Es war Nacht in Rom

I like a lot of Rossellini, but there is the odd clinker. Here's why:

it's not sure if it's propaganda, documentary or drama, or all three ; it's set in a blackout, so it's more unrelieved grey than black and white; it's largely set in tenement garrets, though some odd scenes elsewhere; there are few attractive compositions, except repeated shots of the Rome skyline; it has national clichés instead of characters: impulsive American, reserved Brit, bad German, good German, bad fascist, emotional Italian etc. ; the characters enter and leave the film almost at random ; the dramatic scenes aren't, they stop and start abruptly and are poorly linked; plot developments seem to come out of nowhere; the interesting things often happen off screen; characters' behaviour is often reckless to the point of incredulity.

Apparently rewritten, screenplayed, edited and scored on the hoof, with a great deal of family involvement,and I'm afraid it shows. sorry for being so negative.

Roberto Rossellini and Vittorio De Sica are two directors known for being the premier Neo-Realists. A Neo-Realistic film is one which is not filmed on sets but in the natural environment. And, the actors in the movie aren't professional actors. And, the stories are about ordinary folks. They were made this way simply because Italy was in ruins following WWII and this was the only way the COULD make pictures. While "Escape by Night" is by Rossellini and looks a lot like a Neo-Realist film, it isn't quite. It sure has the look and the story is about ordinary folk but the people in the movie, at least in starring roles, are real honest-to-goodness actors--mostly because by 1960 the Italian film industry was strong and growing. Had the film been made a decade or so earlier, it probably would have been an actual example of Neo-Realism. Now this does not mean the movie is bad in any way...it's not.

This is the story of three soldiers who have escaped from a Fascist concentration camp, and American, an Englishman and a Russian. While this composition isn't realistic, it made for an interesting film. And, there were a lot of escaped Allied prisoners who were helped by ordinary Italians according to this film. The plot is VERY simple...the three men are shuttled from home to home to home until they could either make their escape or they would be liberated by the approaching troops.

The acting and sets are all very realistic and the film is engaging. Perhaps it's not exactly fun or a must-see but it is well made.

By the way, one of the more interesting cast members here is the Russian actor, Sergey Bondarchuk. While not a household name outside the old Soviet Union, this man was an incredibly brilliant director as well and helmed perhaps the most incredible Soviet movie ever made, "War and Peace". Depending on the edit, this sweeping sage is between 4 and 8 1/2 hours long! I'm crazy...I've seen it twice...the long version!

This film is not one of Roberto ROSSELLINI's best, but it provides an impressive story from the Second World War. Soldiers of different nationalities, who therefore speak different languages, try to hide in Rome, which is occupied by the National Socialists. The Roman Esperia (Giovanna RALLI) becomes a figure of hope for these men.

For example, the Russian director Sergei BONDARTSCHUK (the Soviet Russian version of WAR AND PEACE based on the novel by Lev Tolstoy) can be seen as a Soviet soldier. The internationally sought-after German actor Hannes MESSEMER (known from the West German television series DIE DROMBUSCHS on the ZDF television station) plays the Nazi occupier.

What's very interesting is that people speak different languages here, which makes the film very authentic.

An user complained that Rossellini's movies are overlooked today;he is completely right.Although the Italian New Wave was never so hard and so nasty as their French counterpart on former colleagues,it nevertheless cast a shadow over them.On the European board ,there are plenty of messages about Fellini,Antonioni,Pasolini (and Godard,Truffaut ,Rohmer and co)whereas Rossellini (and De Sica,the great Luigi Comencini)are almost always absent.

He also complained about the cuts in Rossellini's works;however,what was intolerable in "Vanina Vanini" (the first part of which is thoroughly incomprehensible) is not so important in "Era Notte a Roma" . My copy has a running time of about 130 min and that's enough,for I think that it's overlong and even full of filler.

"Era Notte" tells the story of three escaped prisoners during WW2: a Russian,an English and an American.It's also the story of an Italian girl who helps the peasants to get rid of their burdensome guests in exchange for food.She's not a resistance fighter (as his fiancé is) but she will prove herself very human in spite of her weakness.

Rossellini displays respect for the audience: every character speaks his own language ,which gives the movie much more substance than ,for instance ," Uomo della croce " in which everyone spoke Italian.My favorite scene is the Christmas celebration with a very moving "Auld Lang Syne" sung by people from four different countries.It cannot be considered one of Rossellini 's masterworks but its several moments of brilliance make it a must for Rossellini's fans.

I watched this on Netflix also and although I like De Sica much better (for some reason his melodrama seems less melodramatic!) there were a few points in other reviews with which I wanted to take issue. First, the title means (I think, given my pidgin Italian) "It was night in Rome". "Escape by Night" is indeed a weird choice for an English title, but one can't really fault the movie for that. Also, as for the American acting like an Italian, even Americans can occasionally act according to the adage "When in Rome..." so I don't buy that as an indictment of the historical sense of the film.

The point that is made above about stereotypes is a good one. I would expect Rossellini to accept this criticism -- it is almost as if, fifteen years later, he is setting out to tell his story of the way Italian society adapted to the end of the occupation. The black market, the Church, the aristocracy, the professional class -- they all are caricatured, almost as if he was doing a sociological study of the time. I thought that film succeeded at that level, although of course there is really little character development if all of them are a "type."

One other distinctive feature I wanted to point out is the role of the Communists in the film - - Rossellini paints the Communists as the major anti-fascists and as having sacrificed quite a bit. This wholeheartedly positive portrayal is unfamiliar for me, as someone who grew up in the Cold War era, but according to my limited understanding, historically accurate. Since the film was made in 1960, at the end of the decade of the House Committee on UnAmerican Activities, though, I wonder if this portrayal was not somewhat pointed?