I just saw Umberto D for the first time last night on the big screen. Roger Ebert was in town and this is one of 3 films he presented while here. Roger has listed Umberto D as one of the "Great Movies" in volume II of his book by the same name. We were told the print was from Martin Scorsese's private collection, and it looked practically new.
I was primed to see this film after hearing Roger's introductory presentation, as I had never even heard of it before. As a film school graduate, former film studio employee, and award-winning screenwriter, I enjoy seeing foreign, independent, and other films that are off the beaten path. I had, in fact, seen The Bicycle Thief when I was in film school, which Vittorio De Sica directed 4 years prior to Umberto D. However, I found Umberto D to be quite a let-down.
I have numerous problems with the film. First, there is a great deal of business that does not propel the story forward, and seems only to serve as window dressing meant to show us the world Umberto lives in. That's all well and good up to a point, but this film really spends a lot of time on side characters and story points that have no bearing on the main storyline.
For instance, the maid's character (Maria). She serves very little purpose to the story, and yet is given a great deal of screen time. In a scene that easily lasts 3-4 minutes, we watch her wake up in the night, wander to the kitchen, turn on the gas, make several attempts to strike a match, light the burner, fill the coffee pot with water, heat the water, grind the coffee beans by hand... well, you get the idea. The problem is, we don't learn anything by watching these mundane actions. Is the point to show us what boring, monotonous lives these characters lead? If so, then this scene is a failure, as we have to suspect that ANYONE who wanted to make a pot of coffee it Italy during the post-war years would have gone through essentially the identical routine. So again I ask, what's the point?
Maria is really a sideplot, not a subplot. A subplot is a plot that weaves alongside the main plot, intersecting it at critical moments. Maria's story is completely independent of Umberto's. She is pregnant by one of two soldiers -- which one she cannot be sure. This hardly creates any meaningful character development with Umberto, except to show his opinion on the matter. It should have been a brief exchange of dialogue between them in a single scene, and yet it's revisited repeatedly for no apparent reason.
Another problem is Umberto's relationship with the dog (whose name is "Flike", not "Flik" or "Flag" or anything else. Roger Ebert even commented on this during his presentation last night, saying he had mistakenly called the dog "Flag" in his review.) We almost never see Umberto and the dog interact, and when they do it's as if he's dogsitting for a friend. Because his relationship with Flike is so critical to the ending of this film, it stands to reason that we need to see a unique bond develop between them, and yet we never do. Umberto plays with the dog ONCE during the entire film, which lasts for all of 15 seconds. He never really pets the dog, or kisses him, or talks to him (other than to give him commands). So when the dog runs away and Umberto becomes distraught while trying to find him it feels like it comes out of left field. This also takes much of the power out of their reunion, since we have not been given a very strong impression that Umberto would go to great lengths on behalf of his dog.
There are also several characters who appear out of nowhere, and then disappear just as suddenly. Umberto's fellow pensioners we meet at the beginning never reappear again later on. The soldiers Maria is involved with are seen once or twice but never heard. Umberto meets a friendly man in the hospital who promises to visit him after they are discharged, but never does. Towards the very end of the film, a man stops when he sees Flike begging for money, and it turns out to be an old acquaintance of Umberto's (although one we haven't met). Who is this man? How does Umberto know him? The movie never bothers to answer these questions, nor does their encounter lead to any deeper revelations. In fact, they only exchange a few words, with most of the scene consisting of awkward silence between them. It's an unnecessary piece of extraneous business that serves little purpose.
(Be sure to read Part 2 of my review, where I discuss the ending in detail)
