Bicycle Thieves is a classic neorealistic drama about the hard life of ordinary workers in post-war Italy. The film tells about a specific worker who was lucky at first, and then, absolutely expected, he was stolen a bicycle without which he can not work, while we all understand that at the same time he just equaled with other people without work, so in this sense the drama of the film is created from scratch, of course, it is very sad, but I was sad from the very beginning of the film, i.e. in my opinion, the creators in vain focused on the story of a particular person, it was worth generalizing.
Another aspect of the film is that it raises the issue of injustice and brutality of society, although it is clear that at that time everyone survived as much as they could, and the creators themselves confirm this in the film when they show the conditions in which the stolen bike lives, there is what you can say that the creators showed the obvious. Yes, the film is very realistic, everything is shown without embellishment, but I knew before that that the world is cruel and unfair, and the creators of the film only once again reminded of this.
In terms of the emotions that this film causes, of course, it is mainly only sadness, the film is very morally heavy, in general, it does not bring any joy or pleasure, only empathy and expectations of a good ending, with which the film has a problem.
In general, the film is undoubtedly great, since it caused so many contradictory emotions, it seems that he did not like, but on the other hand, because he is not called to like, it is such a very semantic social drama that you do not like, but it makes you think. I wouldn’t have watched it, but the movie caught on. It's very strong.
The plot can be told in a few sentences, so simple: in post-war, hungry Italy, the poor poor Antonio Ricca, fortunately, finally finds at least some work. One problem is that for such a profession, a bicycle is vital, which Antonio actually has, but it is built so that the family has something to eat. Poorly, they buy him, but happiness was short-lived: some creature steals from poor Antonio his bicycle.
Sounds like a hook-up to some Soviet sixties comedy, right? However, this is one of the most depressing and hopeless films of mankind. That is, you understand: a film with a plot worthy of a genre no higher than vaudeville, and suddenly - a heartbreaking desperate drama about a man who has been robbed of hope for a happy and relatively full tomorrow.
Antonio and his son Bruno are looking for this unfortunate bike all over Rome. They meet many people along the way: lazy, bored cops who do not want to burden themselves with such petty idiotic affairs as finding a missing bicycle, nor get involved with a company protecting a beaten Antonio thief, and therefore justice does not prevail. Ordinary people who sincerely want to help the unhappy unemployed, but are unable to do so. Idle rich gentlemen... Foreign tourists pick up Bruno's boy as he strenuously searches for his father's missing bike. An angry and tense crowd of people, each member who is madly afraid for himself and therefore violently attack anyone who, in their opinion, will encroach on them.
Does that ring a bell? Of course, we see the same thing every day on the subway. Jokes are jokes, but in fact there is a certain bitter truth: the current Russian society is not much different from post-war Italian society.
I know a lot of people don’t like it when there’s a strong social overtones in movies, but when you talk about Italian neorealism, you can’t get away from it. Moreover, it is a social subtext not of the kind that it is represented by the special haters of this genre: it does not have a clearly expressed position of the director, ideological moments and direct criticism – no, it is just a story about how it really is. That the world, people - they are: the world is not good, not good at all. It’s scary, especially because nobody cares about you. Who? After all, everyone else is exactly the same. If not, then they are.
People are not cruel because of their nature, says de Sica. People are cruel because they don’t know what to do or how to survive in this world. The sense of danger of tension atrophies the need to care for a miracle - how strange it is here, when everything is not thanking God with its own personal territory.
Yes, there is criticism of the public in the film - and where without it, in such a topic. But this is not at all the criticism that is usually drawn by all sorts of moralizers and ideologists of “communism-style” – it is rather a cry to people in general.
Of course, without a psychological subtext, there was not, because the film is bad that does not affect human psychology, and at the same time is not documentary.
The first association that comes to mind when you try to compare the “Abductors” with literary works is Gogol’s “Overcoat”. A small man, an unemployed father of a family, plus an object that is not only very important for him, but almost to the point of fanaticism necessary, and no matter what, just as a fact. And then that item goes missing! It is also very important how it disappears: in this case, it is stolen. It’s not just that he lost or broke himself – not at all!
If you look at it like this, then almost everything that happens to Antonio is not his fault: he did not impoverish himself, he did not sow a bicycle. He constantly resorts to outside help, which, on the one hand, is incredibly logical in the plot and quite curious in fact. He has done very little, although he tries very hard. Particularly noteworthy is the final scene: Antonio gets nervous, looks at his bike, cringes, walks away, comes back, gets nervous again, and finally tries to steal it... and then he is caught and beaten in front of his son. It is not his fault that he was caught!
Perhaps this is because Antonio himself believes in fate, and is far more fanatical than his wife, Maria, believes. Even if you do not take into account the fortune-teller, you can doubt his “unbelief” – when at the beginning they quarrel with his wife, Antonio in the heat gives the phrase that he has such an unfortunate fate, and “it would be better for me not to be born.” When you don’t believe in yourself, you start looking for faith in something else—even absolute unbelief is also faith, just that you can’t believe anything. Antonio is looking for a foothold in faith in justice, tomorrow, fate, because he knows that he personally does not have enough strength to believe in himself. That is why he misses a lot of opportunities to return his bike – another, more brazen in his place would make a scandal right in the market, where he found this very missing bike, or questioned a knowledgeable old man thief right when he was shaved, not afraid to distract him from business.
Is he a bad person? Should he have behaved that way or not? Why did he hit his son?
These are not questions to be asked when watching. The question is: who would keep a man in himself when he would lose everything?
You can talk a lot about the fact that Antonio was initially guilty, that he was originally such a “little man”, which even the editing of the film hints at – how pathetic he looks against the background of the buildings of Rome stretched to the sky. But the fact is that in place of Antonio could be absolutely anyone. We are all human, and not all are Terminators. The fact that a person broke down in a terrible situation, he does not cease to be a person.
A bicycle is an object of worship. The bicycle is a symbol of progress that poor Antonio can't keep up with, unlike his son. Bicycle as the Wheel of Fortune and the guarantor of a new, better life
Italian neorealism is a trend that will not only be relevant forever (as we can say about any more or less worthwhile art form), in our case, all those allegedly “realistic” directors should be prescribed films of neorealism along with kicks and a strong cut in wages; maybe then they will see how people live.
You just have to open your eyes and look.
It's amazing how long the steel great movie hasn't caught my eye. I've read about it, I've seen it on different lists, but I've only seen it now. And most importantly, I can say, “I believe!”
The plot is simple. Post-war Rome. The main character gets a long-awaited job, which requires a bicycle. On the first day of work, I steal my bike. And our hero goes in search of a bicycle-breadwinner.
They say that non-professional actors played here. But it's beautiful! During viewing, he repeatedly caught himself delighted with the magnificent game in the frame. All the heroes are true, unthinkable. The plot, it seems, is simple, but it easily breaks through the protective layer in which we are increasingly shackled with each passing year.
I searched for statements of various Russian directors about this film.
Alexei Balabanov: De Sika ... was not interesting. Not a bad director, but his films didn’t bother me, nor did the other neorealists. I looked at them and forgot them. And if you hadn’t asked me to say something about them, I probably wouldn’t even remember. According to the internal feeling, they are completely cold, although the direction is wonderful.
Alexander Kott: The film attracted with its mood, atmosphere and positive energy. Well remembered individual shots — for example, when the hero rides in the rain on a bicycle — texture close to Soviet cinema. There was an immediate sense of complicity, despite the fact that the action takes place in post-war Italy. It seemed that I knew that life, so everything is recognizable.
Nikolai Lebedev: I remember well the feeling that arose after watching Bicycle Thieves: this is a human movie. I empathized with the heroes, but, frankly, I do not want to watch the film.
Konstantin Lopushansky: What do neorealists remember? Compassionate. A lump in the throat arose from compassion for people.
Aleksandr Mitta: I recently revisited Bicycle Thieves and was once again amazed at how professionally the film was made, how carefully built. We didn't notice it before. Yes, those directors came out of the pavilion and started working with non-professional actors, with an environment almost indistinguishable from the one around them. They were extremely professional.
Marlen Khutsiev: It was a long time ago, in 1947. The poster read, “Bike Thieves.” We left the room shocked. The picture made a deafening impression. What do we know about this foreign country? That the Italians were our enemies, fascists, that they had the Duce, that they were waging war in Abyssinia. And in this film they saw ordinary people who are poor, looking for work, love, hope.
10 out of 10
On the one hand, this is one of the greatest films in history, the founder of a new trend, for the first time in the cinema so realistically, without nuances and conventions, showing the world of ordinary commoners. And on the other hand, what the film is about: just a father and son wander through a large, indifferent to their problems, the city, hoping somewhere to accidentally see a stolen bicycle, without which there is no work, without which there is no money, without which, as you know, the family is on the verge of starvation. That's all.
De Sica beautifully showed a non-standard story from life, harmoniously drawing the line between the drama and absurdity of what is happening. But the plot of the film is simple and uncomplicated, like the life of the main character, and today’s viewer, who has seen the views, will not be surprised by anything. Yes, there are times when some little thing ruins your life and you can't do anything. Yes, it was difficult for people in post-war Italy, but when was life easy for whom? Life in general is a cruel thing.
The parable of the human essence ... It’s a shame to admit, but I haven’t watched a single film by Vittorio De Sica, although he had so many Oscar nominations, so I decided to start with his most famous film, the classics of world cinema “Bike Thieves”. The title of the film is very important, but I’ll talk about it later. Post-war Rome, long unemployed Antonio Ricca is overjoyed - he finally finds a job. But on the first day of work, he was robbed of a bicycle without which it is impossible to work! Together with his young son Bruno, he tries to find a stolen bicycle in a huge city, on which the life of his family depends. The film at first sight is very simple, but it is only at first sight. But this is only from the first, in fact, the film is very difficult. It is difficult to understand the problem. Well, they stole a bicycle from a person, which hundreds are stolen in a day, but this is not the most important thing in the film, just for someone a bicycle is trifles, and for someone it is a whole life. And the point, again, is not that they stole a bicycle, so they could steal anything, just with the help of this bicycle reveals the mean essence of so many people, and breaks the fate of so many families. How can you remain human in such a situation? Who is this mysterious bike thief? It is no accident that I mentioned that the title is very important "Bike Thieves". So who is he? The one who stole Ricky's bike, or could it be Ricky himself? Yes, it can be anyone, any inhabitant of Rome, it is just such a generalized concept that all people are kidnappers in some way, even the best of us. The film is strong in its spirit. All this gravitating atmosphere of doom. Even before watching anything of this and did not expect, thought just a sleek film, but for some reason put it among the best films according to film critics, so it should be something special. That’s the spirit of the film here. It’s actually one of the most moving films I’ve seen. The scene in the cafe is generally a masterpiece of a touching genre. It looked so cool. And there was no tragedy in public, everything was so vital. This effect is largely created by two wonderful male roles. Ricky himself and his son Bruno. The actors played well, and the most important thing is true, and at the end of the film, it's really, really great. Also here is very good music, which is always where you need, sometimes tragic, sometimes comical. In my opinion, the movie was great. If at first I was less skeptical, I thought it would end with Happy End and everyone would be happy, but no. Everything is quite different here, and, it would seem, behind such a simple story, there is such a huge meaning.Original
The parable of the human essence ... It’s a shame to admit, but I haven’t watched a single film by Vittorio De Sica, although he had so many Oscar nominations, so I decided to start with his most famous film, the classics of world cinema “Bike Thieves”. The title of the film is very important, but I’ll talk about it later. Post-war Rome, long unemployed Antonio Ricca is overjoyed - he finally finds a job. But on the first day of work, he was robbed of a bicycle without which it is impossible to work! Together with his young son Bruno, he tries to find a stolen bicycle in a huge city, on which the life of his family depends. The film at first sight is very simple, but it is only at first sight. But this is only from the first, in fact, the film is very difficult. It is difficult to understand the problem. Well, they stole a bicycle from a person, which hundreds are stolen in a day, but this is not the most important thing in the film, just for someone a bicycle is trifles, and for someone it is a whole life. And the point, again, is not that they stole a bicycle, so they could steal anything, just with the help of this bicycle reveals the mean essence of so many people, and breaks the fate of so many families. How can you remain human in such a situation? Who is this mysterious bike thief? It is no accident that I mentioned that the title is very important "Bike Thieves". So who is he? The one who stole Ricky's bike, or could it be Ricky himself? Yes, it can be anyone, any inhabitant of Rome, it is just such a generalized concept that all people are kidnappers in some way, even the best of us. The film is strong in its spirit. All this gravitating atmosphere of doom. Even before watching anything of this and did not expect, thought just a sleek film, but for some reason put it among the best films according to film critics, so it should be something special. That’s the spirit of the film here. It’s actually one of the most moving films I’ve seen. The scene in the cafe is generally a masterpiece of a touching genre. It looked so cool. And there was no tragedy in public, everything was so vital. This effect is largely created by two wonderful male roles. Ricky himself and his son Bruno. The actors played well, and the most important thing is true, and at the end of the film, it's really, really great. Also here is very good music, which is always where you need, sometimes tragic, sometimes comical. In my opinion, the movie was great. If at first I was less skeptical, I thought it would end with Happy End and everyone would be happy, but no. Everything is quite different here, and, it would seem, behind such a simple story, there is such a huge meaning.Original