Recensioni degli utenti

Interesting neo-realistic, quasi-documentary film with notable editing. But did the film deserve the Best Director award at Berlin over Bergman's "Through a glass darkly"? The Swedish film was superior. Martin Scorsese likes it because he can identify with the Italian politics and sociology of that time. The Rosi film is good but overrated.

The first time you experience this film is rather like going to an opera without knowing the plot: there are some grand scenes of murder and passion, some incredible scenery, but it's long and you're in a suspended state of confusion much of the time--and it's a two-hour film, almost a documentary.

The second time you watch this film (and you should!) it can be enjoyed on so many levels, and you begin to appreciate Rosi's genius for mixing various kinds of truth, for exposing the sorts of lies governmental bodies can develop to protect their flanks, for demythologizing the idea of the folk outlaw whose ideals are supposedly those of the people. At heart this is a film about Sicily, about an island's struggle to find it's heart and it's heritage--not easy to watch, but magnificently photographed at every turn.

Review of Salvatore Giuliano (1962)

Directed by Francesco Rosi, Salvatore Giuliano (1962) is a gripping, politically charged Italian film that blends the genres of crime drama and historical reconstruction. The film portrays the life and death of Salvatore Giuliano, a real-life Sicilian bandit who became a legendary figure in post-war Italy. Giuliano's story is tragic, marked by his transformation from a rebellious hero to a notorious outlaw and his eventual murder under mysterious circumstances.

Rosi's approach to the material is unique. The film doesn't rely on a traditional narrative structure but instead unfolds in a fragmented, almost documentary-like fashion, presenting the story from various perspectives. This method of storytelling creates a sense of disorientation, mirroring the confusion and corruption of the political and social forces at play in post-WWII Sicily. By juxtaposing the personal tragedy of Giuliano with the larger political landscape of Italy, the film reveals the complex intersections between crime, politics, and the Sicilian mafia.

The performances are strong, with a particularly noteworthy portrayal of Giuliano by Marcello Mastroianni, whose quiet intensity brings depth to a character that is both a symbol of resistance and a product of the violent environment in which he lives. Rosi's direction maintains a cold, observational tone, which works well to emphasize the film's themes of disillusionment and betrayal.

Visually, the film is stunning, with cinematography that captures the stark beauty of the Sicilian landscape while also reflecting the harsh realities of life for the people caught in the web of organized crime and political corruption. The stark black-and-white visuals, coupled with the atmospheric score by Francesco De Masi, enhance the film's somber and tense mood.

Salvatore Giuliano is an excellent example of the political cinema that emerged in Italy during the post-neorealist era. It's not just a crime story; it's an exploration of the corruption and disillusionment that permeated Italian society during the 1940s and '50s. While the film might feel slow or fragmented at times, its depth and ambition make it a fascinating and insightful watch for those interested in the intersection of politics, history, and cinema.

Rating: 4/5 - A thought-provoking, well-crafted historical drama that shines a light on the murky intersection of crime and politics in post-war Sicily.

Francesco Rosi's cinema are around political matters, a tough subject too swallow for usual cinephiles, due the hard life which we lives are enough to stand, but some facts needs a better understanding as this picture suggests, how Sicily gets his independence from Italy is plentiful explained here, each facts were expose in this overlong picture, but Francesco wisely put forward a cursed triangle of forces, the mob, the separatists and the dangerous outlaws who help them in hope to get their crime's amnesty, after they got Sicily's autonomy starts another hard issue, the communist, such thing was totally inconceivable to Italian standards at it's time, a mass killing was prompt provides by the rich farmers and also by the mob, the Giuliano the leader almost didn't appears on the movie, his second on command and your fellows conrades in-arms were charged by the massacre, interesting picture over this dry land on Italy's south, the mountainous island Sicily !!!

Resume:

First watch: 2019 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 8

Through the first hour of this film there are no focused characters, at most a character is seen in two or three short scenes. It's basically just following history and showing examples of it. Luckily it's not rushed, it's decently paced and it is realistic.

The best way to describe this is to call it a docu-drama. A narrator tells you something and then some people either do what's described or continues where the narrator leaves off. Though this approach can work, I did find it distancing in this film and it did make me less interested. The above competent direction and photography did elevate it however and for a long time I felt that it was great.

The films main problem is that we never really get to know anything, least of all about the title character who is despite the entire film being about his history only seen dead, or walking/running around. He only has a few lines.

Then towards the middle we experience two horrendous acts of overacting which damages the film severely. Both involving screaming/crying, the worst offender was the woman playing Giulianos mother. She screams and cries so awfully and in such a high tone that you wonder if you are watching a cheap parody. This scene is agonizingly long.

We do however learn a lot about the conflict going on and after a bit more than an hour, perhaps closer to 90 mins we get one character to follow. Overall I just don't think the film put us inside the conflict and despite giving us historical facts and let us understand the events we never got to the core. This made it cold and somewhat uninteresting for time to time. Not a film I would recommend but definitely a more or less good film.

6.5/10

This remarkable movie reminded me of early Eisenstein for the fluid, dynamic

movement of crowds--in the streets, in the movement of soldiers and bandits across the hilly terrain, and in the scene of the Portella della Ginestre massacre. The back-and-forth narrative structure must have influenced Costa-Gavras in the making of "Z." And Rosi's ability to get riveting performances from non-professionals (some of whom could not read scripts) is astonishing. The story line gets confusing, but I think that's because the situation was confusing--multiple betrayals and layers of

corruption and complicity--rather than a flaw in the script or editing. Visually exciting, too--the use of distancing overhead shots, the quiet menace of gunmen walking up a deserted, sun-baked street... memorable stuff.

"Salvatore.." is more a documentary than a film, in which the story of the legendary sicilian gangster is told. Oddly enough, we never get to see his face, and no insight is given of his character or about how and why did he turn into such an icon for the sicilian people. We only know about him through the other characters in the film. Even though there is some fine acting going on, the direction of Mr.Rosi is downright awful. We are presented with a series of events with no connecting thread whatsoever, other than a logical chronological development. While dealing with an interesting historical moment of Sicily, the film is terribly boring and you need a truckload of patience to stay tuned through the end. If you are keen on studying Sicily's historical heritage, you may find this film interesting, if not, then you should miss it!.

Francesco Rosi's elliptical film about the notorious Sicilian gangster is quite stunning. This is not, however, a typical gangster film. This film is more about the lives of the people affected by Giuliano than about the gangster himself and this is given extra resonance by the casting of the real villagers in almost all cases. The fact that we never see Giuliano's face makes the director's intentions quite clear.

Giuliano began his professional criminal career when he was caught stealing at a young age and chased out of his village into the surrounding hills where he formed a gang and made a living from robberies and standover tactics. He became feared and respected by the locals and was eventually recruited by regional officials to help in the fight for independence from Italy. The first half of the film explores these events and manages to convey an extremely strong feeling for the time and place. The second half of the film deals with the trial of the surviving members of Giuliano's gang after his death and in doing so illuminates much of what has come before.

It is remarkable how well the film holds together considering the amount of different styles and techniques that were combined in its creation. There are elements of docudrama, courtroom drama, Italian neorealism, crime story and political tract. It is also surprising how well it holds up over forty years later.

There is a problem with this film. Bold, courageous and outspoken though it is, director Franco Rosi is somewhat held captive by his conflicting Communist Party and neorealist filmic leanings. Presented as a if a street reality he is caught between the style and the substance which is made far worse by the ambiguity of the central character, who we only see as a dead man. As a picture of post-war Sicily and its poverty stricken towns and labyrinthine streets it appears remarkable but as to who is doing what and for why much more confusing. I understand it was not just me who was confused, Giuliano himself appears to be a man of many faces and apart from often appearing to be a man of the people keen to wrestle his country from the hands of the Italian government, he went so far as to suggest it should become a part of the US. Rosi is therefore considerably conflicted here as with his background and beliefs, he is keen to bring a much more left orientated administration to the whole of Italy. Such is the result on film that we are presented with the main thrust of discontent and the evils of the State and judiciary and an implication that behind the scenes our hero had everyone's interest at heart. Bit sentimental you might say and a difficult watch.

Filmed in the actual Siciilian locations, this film is a fair attempt to strip away the myth surrounding bandit-cum-revolutionary Giuliano. In fact, he doesn't appear except as a gunned-down corpse at the beginning. The film winds back to unravel the events leading to his death, and forwards to its consequence. This is a clever method of achieving objectivity while at the same time subtly emphasising the man's elusive and mysterious qualities. To show Giuliano would have either been either hagiography or iconoclasm. The film rose above that and broadened its inquiry into the wider social and political context, effectively belittling him as the puppet of various forces jostling for position in Sicily after the war: bandits, police, local aristocracy, the Italian government, communists, and the Mafia.

This sets quite a challenge for itself, partly because of the vacuum at its centre, partly because of the obscurity and complexity of the real events. We are delivered to a chaotic courtroom to try to piece it together. The film finally latches onto Giuliano's lieutenant –the only one who seems to know something of what is going on - but even he is silenced. It's all the more disturbing for the confusion.

Rosi is one of the best directors of crowds scenes and he gives raucous energy to any gathering of men, especially in the courtroom. He induces a kind of group hysteria in his actors; they are totally unaware of the camera and the result is an almost disturbing hyper-real feel (real crowds are dull in comparison) – it's really something to appreciate. To get into this film, you need to invest something in the passions of the various parties involved - if not sympathise with them, then at least understand them. Without this, the danger is that it all boils down to so much petty bickering. The same might be said of the Godfather, which clearly owes a huge debt to Rosi's style.

Influential then, somewhat brave, with some fine directorial moments, and an interesting history lesson. Hard to actually like, but hard not to admire.

This is a docudrama, but it's flaws are too many to list. There was a 20 minute spell about 80 minutes in that captivated me, but everything outside of that dragged and was exhausting. The first hour was mostly dragged out scenes that could've been cut in half or even two-thirds--overly detailed scenes of conflict and battles in immediate postwar Sicily. That much detail would be acceptable in a war movie, but this was supposed to be--I assume--a character study of Giuliano, who is always several arms lengths away--we don't even know what he looks like, we never meet him, and the film fails 1. To develop any characters, or even have any sustained characters 2. To have a coherent, compelling plot 3. To amuse or entertain. It does educate on postwar Sicilian politics, but is far too didactic for its length--over two hours! There were no cinematic innovations, no impressive scenecraft, and nothing to engage. If this is Rosi's masterpiece, I shudde to think what the rest of his oeuvre looks like. I certainly won't be watching to find out.

A perfect analysis of the most famous gangster, loved from the poor people, of Sicily. Is very good the acting of Frank Wolff as the cousin of Giuliano, Salvatore Pisciotta. On this Film there is the same history of the gangster of the Film "Il Siciliano" with C. Lambert, but here the film is history, there the film is a bad novel.