Salvatore Giuliano (1962) User Reviews (13)

The world and revolution

[Polaris_DiB · 7/10 · 12 October 2008]

After World War II, as borders were being redefined, hundreds of countries found themselves in social turmoil, leading to attempted revolutions and a few gains. In Sicily, one Salvatore Giuliano was asked to join the resistance against the Italian fascists still trying to hold the land after the completion of the war. Giuliano was mostly successful at upsetting the rule of the fascists, in the meantime garnering the respect and admiration of the populace but developing many institutional enemies. This movie starts on the day of his assassination, then through flash forwards and backflashes analyzes the conspiracy behind how Giuliano came to die. Nothing and nobody is left out of scrutiny, from the fascists to the police to the mob to the resistance to the populace.

This is a piece of political film-making, the type which is an honest document to that post-war trend of social revolution in small countries and the dire consequences it had, not to mention the disturbing connotations felt by the conspiratorial nature of the ultimate fall of revolutionary leaders. The first half of the film shows mostly the historical events as they took place, and then the second half revolves mostly around a trial in which everyone's role in the events are put into question: an intriguing concept in a movie because it undermines the theory of the camera as "all-seeing". Giuliano as a character is never seen except dead. It is impossible to hear what he has to say for himself. We are left only with the history of events and the interpretations of the community and spectators, only that their opinions are subtly twisted by institutional hegemony, the status quo. Sound a little familiar to anything that may be happening today? This is the type of movie that needs reappraisal every few years for re-asking that very same question.

Meanwhile, despite the deconstruction of the role of the camera in recording "the truth", it is nevertheless used to awesome effect: the photography of this movie is absolutely gorgeous. Ironically, all of the action is set against a spectacular Sicilian backdrop that almost overshadows the actions and drama of the minuscule humans that inhabit it. In a way, there's an undertone of the theme of impermanence in the whole movie via the visuals, as the most striking images often involve the lack of humans completely.

--PolarisDiB

Good but overrated

[JuguAbraham · 7/10 · 31 October 2017]

Interesting neo-realistic, quasi-documentary film with notable editing. But did the film deserve the Best Director award at Berlin over Bergman's "Through a glass darkly"? The Swedish film was superior. Martin Scorsese likes it because he can identify with the Italian politics and sociology of that time. The Rosi film is good but overrated.

A Unique Motion Picture Experience

[vslucarelli · 7/10 · 16 February 2017]

This film is not without its flaws. The middle is quite slow, linearity is minimal and some sequences are hard to follow. However, the ultimate courtroom sequence with Gaspare Pisciotta arguing his innocence packs quite a punch and gives this film's ending some substance that the middle fairly lacked. This saves a film that, in the end, blends multiple styles quite well and stands as an achievement in Italian Cinema that has few parallels in America. Use of the crash zoom and documentary style camera-work adds to the effect that Rosi was trying to create of melding fact with fiction in a unique way which is only heightened by the absence of the title outlaw in all but words and a corpse in the films opening minutes. Salvatore Giuliano is not for all viewers, but it clearly has many merits that its contemporaries lack.

brilliant direction

[paulet · 4 April 2004]

This remarkable movie reminded me of early Eisenstein for the fluid, dynamic

movement of crowds--in the streets, in the movement of soldiers and bandits across the hilly terrain, and in the scene of the Portella della Ginestre massacre. The back-and-forth narrative structure must have influenced Costa-Gavras in the making of "Z." And Rosi's ability to get riveting performances from non-professionals (some of whom could not read scripts) is astonishing. The story line gets confusing, but I think that's because the situation was confusing--multiple betrayals and layers of

corruption and complicity--rather than a flaw in the script or editing. Visually exciting, too--the use of distancing overhead shots, the quiet menace of gunmen walking up a deserted, sun-baked street... memorable stuff.

A Subtle Classic About The Heart and Soul of A Country

[museumofdave · 9/10 · 4 May 2013]

The first time you experience this film is rather like going to an opera without knowing the plot: there are some grand scenes of murder and passion, some incredible scenery, but it's long and you're in a suspended state of confusion much of the time--and it's a two-hour film, almost a documentary.

The second time you watch this film (and you should!) it can be enjoyed on so many levels, and you begin to appreciate Rosi's genius for mixing various kinds of truth, for exposing the sorts of lies governmental bodies can develop to protect their flanks, for demythologizing the idea of the folk outlaw whose ideals are supposedly those of the people. At heart this is a film about Sicily, about an island's struggle to find it's heart and it's heritage--not easy to watch, but magnificently photographed at every turn.

Poor Sicily between the Mafia and the Communist !!!

[elo-equipamentos · 8/10 · 16 June 2019]

Francesco Rosi's cinema are around political matters, a tough subject too swallow for usual cinephiles, due the hard life which we lives are enough to stand, but some facts needs a better understanding as this picture suggests, how Sicily gets his independence from Italy is plentiful explained here, each facts were expose in this overlong picture, but Francesco wisely put forward a cursed triangle of forces, the mob, the separatists and the dangerous outlaws who help them in hope to get their crime's amnesty, after they got Sicily's autonomy starts another hard issue, the communist, such thing was totally inconceivable to Italian standards at it's time, a mass killing was prompt provides by the rich farmers and also by the mob, the Giuliano the leader almost didn't appears on the movie, his second on command and your fellows conrades in-arms were charged by the massacre, interesting picture over this dry land on Italy's south, the mountainous island Sicily !!!

Resume:

First watch: 2019 / How many: 1 / Source: DVD / Rating: 8

Flawed, partly uninteresting but overall well made

[Gloede_The_Saint · 5/10 · 10 July 2010]

Through the first hour of this film there are no focused characters, at most a character is seen in two or three short scenes. It's basically just following history and showing examples of it. Luckily it's not rushed, it's decently paced and it is realistic.

The best way to describe this is to call it a docu-drama. A narrator tells you something and then some people either do what's described or continues where the narrator leaves off. Though this approach can work, I did find it distancing in this film and it did make me less interested. The above competent direction and photography did elevate it however and for a long time I felt that it was great.

The films main problem is that we never really get to know anything, least of all about the title character who is despite the entire film being about his history only seen dead, or walking/running around. He only has a few lines.

Then towards the middle we experience two horrendous acts of overacting which damages the film severely. Both involving screaming/crying, the worst offender was the woman playing Giulianos mother. She screams and cries so awfully and in such a high tone that you wonder if you are watching a cheap parody. This scene is agonizingly long.

We do however learn a lot about the conflict going on and after a bit more than an hour, perhaps closer to 90 mins we get one character to follow. Overall I just don't think the film put us inside the conflict and despite giving us historical facts and let us understand the events we never got to the core. This made it cold and somewhat uninteresting for time to time. Not a film I would recommend but definitely a more or less good film.

6.5/10

Not so much a review as notes that might help the prospective viewer

[petrelet · 22 January 2018]

In order to really evaluate this film, I would have to be a knowledgeable Italian leftist. I'm not. I knew who Giuliano was, but the structure of the film still kind of threw me for a while. But I think I can say a couple things which might help the next person who is thinking of seeing it.

First: it helps a lot if you know something about Giuliano and about the political situation in Italy and in Sicily at the end of World War II before seeing the movie. Francesco Rosi made this movie a few short years after Giuliano's killing and the subsequent trials. His audience had heard a lot about Giuliano and didn't have to be given the whole backstory about him and about the last 15 years of Italian politics. The viewer today, however, particularly outside Italy, could use some of it. Check out the Wikipedia article at least.

Second: if you expect a movie about a charismatic bandit setting traps for the law, you'll be surprised, because the movie really doesn't focus on his career as a leader of a bandit gang / separatist guerrilla force at all. It starts with Giuliano's body lying in a courtyard, and officials telling reporters a story about how he died. During the first half of the film we jump back some to some incidents, and then about halfway through we leave all that behind and go forward into the investigations and trials of accused members of his band after Giuliano's death.

Furthermore, Rosi rather veils his views about Giuliano. We learn that secessionist politicians saw him as sort of a desperate hope, that the people of his town mostly liked him and that the big cheeses mostly hated him, but Rosi keeps his distance. The key incident from the point of view of the succeeding criminal trials is the massacre at Portella della Ginestra of peaceful persons attending a May Day rally. We see Giuliano's band moving out to "shoot at some Communists"; later, as the crowd listens to talk about getting land and education for their children, there are a couple volleys of bullets, and then a third one, from the arid distance, which cuts down a score of completely innocent people. The camera does not minimize this crime, but Rosi is vague about whether he thinks Giuliano intended this result, or that it was unintended by him or even a frame-up by other parties.

Third: while Rosi keeps Giuliano at a distance, he makes it very clear what he thinks of the Italian state. We see that their promises of amnesty to the separatists were worthless. We see carabinieri raiding a village and carting men away pretty much indiscriminately. We see that their stories about how they heroically shot Giuliano in a fire fight are lies. We see that legal procedure silences competing stories and takes the place of a true investigation of Giuliano's life and death. We hear stories of a secret alliance between the state and the Mafia. Giuliano is dead, his forces are in jail or dead or disbanded, but all these horrible people and sinister forces in and around the state apparatus are alive and the real focus of Rosi's agitation.

All this makes perfect sense to me if I try (of course with no hope of getting it exactly right) to put myself in the position of a leftist agitator (anyone who thinks I intend to belittle Rosi by thinking of the film in this way doesn't grasp how I view leftist agitation) in 1961, trying to deal with the tales and memories of Giuliano and sorting out the lessons I do and don't want people to remember. On the one hand, Giuliano took on the Italian state and was seen as a Robin Hood character. On the other hand, he was quite anti-communist even if you give him the benefit of all the doubt there is regarding Portella della Ginestra; he hung out with monarchists and wanted to get Sicily annexed by the Truman administration!

So if you are Rosi, you are not at all interested in trying to revive Giulianism or revere Giuliano. You are interested in starting with the fact that your audience maybe has fond feelings about him and understands where he came from, but in moving on from there into a present-day critique of the police, the military, and the Mafia. And for me this answers a lot of questions about why this film is organized the way it is. Rosi wants people to remember, for example, the heroic black-clad village women, trying to take on the carabinieri in a hand-to-hand fight to get their men released. There are more people in that fight than in Giuliano's whole band at its highest point.

Those are some notes that will perhaps (who knows) be useful for a non-Italian viewer trying to get into this film. As for a full review of the film, I don't claim to be competent to do it. I'm glad I got around to seeing it, though.

more a documentary than a film, and a very boring one too

[sebaeyza · 4/10 · 20 February 2003]

"Salvatore.." is more a documentary than a film, in which the story of the legendary sicilian gangster is told. Oddly enough, we never get to see his face, and no insight is given of his character or about how and why did he turn into such an icon for the sicilian people. We only know about him through the other characters in the film. Even though there is some fine acting going on, the direction of Mr.Rosi is downright awful. We are presented with a series of events with no connecting thread whatsoever, other than a logical chronological development. While dealing with an interesting historical moment of Sicily, the film is terribly boring and you need a truckload of patience to stay tuned through the end. If you are keen on studying Sicily's historical heritage, you may find this film interesting, if not, then you should miss it!.

Quite Stunning

[n_m_mcnamara · 30 April 2004]

Francesco Rosi's elliptical film about the notorious Sicilian gangster is quite stunning. This is not, however, a typical gangster film. This film is more about the lives of the people affected by Giuliano than about the gangster himself and this is given extra resonance by the casting of the real villagers in almost all cases. The fact that we never see Giuliano's face makes the director's intentions quite clear.

Giuliano began his professional criminal career when he was caught stealing at a young age and chased out of his village into the surrounding hills where he formed a gang and made a living from robberies and standover tactics. He became feared and respected by the locals and was eventually recruited by regional officials to help in the fight for independence from Italy. The first half of the film explores these events and manages to convey an extremely strong feeling for the time and place. The second half of the film deals with the trial of the surviving members of Giuliano's gang after his death and in doing so illuminates much of what has come before.

It is remarkable how well the film holds together considering the amount of different styles and techniques that were combined in its creation. There are elements of docudrama, courtroom drama, Italian neorealism, crime story and political tract. It is also surprising how well it holds up over forty years later.

There is a problem with this film

[christopher-underwood · 4/10 · 7 May 2020]

There is a problem with this film. Bold, courageous and outspoken though it is, director Franco Rosi is somewhat held captive by his conflicting Communist Party and neorealist filmic leanings. Presented as a if a street reality he is caught between the style and the substance which is made far worse by the ambiguity of the central character, who we only see as a dead man. As a picture of post-war Sicily and its poverty stricken towns and labyrinthine streets it appears remarkable but as to who is doing what and for why much more confusing. I understand it was not just me who was confused, Giuliano himself appears to be a man of many faces and apart from often appearing to be a man of the people keen to wrestle his country from the hands of the Italian government, he went so far as to suggest it should become a part of the US. Rosi is therefore considerably conflicted here as with his background and beliefs, he is keen to bring a much more left orientated administration to the whole of Italy. Such is the result on film that we are presented with the main thrust of discontent and the evils of the State and judiciary and an implication that behind the scenes our hero had everyone's interest at heart. Bit sentimental you might say and a difficult watch.

Matter-of-fact, yet punchy

[federovsky · 21 December 2008]

Filmed in the actual Siciilian locations, this film is a fair attempt to strip away the myth surrounding bandit-cum-revolutionary Giuliano. In fact, he doesn't appear except as a gunned-down corpse at the beginning. The film winds back to unravel the events leading to his death, and forwards to its consequence. This is a clever method of achieving objectivity while at the same time subtly emphasising the man's elusive and mysterious qualities. To show Giuliano would have either been either hagiography or iconoclasm. The film rose above that and broadened its inquiry into the wider social and political context, effectively belittling him as the puppet of various forces jostling for position in Sicily after the war: bandits, police, local aristocracy, the Italian government, communists, and the Mafia.

This sets quite a challenge for itself, partly because of the vacuum at its centre, partly because of the obscurity and complexity of the real events. We are delivered to a chaotic courtroom to try to piece it together. The film finally latches onto Giuliano's lieutenant –the only one who seems to know something of what is going on - but even he is silenced. It's all the more disturbing for the confusion.

Rosi is one of the best directors of crowds scenes and he gives raucous energy to any gathering of men, especially in the courtroom. He induces a kind of group hysteria in his actors; they are totally unaware of the camera and the result is an almost disturbing hyper-real feel (real crowds are dull in comparison) – it's really something to appreciate. To get into this film, you need to invest something in the passions of the various parties involved - if not sympathise with them, then at least understand them. Without this, the danger is that it all boils down to so much petty bickering. The same might be said of the Godfather, which clearly owes a huge debt to Rosi's style.

Influential then, somewhat brave, with some fine directorial moments, and an interesting history lesson. Hard to actually like, but hard not to admire.

A perfect analysis of the most famous gangster, loved from the poor people, of Sicily.

[_Manuel_ · 23 August 1999]

A perfect analysis of the most famous gangster, loved from the poor people, of Sicily. Is very good the acting of Frank Wolff as the cousin of Giuliano, Salvatore Pisciotta. On this Film there is the same history of the gangster of the Film "Il Siciliano" with C. Lambert, but here the film is history, there the film is a bad novel.