Rome, ville ouverte

Over time, Rossellini's legacy has been overshadowed by that of his contemporaries Fellini and de Sica. There are reasons for this. Fellini had a unique cinematographic eye and a gift for abstract symbolism. De Sica was able to capture the incidental and indeterminate in a way that practically elevated it to the level of the holy. His use of non-actors was far more effective than Rossellini's, as was Fellini's use of actors. Rossellini's scripts were often two-dimensional, his cinematography spotty and his editing odd. So why is it that he occupies a leading position among Italian auteurs?

In fact, Rossellini was not a neo-realist, but a realist. Compared with products of the neo-realists, his films are thin and wooden. If, on the other hand, one views them as works of tragedy, they are excellent. From the very start of Open City, it is clear that the seeds of disaster are sewn. A pregnant mother is to be married to a member of the resistance. Members of the clergy and children are also involved in fighting the Nazis. Italians are united against a common enemy: Fascism. Yet we know that, while victory is inevitable, so is death. Perhaps it is the darkness of the tight, seedy interiors that tips us off. Perhaps it is because we do not feel that sense of endlessness beyond the screen, but that we are being led through these building and streets along with the characters. Perhaps is is the German marching songs. Whatever it is, we feel the march of destiny leading us to some terrible conclusion. Fate can never play a role in neo-realist work; by Bazin's definition, it is constructed organically and arrives at its destination as if by chance. Tragedy can only be the purview of the realist.

Open City is not without its liabilities. For one, Arata's cinematography, while startling at times, is unsatisfactory at others. The script, written by Fellini and Amidei, is confusing and allows for minimal character development. [N.B.: The English subtitles add to this confusion, excising whole chunks of crucial dialogue.] Several of the performances are undynamic, such as those of Maria Michi and Carla Rovere; the villains, portrayed by Giovanna Gallett and Harry Feist, are very much "in type"; Aldo Fabrizi, who, as Don Pietro, is so central to the plot, is guilty of overacting. Above all, one doesn't get the sense that Rossellini's camera "falls in love" with its subjects the way that one might wish it did. Yet it is in this very impassiveness, this plastic script and detached camera, that the key to Open City lies. This is not a film about a painter and his son, nor does it lovingly portray an old pensioner and his dog. This film is about the horrors of war, not a subject for which Rossellini expects to find an empathetic audience. In the absence of footlights and the invisible "third wall", he uses the greatest tool at his disposal to create tragic theater: our own lack of nobility.

Open City is a portrait of human courage in the face of overwhelming odds. It confronts us with horrors which, God willing, we may never know. Don't watch it expecting to fall in love with the grittiness of World War II era Italy. Expect to be deeply moved.

It is hard to overestimate the influence of "Rome, open city" on the history of film.

There is much debate if "Rome open city" is the first neo realist movie. Some are of the opinion that already "Ossessione" (1943, Luchino Visconti) complied with the characteristics of this movement, although one can also classify this movie (based on a novel by James M. Cain) as film noir. There is however little discussion about the fact that "Rome, open city" was the breakthrough of neo realism.

Prepared during war time, shot while the Second World War was still raging in parts of Italy this film bears all characteristics that would become the trade marks of neo realism: shot on location, mostly non professional actors and a real life story adjacant to a documentary. Unlike the Danish "dogma" movement decades later these choices were not entirely made out of free will, but largely inspired by the lack of infrastructure after the Second World War. "Rome, open city" is for example shot with film stock that is definitely second rate. This is of course not a trademark of neo realism, there simply was no film stock of better quality available.

Most of the actors were non professional, but there were a few exceptions. Anna Magnani was one of the exceptions and after "Rome, open city" she went on to become a big star that worked with great Italian directors like Fellini, Visconti and Pasolini. In "Rome, open city" she dies halfway, but her dying scene is realy heartbreaking. A few years later she would shine as a mother who would do anything to make her daughter a moviestar in "Bellissima" (1951, Luchino Visconti).

Anna Magnani is by far the most well known actress from "Rome, open city", but I would like to also call attention to some of the other actors.

Maria Michi is a beautiful girl working in a cabaret who is addicted to drugs (and luxuries) and so becomes dependend on the Nazi's. After "Rome, open city" Michi would also play in Rossellini's "Paisa" (1946) but after that her career came to a halt.

Even less impressive is the career of Harry Feist, who plays the evil German. In fact "Rome, open city" would remain his only film of importance. Remarkable to me was his physical likeness with Donald Sutherland in "Novecento" (1976, Bernardo Bertolucci), who also plays a Second World War villian in that movie.

After "Rome, open city", which is situated in occupied Italy, Rossellini made two other war movies. "Paisa" (1946) is about the liberation of Italy by the Americans, "Germania anno zero" (1948) is about Germany after the war.

"Rome, open city" is famous as the breakthrough of both neo realism and Anna Magnani, and rightly so. It is however not the best neo realist movie (nor the best movie of Anna Magnani, of whom I like the aformentioned "Bellissima" more). The film has some flaws, and these are not all attributable to the difficult circumstances under which it was produced. The monologue of the disillusioned German Captain Hartmann, openly criticizing the "Third Reich" with other German officers present, does not seem very realistic to me.

As a director Roberto Rossellini thus had his limitations. My favourite neo realist director was and remains Vittorio de Sica, with masterpieces such as "Bycicle thieves" (1948) and "Umberto D" (1952).

Rosselini shot 'Roma Città Aperta' in the open streets post-war. His film-making resources were limited, as is apparent in the film, since he uses natural lighting, non-professional actors and a delicate sound system) but it only gives the film a stark and more authentic look making the atmosphere more terrifying and a the experience more real. Most of the 'props' and 'sets' and even many of the Nazi soldiers were real. Unlike many historical films, this one does right by the historical facts (even though it's a work of fiction).

What is most outstanding is Rosselini's compelling storytelling. Instead of showing us a documentary account (due to lack of film-equipments) he gives us a moving story of resistance. I was also impressed by the subtle way he brought out the characters such as the homosexuality of the Nazis. He also extracts marvelous performances from his actors. Aldo Fabrizi and Anna Magnani stand out. The background score (though used minimally) adds some melodrama but not in a poor way.

If one can look beyond the poor technology of the film, 'Roma Città Aperta' is one of the most powerful films of its genre. Though the film may depress, and at some point horrify the viewer, the ending is profound and hopeful. In the end, it's a story about fear, courage, integrity and hope.

Roberto Rossellini's Open City contains characters so real and emotions so powerful that it is not unusual for audiences to wonder whether the drama being played out on the screen is in truth a bona fide documentation of events surrounding the Italian Resistance during WWII. A study of the production history reveals that the film is closer to a combination of pure documentation (most accounts will go into detail about the location shooting and the presence of real soldiers) and dramatic reconstruction of actual events (like the execution of priest Don Morosini by the Nazis) with some lyrical filmmaking thrown in for good measure (I still get chills down my spine when I hear the children whistling in defiance of their oppressors). Anna Magnani, one of the greatest performers in the history of Italian cinema, is absolutely amazing in this film.

In Nazi occupied Rome, German SS is hunting for engineer Giorgio Manfredi who is a leader of the communist resistance. He escapes looking for fellow fighter Francesco and finds his pregnant fiancée Pina. Catholic priest Don Pietro Pellegrini helps but he's under surveillance.

It's a minor miracle that Roberto Rossellini achieved so much so soon after the end of the war. On the other hand, when Pina points to a bomb damaged building, a bomb probably did damage that building. It is considered a great example of neorealism although he had fewer unreal sets that he could use anyway. The one scene where Pina is chasing after Francesco being arrested is one of the great scenes of cinema. It is dynamic and visceral. One can really feel the action more than most war action scenes of its time.