Four hours of Martin Scorsese talking us through his favourite Italian (mainly neo-realist) films. The format is odd. The problem is not that we don't get to see much of Scorsese - he appears only occasionally - but that he basically presents condensed versions of entire films - lots of them one after the other, using an extensive series of clips over which he narrates the story from beginning to end, giving away everything. This is annoying, and it is necessary to keep fast-forwarding in order to avoid all the spoilers.
Rossellini gets most attention - a third of the film is devoted to him. Rome Open City, Paisan, Flowers of St Francis, and Viaggio in Italia are all treated in depth. The others, and the films that he singles out to rave about, are: Visconti (Senso), Fellini, (I Vitelloni), De Sica (Gold of Naples) and Antonioni (L'Avventura) - although many others touched on in less detail.
Scorsese insists repeatedly that these films influenced his own work, but at no point gives any particular examples, and it's hard to see any. Where is the realism and the humanism in Scorsese's films? He admires Viaggio in Italia for not leaping from one climax to the next, instead allowing the drama to unfold through small moments - and yet breaks that precept completely in The Aviator.
It's relentless adulation rather than critical assessment, and that becomes dull. Without adding enough critical value, it's hard to understand the point of the whole exercise.
Rossellini gets most attention - a third of the film is devoted to him. Rome Open City, Paisan, Flowers of St Francis, and Viaggio in Italia are all treated in depth. The others, and the films that he singles out to rave about, are: Visconti (Senso), Fellini, (I Vitelloni), De Sica (Gold of Naples) and Antonioni (L'Avventura) - although many others touched on in less detail.
Scorsese insists repeatedly that these films influenced his own work, but at no point gives any particular examples, and it's hard to see any. Where is the realism and the humanism in Scorsese's films? He admires Viaggio in Italia for not leaping from one climax to the next, instead allowing the drama to unfold through small moments - and yet breaks that precept completely in The Aviator.
It's relentless adulation rather than critical assessment, and that becomes dull. Without adding enough critical value, it's hard to understand the point of the whole exercise.