular popcorn-eater is diminished as "for the film festival crowd" - when, at last, is "that crowd" who's really interested in cinema. But what is even wronger in that sentence is to think that a director has to work biased on this or that kind of audience. This sounds like that kind of rants about modern painting ("oh man, even my 8-year-old son can do a thing like that, this is just pretentious shite for the intellectual crowd !").

Originally Posted by cyniclaus

But even now you need to wade through a sea of cookie cutter disposable box office flash grenades to find anything that has any true meaning or contemporary insight.

Well, that's about the actual state of cinema in general, isn't it ? Not an Italian privilege, i guess.

[whbinder]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

Cinema Paradiso is a magnificent Italian film. Granted, the love angle is a bit sappy but the love of cinema conveyed is great.

The ending with

[Show spoiler]the film reels

gets me every single time. Also, I was more than delighted at the extended homage "The Simpsons" did last year to the film.

[cyniclaus]

Originally Posted by Schonfelder

you'll see that a lot of them emerged years (sometimes decades) from Neo-Realism....Others have their work spanning for decades, like Rossellini or Antonioni. So, the argument that "Neo-Realism lasted a decade" is not valid

I won't dwell on it since it's practically irrelevant to the point I'm trying to make, but Italian neorealism as a period was finished by the mid-'50s.

Of course there continue to be films influenced by it and contemporary takes on it just as you see with film noir...not "dead", perhaps, but definitely no longer "in vogue" or being produced significantly.

Originally Posted by Schonfelder

And really, "encapsulate the cultural change" is kind of subjective when we're talking about art, isn't it?

Absolutely. But (And I definitely picked the wrong thread to say this in ) not every film is "art" in the sense that you refer to it.

I think we are arguing two different points. I don't deny that there are many fine pieces of cinema with artistic merit that have come out of Italy. I was just bemoaning that there are so few that share the fascinating and rich contemporary Italian culture with the world. I further make the point that there was a noticeable and ever-increasing dearth of such culturally expository films from the 50's up to the late '80s. So, you're talking about film as art (which it often is) and I'm talking about foreign film as a window into another culture.

Say "Italian Cinema" and it brings to mind different things for different people, but the first thing most film buffs think of is either gritty neorealism, or Fellini and Pasolini's "art films". Then you also have lovers of giallos or spaghetti westerns for whom "Italian Cinema" is something else altogether. But neither of these "fans of Italian Cinema" have any idea what Italians are like. If anything, they probably have misconceptions based on these films. I just wanted to bring it up here to hopefully get people interested in exploring some of the films made recently that reveal the fascinating contemporary face of Italy and the extremely important transitional period of the 60's and 70's that gave birth to it.

Originally Posted by Schonfelder

Just had to quote this bit, because this kind of mentality is so wrong... So, every film that is not intended for the regular popcorn-eater is diminished as "for the film festival crowd" - when, at last, is "that crowd" who's really interested in cinema. But what is even wronger in that sentence is to think that a director has to work biased on this or that kind of audience. This sounds like that kind of rants about modern painting ("oh man, even my 8-year-old son can do a thing like that, this is just pretentious shite for the intellectual crowd !").

This is another discussion.

A good film appeals to people on intellectual grounds...its artistic or technical merits or on its meaning (art house films). Another good film appeals to our base desire to be entertained (multiplex staples). A great film can do both. Not a lot of great films being made...especially in Italy during the period in question.

I mentioned the schism between meaningful art and mindless entertainment not as a generalization, but because the dichotomy was so obvious and so increasingly polarized in Italy up until the late '80s

In fact, it is this very misconception that I was complaining about! I think it's a shame that a lot of people still think of Italian Movies either as cryptic art (Fellini) or as exploitive pulp (Mario Bava) without realizing that more recently there is a lot of good stuff in between

[Cinemach]

Originally Posted by cyniclaus

Say "Italian Cinema" and it brings to mind different things for different people, but the first thing most film buffs think of is either gritty neorealism, or Fellini and Pasolini's "art films". Then you also have lovers of giallos or spaghetti westerns for whom "Italian Cinema" is something else altogether. But neither of these "fans of Italian Cinema" have any idea what Italians are like. If anything, they probably have misconceptions based on these films. I just wanted to bring it up here to hopefully get people interested in exploring some of the films made recently that reveal the fascinating contemporary face of Italy and the extremely important transitional period of the 60's and 70's that gave birth to it.

(Bold is mine)

Can't you say that about any culture's cinema, though--including (especially) America's, as that's what most of the world's image of us comes from anyway: that you don't really get an idea of them from their movies?

And I gather many people think of those memes from Italian cinema because that is what is readily available. And quite frankly neo-realism, spaghetti westerns and 'art films' constitute a large, large part of the Italian cinema canon. Of course there are others, but unfortunately other countries cinemas don't have Hollywood/US film distribution so much (much) more effort has to go towards seeing them.

[Schonfelder]

Cyniclaus, now i got your point.
But just to make things clear, my arguments were basically to deny the first post when you said that Italian cinema "wasn't representative at all". In the cinema canon, those names that we cited, among some others, stands for the best cinema ever produced, everywhere.
Back to the last post, i disagree that a great film can do both. Some of the greatest films ever made aren't appealing to the masses, and on the other hand, some good-but-not-great films can meet our artistic and entertainment sides. Meaning, there's no general rule at all - and that leads to the second thing that i disagree , which is that "not every movie is art". Sure that some films have higher artistic ambitions than others (maybe that's what you were trying to say, but anyway), but even the most commercial movie has artistic intents - at least while they're still made by humans. When a director frames a scene and prepares the mise en scene, there's something personal being put there - the basic premise of the artistic expression.
The last bit, when you talk about "foreign film as a window into another culture", you're probably right - but sincerely, what country have its culture or population represented by its cinema ? I mean, just for the record, i'm Brazilian, so American cinema is so "foreign" to me as Italian cinema. And if American cinema "represents" its culture a little better than the Italian, its just because it has a much larger and wider production scale. You'll probably know very little about Brazilian culture judging by its films, and so on...
But hey, maybe i'm getting too far with this

As for contemporary (?) Italian cinema, i think that Nanni Moretti is one of their leading forces - and if you lived there, you probably know what he represents as a public figure (the political strikes agains Berlusconi, or the fact that he owns a cinema in Rome dedicated to classic and arthouse films, etc).

[Schonfelder]

Originally Posted by octagon

This is rather embarassing but after review it would appear the Italian section of my film history is pretty much limited to spaghetti westerns and the Emanuelle series.

Emanuelle is French
A good starting point, if you're interested, maybe is Martin Scorsese's documentary "My Voyage To Italy", where he talks about the Italian films that had an impact on him, in a very personal way.

[NoirFan]

Originally Posted by Schonfelder

A good starting point, if you're interested, maybe is Martin Scorsese's documentary "My Voyage To Italy", where he talks about the Italian films that had an impact on him, in a very personal way.

Though be forewarned, it is full of spoilers.