Zurlini introduces a familiar theme, a futile relationship with an older woman and a younger man, perfected in his later film `Violent Summer,' but here Aida, Claudia Cardinale, plays a nighclub singer who is jilted in the opening moments of the film and spends the rest of the film searching for a way out of the stereotypical relationship of a beautiful woman using, and being used by men, a dependent and unhealthy relationship. When Marcello, a cad who lives in a lavish estate, tells his 16 year old younger Lorenzo, Jacques Perrin, to get rid of the girl, the younger brother's interest turns from bewilderment to unbridled obsession, as the high-strung, free-spirited girl surprisingly is flattered by his attention and by her belief that he has money, contrasting the obvious class distinction between the two, he lives in a statue-filled estate with his family, she lives alone out of a suitcase in a hotel room. The adults in the film are overly stern and heartless, represented by the familiar Zurlini statues which can be seen throughout his entire body of work; this lifelessness is contrasted against the passion of youth. The relationship comes to a screeching halt with the intervention of the family priest who questions Aida's motives with such a young and impressionable boy, urging her to move on. This is a brilliant scene where they speak in what appears to be a museum construction area, broken statues lie about with other scattered debris as the priest tries to reconstruct the spiritual direction of the young lovers, urging them to go their separate ways. This leads Aida into the arms of another conniving man who attempts to seduce her with plenty of money and alcohol, but Lorenzo arrives, refuses to butt out, gets his butt kicked by the older man, which leads to this extraordinarily long, beautifully evolving scene on the beach where the two lovers are caught up in the mysteries of their own futility, a kind of existential despair, surrounded by the wonderment of nature. This film constantly shifts the focus on who is the victim and who is to blame, in the end there are no answers, just a continuous search.
Add a Review
-
dat01020328 May 2005I have news for you. Claudia, as beautiful as she is, is not the most beautiful person in this film. That would be Jacque Perrin. He was 19 when the film was made (his character is 16), and the camera lingers on him in scene after scene.
The story is simple: Perrin's character falls for Claudia. She's an adult, he's not. She's poor, he's nobility.
Perrin's understated performance is a dead-on portrait of adolescent longing. His eyes tell the whole story. It's difficult to imagine that any man could watch him without experiencing flashbacks to his own adolescence. He doesn't know whether to hope, or not, but he can't help hoping anyway. He doesn't know anything about adult courtship, so he improvises as he goes along. He's unfailingly, achingly, kind and polite (see first clause, previous sentence). He's brave, as he pushes against, and sometimes breaks, the rules that bind a young man not yet old enough to make his own rules.
Claudia, meanwhile, also provides a deeply thought performance, as a young woman whose poverty constrains her every move. She wants some tiny measure of security-- her fear of of the very real possibility of being out on the streets in palpable. She has no way to reach safety without depending on a man, but men have been awful to her. And, she wants desperately not to cross the final line of degradation and become a whore. She'll take money, but only if she can satisfy herself that it is a gift-- that is, only if she can feel that she still has some measure of choice in what happens next. Several men, including Perrin, are trying to "help" her. We see her hesitate, and calculate, in almost every conversation: trying to decide if the safety offered is real, calculating what she will have to give up if she accepts. Claudia is not in glamor mode here: she is beautiful, and the men are swarming around her, but her clothes are cheap, and she's living out of her suitcase.
This is a fine film, but it's not likely to be in anyone's top ten. I think most people will find it moving and well worth watching.
Why not a GREAT film? I think this is not so much because of particular flaws of the film, as because of its modest dimensions. The film is not trying to make a grand statement. It delivers deeply felt and moving drama, and two completely believable and interesting characters. Enough for me. P.S.: On the dubbed version, the voicing is surprisingly good. -
gerettas1 November 2010That anyone could categorize this film as a "...somewhat mediocre and meandering melodramatic film by Zurlini" is sad.
I suppose, one must be sympathetic a bit to Italian culture at the time of the film to understand the simple truths of a beautiful woman who is unable due to circumstance, lack of education, and her own character, to hold onto the very few and dubious chances life presents to improve her situation.
With only her beauty as both spoiler and advantage a beautiful but simple woman is on the tide of personal ruin in every choice she makes. We hope and are torn for her as we watch each scene knowing the razors edge she is living on while those around her continue to misunderstand and take advantage of her plight.
This is a fantastic film (albeit 'little') that it's Nomination for the 1961 Cannes Golden Palm proves.
If you can find it in Italian with sub-titles listen carefully to the actors even if you don't understand Italian. The simplicity of their performances is decades before it's time. For me it remains an unforgettable masterpiece.
note: I would have rated it a "10" but some of the 'jump cuts' in the were one too many for my now '21-century' tastes. -
Jep_Gambardella23 June 2001... the one where Lorenzo watches Aida dancing with that older man. She was supposed to go to the movies with him but she chose to have dinner with a group of other guests at the hotel, and after dinner they start partying and dancing. At one point there is a close-up of Lorenzo that lasts for at least one minute. He looks at them dancing, looks away, takes a sip from his drink, fidgets, with all these different expressions on his face: jealousy, frustration, anger, discomfort, despair. No dialogue. Wonderfully acted and directed. That scene is worth more than all car chase sequences since the beginning of Cinema put together.
-
Underrated and little known to the Hollywood mainstream, this is an oft-told unrequited story of a boy falling in love with a woman. Jacques Perrin plays Lorenzo a wealthy boy of about 16 years old falling in love with a poor, nomadic not-so-successful showgirl named Aida, played by Claudia Cardinale. Lorenzo becomes Aida's patron and guardian of sorts, looking after her as Aida doesn't fully appreciate the boy's attention and kindness until the end. Instead we see her gravitate towards men who promise her a job and attention, which many men will do to a beautiful girl. But they don't give her kindness but instead break promises. Aida thinks fondly of Jacques as help but like many girls, she thinks of it as that and simply friendship to be repaid. Lorenzo is the only person who treats her with dignity. At what point does she realize he loves her if she does? (But then I can't give you spoilers). It's a old-fashion romantic story without sex and romance. Just reality.
Often mentioned as CC's first vehicle, this was actually her 15th film at a young age of only 22 when it was made. Jacques went on to a fairly successful film career which included Z and Cinema Paradiso and Claudia has had one of the longest film careers of any leading lady (over 50 years of consistently making films). Most of Claudia's movies are neorealist, dramatic roles suitable for arthouses and auteurs, rather the popular box-office hits. This film is not much different from her other films in how it approaches a love story from a neorealist view.
Valerio Zurlini directs with simple taste, nothing fancy and uses simple sets to tell his story. Zurlini made few films but this is his gift for us, his masterpiece. With cinematographer Tino Santoni, the two crafted a beautiful black-and-white story highlighted by the two lead actors. Three scenes represent their skills best, namely: the scene on the swing as Aida sings to Lorenzo after they separate from the party. He gently puts her hand on hers and as he does, she never notices and we don't see the hand until we see her eyes and expression. Then the camera slowly pans down to their hands as she stops singing. That scene was simply brilliantly directed and acted. The second was the long beach scene, one of the finest and most touching in (Italian) cinema history. It was long silent scene of the two on the beach at dusk. Starting not romantic but as she tends to his cuts, they stare at each other and the camera and lighting was simply beautiful for the two young faces. In today's quick catchy, witty dialogues, we forget acting is the eyes and face. That scene and the final scene (if I wrote the details, it would be a spoiler, no?) at the train station were tributes to Italian chiaroscuro and Caravaggio, the art of dark and light. Like many Italian films, this film ends with a slight melancholic feel and without Hollywood closure.
Claudia Cardinale is incredibly sexy and beautiful with little make-up and simple attires. It's amazing that she rarely dresses glamorously in her movies but still manages to show her beauty. She and Jacques give great performances. Compared to Sophia Loren or Gina Lollabrigida, Cardinale is a slightly better actress but many of her best roles were never mainstream Hollywood (and she didn't have that "English" accent Loren was able to master). She acts with her eyes, facial expressions and gestures extremely well.
This was named one of the Ten Best Movies of the Year by the New York Times and also made their 1000 Best Films list. Girl with a Suitcase (La ragazza con la valigia) is still occasionally shown in arthouses and museums today.
Similar films are Summer of 42 which is nostalgic 7/10, and more favorably I'd compare and recommend two other foreign films, Baran (French-Iranian) and Malena (Italian). I'd give Baran a 9/10 also which has incredibly beautiful scenes in a neorealist flair. The cinematography by Mohammad Davudi in that film directed by Majid Majidi is brilliant. Like Girl With a Suitcase, the plot is simply but the film is brilliant. Malena is cute, funny and touching with beautiful Monica Bellucci but simply not as good (7.5/10). -
JohnHowardReid29 October 2016The subtle, probing camera of director Zurlini (with its admirable choice of camera angles and remarkably fluid camera movement), allied with the evocative, deceptively simple yet superbly skilled photography of Santoni, clothe this wistful and heart-tuggingly scored romantic drama with an appeal that is as immediate as the pretty pout of Claudia Cardinale's lips, and as attractive as the sun-shrouded locations of Parma and Riccione. Acting is fine throughout, and Claudia Cardinale's admirers need not be too upset by the English-dubbed version, as she doesn't speak her own lines in the Italian version either. The original running time is listed as 135 minutes, but I've never met anyone who has actually seen this version. IMDb lists 121 minutes, but the dubbed version I saw at a studio preview ran 115 minutes (which is still longer than the U.S. sub-titled version of around 110 minutes or the U.K. dubbed version of 96 minutes).
-
frankde-jong27 August 2020Valerio Zurlini (1926 - 1982) is a somewhat forgotten director with a small oeuvre (8 films).
In "Girl with a suitcase" the 16 years old Lorenzo Fainardi (Jacques Perrin) falls madly in love with Aida Zepponi (Claudia Cardinale) who has been dumped by his older brother. This older brother has started a brief affaire with Aida by promising her a film career.
During most of the film Lorenzo seems to be the victim of the opportunistic Aida, who gladly accepts his gifts and monetary donations. In a key scene a priest, as a sort of oral conscience, reproaches her for this behaviour.
The real tragic character however is Aida herself, who is using but also being used by men and therefore very dependent on them. We see this very clearly in the beautiful final scene.
The film starts very slow and only gets underway in the second half. Claudia Cardinale, who was at the peak of her career ("Rocco and his brothers", 1960, Luchino Visconti / "8,5", 1963, Federico Fellini / "Il gattopardo", 1963, Luchino Visconti), really makes this film. -
lee_eisenberg8 December 2021Although Claudia Cardinale didn't achieve Sophia Loren's renown, there's no denying that she's an equally great actress. An example is "La ragazza con la valigia" ("Girl with a Suitcase" in English). The subtlety that Valerio Zurlini instills in the movie helps move this story of an accidental love triangle along at just the right pace.
It's the sort of movie that deserves a lot more recognition (especially given the current glut of franchise-driven cinema). I'm now hungry for other movies directed by Zurlini, or other Italian movies from this era. In the meantime, it's definitely a movie that you should see. -
lasttimeisaw21 December 2015One of Cardinale's defining work in her early career, GIRL WITH A SUITCASE is director Zurlini's second feature, an eye-pleasing Black-and-White melodrama centres on the dead-end obsession, which a young rich boy Lorenzo (Perrin) projects on Aida (Cardinale), a penniless nightclub showgirl, who has been dumped by his elder brother Marcello (Pani).
In the movie, Lorenzo is a 16-year-older, having barely arrived puberty, Aida is his first crush, which symbolises the most innocent and pure affection a boy must experience once-in-a-lifetime, propelled by unquenchable impulse, he is willing to do anything for her, and will surely swallow the bitter taste since their relationship can bear no fruition, the age barrier, the class disparity, all appear too formidable for Lorenzo to overcome, and Lorenzo is so good-natured and is too obedient to rebel against the unfair and prejudiced society. When we are young, we might meet the right person in the wrong time, maybe this is what Zurlini wants us to ruminate on.
But more relevant to contemporary audience, the film tends to be preferably reckoned as a strong showcase for Cardinale, debatably the very first one for her to stretch her limit as an actress in spite of her drop-dead sex appeal. Also later it reveals that Aida has been entering motherhood in a fairly early age, which mirrors Cardinale's own turbulent personal life of being a mother at the age of 19. Her Aida is a sultry damsel-in-distress, but the reality offers her no prince-charming, only leery chancers want to physically overtake her, in a critical point, she has no alternative other than agreeing to prostitute herself, we should feel empathetic to her, but that feeling is not well- sustained, since Aida is clearly aware of Lorenzo's blind fixation, and she has no qualms to cash in on it, and being brutally honest about their doomed future. The script dangles sluggishly in the cul-de-sac, to an extent of being patience-testingly sentimental, the two-handers between Cardinale and Perrin often oscillate between generic theatrics and amateurish spontaneity sans scintillating chemistry, which inadequately sets the tenor in a lukewarm limbo.
On the plus side, the film occasionally coruscates with its dashing panning camera movements, indicates that DP Santoni is a master-hand behind it; also the soundtrack is a winsome collage of classic pieces frequently played with harpsichord, builds up a solemn mood for the harsh reality where money becomes the only opt-out for something intrinsically superior to all the material concerns. -
planktonrules26 August 2010"Girl With a Suitcase" begins with a young lady (Claudia Cardinale) being abandoned by a man. He claims he has an appointment and will return but doesn't. The lady is stranded and calls the man's home. They have no idea who she's calling for, as he'd given her a false name--but the phone number and address were correct. Apparently this bum had used the woman and when he finds out about this, he convinces his 16 year-old brother to tell her that they have no idea who this man is who abandoned her and that she should leave. However, something strange happens--the young man becomes infatuated with her. While he doesn't tell her the truth, he does agree to help her and they form a friendship. If I were 16 and such a woman came into my life, I could certainly understand the guy--Ms. Cardinale was radiant in the film and I am pretty sure almost all the men in the theater seeing this were also infatuated with her!
Much of the film is very, very slow--and this is NOT meant as a criticism. It's just leisurely paced and lovely to watch--thanks to excellent acting and especially to the director's touch. This could have all seemed rather silly or salacious, but thanks to deft handling it's rather endearing and sweet to watch as it unfolds. Unfortunately, however, I would say that the last quarter of the film is quite different--and not quite as good. Still, overall, it's a very nice film and I can honestly say I can't think of another film like it! Some might be a bit put off by the age difference between the characters, but fortunately it did avoid being too creepy (see the film and you'll probably know what I mean). -
Jeremy_Urquhart11 May 2023I feel like the role Jacques Perrin plays here would have been a fairly easy one at times, because he (19 at the time) plays a character who's hopelessly smitten with Claudia Cardinale's (22 or 23 at the time) character. His character's older brother betrays Cardinale's character, a showgirl, and so he tries to right the wrongs his brother did, with consequences surprisingly more dramatic than comedic along the way.
I went into this expecting a romantic-comedy of sorts, but it felt more serious to me in all honesty. Maybe something was lost in translation, and further lost by the strange version I watched on YouTube, where the audio switched between Italian and English dialogue throughout for no rhyme or reason. It was still followable, because the Italian parts had English subtitles, but it was weird, especially when the changes happened halfway through a scene.
As for the film? It was fine. Felt a bit overlong and dragged here and there, but it's decently made. The two leads are very good, and Italian's a nice language to listen to (I preferred the YouTube version when it was in Italian). It was an alright movie. I can't be super enthusiastic or negative about it. -
dierregi28 June 2020Claudia Cardinale is at her most beautiful as Aida, an ordinary, low-class girl with little education. In the Italian society of the time, her only choice to survive his marrying well, but she's already missed her chance, having believed the talks about "free love" of her first boyfriend who got her pregnant and disappeared from the scene.
An unmarried young mother was not considered respectable in 1961, therefore Aida is an easy prey, first of Piero, her married band leader who mistreats her, then of Marcello a rich latin lover, who seduces her and then dumps her in a garage. So far, all the male characters are despicable.
Enters Lorenzo, Marcello's younger brother who is confronted by Aida and tells her lots of lies because he wants to keep her around. Lorenzo develops a major crush for Aida, but he's only 16 and has no chance of a real romance.
Aida turns a bit despicable herself when Lorenzo pays for her lodging in a luxury hotel and even buys her clothes. Her "thank you" is flirting with an older, sleazy hotel guest.
Having realised Lorenzo is a dead end, Aida tries to patch up things with Piero, who wants nothing of it, but his friend Romolo expresses an interest in paying Aida for sex. Sliding down the slippery slope, Aida is momentarily stopped by Lorenzo who tries a grand gesture, only to dump Aida like everybody else, leaving her a nice wad of cash.
The story moves at snail pace and all characters are unpleasant to various degrees. Cardinale was a luminous beauty and talented and Perrin as Lorenzo also did a good job. Still, a forgettable downer of a movie. -
federovsky22 October 2010There are moments in this film when you feel your feet lift of the ground and you enter a pure state of movie nirvana. Only the Italians could bring together style, elegance, poise, wit, sensitivity and irony like this, and play it out in the real world with real characters. The amour fou seems original: the sensitive ingenue is nobility (Jacques Perrin), while the girl (Claudia Cardinale) - his older brother's cast-off - is an impoverished drifter. It's not so much the obvious contrast in their backgrounds that provides the tension so much as the directions their yearnings take, that flash across each others' paths like ungainly swordsmanship. The fresh faces of the leads are a delight. It's really the quiet dignity of Perrin that carries the film while Cardinale is the sudden whirlwind that blows into his life. Technique is employed to brilliant effect: the waist-level camera, Zurlini's signature artistic shadows on the walls, and, most tellingly, the way distant characters gradually draw close to our position, a trick established with the first shot of the film. There's no finer kind of cinema.
-
tedg13 January 2007I watched this together with Eastwood's "Million Dollar Baby." I knew I would be challenged by that film (you can read my comment), and I wanted something that I knew would be a safe island after the offenses therein.
I chose this. Its between "Million" and "Nights of Cabiria" and more perfect than both in my view. The spine of this film is a story of a prostitute/dancer, an adventuress with few skills for the job. We see some encounters that provide insights, not into her character so much, but what limits her, and that matters because we discover many of those same limits in us.
Its a good film, largely forgotten today because its merely competent and not showy or overtly experimental as so many from that block were. But if you want an antidote to those bad films of good men, come here.
It has the economy of Eastwood, in fact this very tradition is where he learned his directorial craft. But its economy directed toward conveying the environment, the context in which our two characters find themselves. It's geared to the context not the actors, who after all can only tell you what is in themselves, not is what is in their world.
It has the depressing rootlessness of those early Fellini films, but it emerges from the real world we see instead of being an overt essay on what we know is Fellini's perspective that starts from the very beginning. This emerges.
Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching. -
Aw-komon4 February 2001This somewhat mediocre and meandering melodramatic film by Zurlini features Claudia Cardinale at her most exquisitely beautiful in every shot and what shots! Beautiful long takes that allow you to concentrate on whatever you want. Tino Santoni is a hell of cinematographer, whoever he was, a total master. If the script had been a little bit better the film might've ended up transcending into a superpoetic realm like Zurlini's awesome technicolor 1962 film "Family Diary"; as it is, it's very much a failure in an overall sense but still pretty good as probably the ultimate ode to one of the most beautiful actresses in cinematic history.