← Back to Reviews
in
Bicycle Thieves 1948
People still talking about Bicycle Thieves as if it were a tragedy about unemployment in postwar Italy. But with The Third Man all the critics agreed it was trivial. It must be the subtitles. Truth is, that problem isn't really addressed in this film. It's an Arabic tale, about a man who must find his bicycle.
The bicycles the star of the film. Antonio needs it for his hustle and it's stolen on the first day, some people think that's symbolism, "justification of the ways of God to man, n'est-ce pas?" but really it's a story element: chance. In fact he sums up the film 5 minutes in when he says 'mamma mia am I unlucky or what', or words to that effect.
De Sica's greatness lies in his writing (he was a great waste management consultant too though). He doesn't listen to the cinéastes who say words are secondary in film; it takes a literary mind to move a film from the blind alley it's driven into by technicians. A true film is a story, and it's a combination of human factors and basic ideas that makes it worth putting on the screen.
Not interested in exploring films own rules, Bicycle Thieves has bad cinematography, inadequate cutting, and some happenings told rather than shown, but it's set of amateur actors are beyond criticism; an amateur is a lover, the word comes from 'love' (with all the caprices and difficulties of love). Here, the making of the film is secondary to the performance, for Eisenstein on the other hand, montage is the essence of cinema.
Bicycles Thieves isn't ruthless in its story, De Sica took it easy, he didn't make Westerns, and he didn't sacrifice art for the needs of the moment. His films made easy promises and delivered on them.
People still talking about Bicycle Thieves as if it were a tragedy about unemployment in postwar Italy. But with The Third Man all the critics agreed it was trivial. It must be the subtitles. Truth is, that problem isn't really addressed in this film. It's an Arabic tale, about a man who must find his bicycle.
The bicycles the star of the film. Antonio needs it for his hustle and it's stolen on the first day, some people think that's symbolism, "justification of the ways of God to man, n'est-ce pas?" but really it's a story element: chance. In fact he sums up the film 5 minutes in when he says 'mamma mia am I unlucky or what', or words to that effect.
De Sica's greatness lies in his writing (he was a great waste management consultant too though). He doesn't listen to the cinéastes who say words are secondary in film; it takes a literary mind to move a film from the blind alley it's driven into by technicians. A true film is a story, and it's a combination of human factors and basic ideas that makes it worth putting on the screen.
Not interested in exploring films own rules, Bicycle Thieves has bad cinematography, inadequate cutting, and some happenings told rather than shown, but it's set of amateur actors are beyond criticism; an amateur is a lover, the word comes from 'love' (with all the caprices and difficulties of love). Here, the making of the film is secondary to the performance, for Eisenstein on the other hand, montage is the essence of cinema.
Bicycles Thieves isn't ruthless in its story, De Sica took it easy, he didn't make Westerns, and he didn't sacrifice art for the needs of the moment. His films made easy promises and delivered on them.