Cabiria

It is a little known fact that the feature film was born in Italy - that is, a film longer than the standard one or two reels in length -ten to twenty minutes. It is the crop of early Italian features, all epics, birthed in 1914, that influenced America's Griffith and DeMille. The length of CABIRIA is staggering - originally 2-1/2 hours in Italy and just over two hours here - considering most audiences were used to sitting and concentrating on a plot for only twenty minutes at most.

Were there Oscars then, the extraordinary art direction and special effects would have garnered noms - they are outstanding. The cinematography is unique in using early scanning and dollying techniques heretofore unknown in film. The plot becomes very hard to follow because the title cards are history lessons of alliances and battles that have little meaning for us and often we are aware of the cut 22 minutes in the surviving USA version as symbols and relationships which have great dramatic meaning for the players leave us baffled.

The print used by Kino and Grapevine video as well as Turner Classic Movies is impeccable - crystal clear and sharp.

For all fans of epic movies and for all film historians, this is a must see.

An engrossing historical melodrama with all the trimmings, "Cabiria" would be rather impressive if it had been made in the mid- or late- 1920's, and the fact that it was made in 1914 is astounding. While it was widely known in its time, and apparently was once given full credit for its influence on other film-makers, it has been largely forgotten today, for no good reason. The story is involved and ambitious, the settings and scale are lavish and creative, and the historical scenario comes from the fascinating (if today little-known) period of the Punic Wars between Rome and Carthage. It's all very good in its own right, and it's even more of a success when you consider the new ground they had to break in bringing it all together so well.

The story blends together several fictional and several historical characters, centering on the adventures and misfortunes of the girl Cabiria. As in any melodrama, there are some implausible developments, yet it rarely seems overly forced. The historical setting is used creatively, both to drive the action and to provide interesting settings and characters. While it is clearly fiction, it takes fewer liberties with history than do many other movies with historical settings, since it is designed for entertainment rather than to promote a particular viewpoint.

And as entertainment, it delivers handsomely. This is well worth the trouble to find for anyone who enjoys watching silent movies. It is also worth seeing if you have even a passing interest in the development of cinema, because few movies have ever been so creative in using and improving upon the means available in their own era.

Giovanni Pastrone's grand-scale storytelling of a lost princess, her journey from being kidnapped to almost being offered as a child sacrifice and then ending up as a slave, 'Cabiria' is cinema's first true epic. Pastrone made several films, and the scope and spectacle of his films inspired directors like Griffith and Fellini, but 'Cabiria' is the only one which has stood the test of time. And since the story is set almost 2000 years ago, the aged quality of this 100-year-old film only adds to the feel of the time.

Like Griffith's 'Birth of a Nation', 'Cabiria' too was shrouded in controversy for its biased depiction of races, places and cultures. Like 'Birth of a Nation' propagated Ku Klux Klan's nobility and agenda, 'Cabiria' tried to legitimize Italy's distant past, and tried to promote and inspire themes like 'wars of conquest', Roman salute, racial nobility and virtue, etc. I mean, all the non-Roman characters in the film are depicted in negative light.

Whatever the controversial history the movie might have, if one is ready to ignore those aspects and try to acknowledge the feat it tries to achieve in the medium of filmmaking, it's an enjoyable journey. The movie offers many fascinating sequences, like, the child offerings at Temple of Moloch, Princess Sophonisba's pet leopard and even her spectacular arrival for her almost wedding, soldiers and elephants crossing the Alps, the pyramid formed by soldiers and shields in one continuous shot, and few others.

The original version is said to have been three hours long. I saw the truncated 1993 restoration, which is two hours long. In this itself, the number of characters and events seem too many, a few of them almost unnecessary; I wonder what the extra 60 minutes had in store. Better editing (I mean, even shorter than two hours) could have made the story tighter, more interesting and compelling.

Overall, it's an interesting story and a well-made film, and personally, I liked it much more than the overrated 'Ben-Hur'.

This was a confusing, yet highly important, one to watch. I have to say that I haven't watched a silent film in a long time so adjusting to the many, many differences was a struggle. I found the captions to be really lacking in clarity. I appreciate the beauty of their writing but I'm not really trying to decode poetry when watching a silent epic, you know? It's not even that, really, it was the constant introduction of new names without describing who they were or what the hell their problem was. I was under the impression that the captions would describe what was about to happen, but really they just introduced it, which meant that I understood a bit of what was happening before their mouths kept moving and their arms started flailing and fights started happening and I was lost again. I definitely wish I had a historian in my room just quietly explaining where these ancient cities were and why everyone was so upset all the time. I could Google it while watching but I have a strict rule against touching my phone while a movie is on. Try to read up on the context surrounding the story before watching if you can.

Anyway, the sets were grand even by today's standards and that impressed me a lot. Even the special effects they utilized were outstanding, because at that time in cinema, they weren't special effects as much as they were visual tricks that the filmmakers had to figure out and pioneer on their own essentially. I really liked the Maciste character and I wasn't surprised to find that he was extremely popular when this movie came out, too. The naked children everywhere and live birds flying around a set that is actively crumbling and in flames was bananas! It made me wonder how many people/animals died on sets back before there were regulations. The story had many complexities to it and that was cool. It definitely deserves it's title as an epic. It is not an easy watch, but it is a worthwhile one. No doubt it was piloted by a strong plot. I agree with the many others who have said that this is a must-see for people who truly love film. I definitely recommend it and am happy to have it in my movie collection.

...that was a huge worldwide hit and began more than one cinematic trend. Circa 300 B. C., Cabiria (Carolina Catena), the young daughter of a wealthy Roman family, is thought lost after an eruption of Mt. Etna. Instead she was rescued by servant Croessa (Gina Marangoni) who takes her to Carthage where they fall into the evil hands of the Temple of Moloch. Luckily two Roman spies, Fulvius (Umberto Mozzato) and his musclebound slave Maciste (Bartolomeo Pagano), in Carthage to keep an eye on the activities of Hannibal (Emilio Vardannes), learn of the child and attempt to rescue her.

This was said to have inspired Griffith to make Intolerance into the epic it became, and the sets here are truly awe inspiring, especially in comparison to other films of the time. The Temple of Moloch is one of the great screen images of the silent era. The supporting character of Maciste, played by Pagano, was a breakout hit, the first screen muscleman hero, and led to a series of over 20 movies with Pagano as the character, as well as dozens more in the 1960s with a variety of stars. The history on display is dubious, but how many movies have Romans, Carthaginians, Numidians, Phoenicians, and even a Greek running around in the same story? Recommended.