User reviews

Sam Wanamaker is an Italian-American bricklayer. In 1921, work is good, so he brings Lea Padovani from Italy to be his wife. Building is not a constant paycheck, and with the coming of the Depression, his marriage and trade struggle.

Director Edward Dmytryk shot this for Eagle-Lion in Great Britain, and it shows in the mistaken rhythms of some of the actors -- having Englishmen playing Italian-Americans forces them into a slow and mannered style that seems unnatural to my ears; those playing Italians do better. This raises the question of why Dmytryk was not shooting this in the US, and it was because of the HUAC witch hunts. Dmytryk would be one of "The Hollywood Ten", one of the writers who refused to testify before the committee and were jailed. Dmytryk would eventually cave and testify. Even though he would work again, starting three years later, and continue directing for another 20 years, many would never forget or forgive.

Besides the political issues, Dmytryk was trapped by his own success in producing cheap but well-regarded film noir in the US. One outlier, CROSSFIRE, had gotten him an Academy Award nomination. This movie was another shot at a serious movie. Unfortunately, despite a fine performance, Wanamaker no more suggests a bricklayer than Miss Padovani, and only Miss Padovani and Sid James (in a small but key role) acquit themselves well. The result is always watchable, but given the aspirations of the film makers, disappointing.

I saw this film many years ago on television and was quite stunned by it. This very simple drama of the life of an ordinary working man is turned into high tragedy through the wonderful talents of the filmmaker. The film is all the more impressive when one considers that it was made on the cheap in London, though set in New York. The low budget gives rise to one or two false notes, but the story is so well told that you easily forget about those. Perhaps the lack of budget was a blessing, in that it allowed the actors and director to concentrate on the more ineffable qualities of story-telling. I would love to see this film again. It should be revived so that many more people can appreciate the great talent of Edward Dmytrk and the social-realist style, of which it is a wonderful example.

After many years in political purgatory, the film version of Pietro Di Donato's masterpiece CHRIST IN CONCRETE comes to beautifully restored DVD. The story of a humble bricklayer (Sam Wanamaker) who wants only the best for his family, and is briefly seduced by becoming "managment" holds up beautifully. Wanmaker is a wonderful, natural actor (I kept thing Actor's Studio before there was such a thing!) and though I had known him in later years, I never realized how dynamic he was as a leading man. (No surprise then that his daughter Zoe is one our finest actors.) Lea Padovani is magnificent, and the rest of the cast give superb performances as well. (What a kick it is to see William Sylvester, Dr. Heywood Floyd of 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY as a young man in his first film!)

The director, Edward Dmytryk, clearly influenced by Greg Toland as well as the neo-realismo films of the time, uses fascinating camera angles, moody lighting and a steady pacing that makes the nearly two hour running time seem half that time.

I had loved the novel and had always wanted to see the film. What a joy it is to finally see it in near pristine condition. Thank you ALLDAY films for finding and restoring this masterpiece. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED................

Have I seen this film?! Only every time I teach an urban sociology class, when I show it to my students! I can only echo the previous commentator--what a great film! The best scene--and there are many--is during the Great Depression, when the five bricklayers decides that it is Julio, who starving mouths to feed, should get half a day's work. Then, through a store window, Geremio catches one of the other bricklayers panhandling. "Heaven has forgotten us!" his workfellow says. This film, whose story was written by an Italian socialist (DiDonato) and made by socialists in London (couldn't make it in New York--it was the McCarthy period, may he rest in pieces!) is, besides being dramatically and emotionally rich, is sociologically rich. It's a brilliant portrayal of the conflict between the individualist version of the American Dream among immigrants--and the sordid reality they face. When they face it collectively, they are great men and women, in all their splendor. When they face it individually, they become alienated from themselves and each other. Though the DVD is entitled CHRIST IN CONCRETE, it is actually the prequel to the story in the novel. The last horrific scene is the first chapter of the novel, which detail's the life of Geremio's widow, Annunziata, and their son Paul, after Geremio dies. All the actors are great--but I especially like Lea Padavini--who had to learn the part phonetically, because when they hired her, she didn't speak a word of English! I also highly recommend this film

This rarely seen, hard-hitting film combines Depression-era melodrama with noir and social realist sensibilities. A Brooklyn bricklayer struggles to fulfill the American Dream, but his efforts seem increasingly futile in the face of modern capitalism's socioeconomic indifference. Features impressive acting, cinematography, and writing; unforgettable opening and closing sequences. Christ in Concrete was made in England by the exiled director Edward Dmytryk, one of the blacklisted Hollywood 10.

This film is extremely difficult to find anywhere, and still it's a major milestone in the history of film noir. Both Edward Dmytryk and Sam Wanamaker fled America for the McCarthy persecutions and made this unique film in London about Little Italy in New York. It's brutally expressionistic and realistic about the conditions of Italian building workers in New York and was forbidden in America - today you wonder why. Sam Wanamaker remained in Britain, made many films, was in 'Holocaust' and initiated the process of rebuilding the Globe theatre in London. Another of his major performances was in "The Voyage of the Damned" 1976, another great film of documentary character and a true story; but "Give Us This Day", also known as "Christ in Concrete" is his quest for immortality as a very ordinary Italian worker in Brooklyn with great foibles and weaknesses, and he is well supported by Kathleen Ryan (expert at such roles, like also in "Odd Man Out") and Lea Padovani as the sorely tried but heart-renderingly faithful wife. Perhaps the greatest credit of all in this film is due to the music of Benjamin Frankel, booming with beauty sand pathos all the way, while above all the story is without comparison in its very human and overwhelmingly true account of the conditions of Italian house-building workers in Brooklyn around the Great Depression. This film makes an unforgettable impression the first time, and you will always recall it with tears and return to it - a film indeed worth owning.

This movie does have some great noirish/neorealist visuals, and it tells a story that is refreshingly free of Hollywood's sugar-coating, which was only possible because it was essentially an independent foreign film. But some of the scenes go on for much too long (the wedding, especially), and I found the exaggerated acting and unrealistic dialog to be more fit for the stage than for the silver screen.

The dialog was particularly distracting, and it seemed to get worse as the movie went on. Most of the characters were either Italian-Americans or Italian immigrants living in New York in the twenties and thirties, but their dialog sounded like they were practicing lines for a Shakespeare play while they mixed cement and laid bricks. Toward the end I was laughing, and not because the filmmakers wanted me to. I guess the stilted poetry could be defended by saying that the characters would have been speaking Italian, and the dialog is a literal translation of how they would really talk. But it absolutely did not work for me.

Another line of dialog made me laugh for a different reason: the main character's son, born and raised in New York in the 1920's, suddenly picks up a lovely lilting British accent. I'm only guessing this had something to do with the fact that the movie was made in England.

I give this movie an 'A' for effort and intention, but a considerably lower grade for execution.

I read the book about 2 years ago. It's a beautifully written and well told story of a son's love and devotion towards working, supporting his mother, upholding his deceased father's dignity, and surviving through the toughest of times, the great Depression. The book version told a story that I thought was easily adaptable to film, and when I saw that the movie version had been released as a DVD, I ran out and bought a TV, a DVD player and rented the film.

Now what astounds me is that, considering the great impact of the original story, and how easy as I say it would have been to simply tell it on the big screen, why did the filmmakers toss the whole thing out and produce a most conventional and predictable typical film of that era? This movie should really not be associated with the original novel- there's really very little comparison.

As an original story, average- 5/10. As an adaptation, poor- 2/10.

Hounded out of the States as a Commie (fellow DGA member Sam Wood outed him), Edward Dmytryk actually made (in the U.K.) that left-leaning agit-prop proletariat 'noir' HUAC vainly searched Hollywood for. The film never got a proper American release, Dmytryk returned, 'named names,' served time, & found himself upgraded to 'A' projects which never lived up to his promising early 'B' stuff. Pietro Di Donato's once influential novel tells a fatalistic story of an Italian/American brick layer, always on the verge of better times, who loses his soul when he rises to foreman during tough depression times. Dmytryk does some impressive work within the restrictions of an indie U.K. production, but he's ultimately defeated by a twice too earnest script and a lackluster cast that has to work overtime to fake that Brooklyn flavor. Five years on, another HUAC alumni, Elia Kazan, would get this sort of thing right in ON THE WATERFRONT, which you may have heard of.

Both titles ("give us this day" ,"Christ in concrete" ) refer to religion ,but religion does not really play a prominent part in "give us this day" which is close to Italian neo-realism .All the movie revolves around the "a bricklayer deserves his house for his work is hard and he dirties his hand every day"subject.One of the rare movies of the era which deals with working-class people ,it ran into problems with MacCartyism .It was the first time that the recurrent feature of the injured arm had appeared in a Dmytryk movie (see also "the sniper" " the Caine mutiny" and "the juggler").As Dmytryk had not yet betrayed,it would tend to destroy the "Dmytryk feels guilty " theory.

" Give us this day" actually reminds one of the movies-before the-code ,the great works of Wellmann("Heroes for sale" "Wild boys of the road" ) as well as the precise depictions of Rossellini and De Sica in Italy.