Micransix Crappy film

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Ginger Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Fleur Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

dongwangfu I watched this on Netflix also and although I like De Sica much better (for some reason his melodrama seems less melodramatic!) there were a few points in other reviews with which I wanted to take issue. First, the title means (I think, given my pidgin Italian) "It was night in Rome". "Escape by Night" is indeed a weird choice for an English title, but one can't really fault the movie for that. Also, as for the American acting like an Italian, even Americans can occasionally act according to the adage "When in Rome..." so I don't buy that as an indictment of the historical sense of the film.The point that is made above about stereotypes is a good one. I would expect Rossellini to accept this criticism -- it is almost as if, fifteen years later, he is setting out to tell his story of the way Italian society adapted to the end of the occupation. The black market, the Church, the aristocracy, the professional class -- they all are caricatured, almost as if he was doing a sociological study of the time. I thought that film succeeded at that level, although of course there is really little character development if all of them are a "type."One other distinctive feature I wanted to point out is the role of the Communists in the film - - Rossellini paints the Communists as the major anti-fascists and as having sacrificed quite a bit. This wholeheartedly positive portrayal is unfamiliar for me, as someone who grew up in the Cold War era, but according to my limited understanding, historically accurate. Since the film was made in 1960, at the end of the decade of the House Committee on UnAmerican Activities, though, I wonder if this portrayal was not somewhat pointed?

Movie Review SPOILER ALERT (Shortened Review: Nowhere near the drama I was expecting):I watched the 133 minute version on Netflix based on the positive reviews here. But after watching the film, and I don't care about the masterful, under-appreciated directing etc, I just want a good story and something to care about. It doesn't happen. The title led me to believe there was an escape from occupied Italy to somewhere in liberated Italy. This is World War 2 after all and the Germans had occupied Italy for some time after the Sicily invasion and the eventual Italian surrender to the Allies. Even the history is wrong. I don't believe the Germans held Soviet prisoners with the rest of the Allied POWs. Soviet POWs were used as slaves and worked to death. Almost none of the Soviet POWs returned alive after the war. But that is trivial to the plot of the movie. What is awkward is that none of the 3 former Allied POWs escapes - or at least the one who did escape just vanished and the audience is told he escaped. The POW escapees go out on some nights from their attic hide out and into the street on another occasion but that's it. Not really much of an escape for hardened veterans, and officers at that. There are a very few moments of drama when the film picks up. And miraculously, all the non-Italians learn fluent Italian by reading a book and hiding in a dreary attic of our beautiful Italian hero-ette. Even the Russian speaks decent Italian. I knew there was something hokey about the cast when the American POW kissed his Italian male acquaintance on the cheek. No American male would ever do that in an infinite number of centuries, let alone a soldier. The film just didn't flow enough for me and the story dragged with very few moments of drama. It's an above-average film but that's it.

dbdumonteil An user complained that Rossellini's movies are overlooked today;he is completely right.Although the Italian New Wave was never so hard and so nasty as their French counterpart on former colleagues,it nevertheless cast a shadow over them.On the European board ,there are plenty of messages about Fellini,Antonioni,Pasolini (and Godard,Truffaut ,Rohmer and co)whereas Rossellini (and De Sica,the great Luigi Comencini)are almost always absent.He also complained about the cuts in Rossellini's works;however,what was intolerable in "Vanina Vanini" (the first part of which is thoroughly incomprehensible) is not so important in "Era Notte a Roma" . My copy has a running time of about 130 min and that's enough,for I think that it's overlong and even full of filler."Era Notte" tells the story of three escaped prisoners during WW2: a Russian,an English and an American.It's also the story of an Italian girl who helps the peasants to get rid of their burdensome guests in exchange for food.She's not a resistance fighter (as his fiancé is) but she will prove herself very human in spite of her weakness.Rossellini displays respect for the audience: every character speaks his own language ,which gives the movie much more substance than ,for instance ," Uomo della croce " in which everyone spoke Italian.My favorite scene is the Christmas celebration with a very moving "Auld Lang Syne" sung by people from four different countries.It cannot be considered one of Rossellini 's masterworks but its several moments of brilliance make it a must for Rossellini's fans.

tentender Can no one have seen this important Rossellini film? Astonishing it is to be the first to comment in these "pages" on a work by one of the major directors of world cinema (and for the second time -- no one else had commented on "Vanina Vanini" either). Apparently this 145 minute film (that is how it clocked in at the showing I attended) received very little distribution, and, though it is excellent, it is not hard to see why this was so. Its story of three Allied soldiers, one English, one American, one Russian, on the loose in an as-yet-unliberated Italy, is short on wild excitement, but filled with interesting detail and human warmth. Giovanna Ralli is marvelous (and would have been a marvelous Vanina Vanini, if only...) in a complex and emotional role. Peter Baldwin and Renato Salvatori are winningly handsome young men (and are rather lookalikes), and Leo Genn and Sergei Bondarchuk provide solid acting. Rossellini's use of the zoom to make possible "intercutting without cuts" is used to great effect in this film, and the scene in which the spy/informer eavesdrops on the confessional is especially masterful. One of Rossellini's last films before he decided to devote himself exclusively to the small screen, this film is sober, serious, worthy, and, withal, not lacking in value as entertainment. Postscript: I've now had a chance two years later (December 2008) to re-view this film, thanks to a new (and very inexpensive) DVD region 1 release. My second viewing has led me to revise (upward) my evaluation of this beautiful film. Yes, it's long, and seems episodic, but, as in Chekhov's plays and (odd pairing, I know) McCarey's "The Bells of St. Mary's," on second viewing the connections between the episodes are profound and satisfying. The Lionsgate DVD (paired with a second little-known Rossellini feature, "Dov'e la liberta) is a real bargain (available for under $15). The print appears better than that on the region 2 UK disc (see screen captures at DVDBeaver.com), and, though the titles are in French (this is a Franco-Italian co-production) the title itself is given in Italian, unlike that on the UK version. Running time is 2:13.5, compared to 2:08 and change on the region 2 disc (accounted for by the PAL speedup). Subtitles are excellent and unusually thorough. My previously stated running time of 145 is confirmed by Jose Luis Guarnier within the text of his Praeger Film Library monograph from 1970 (though his filmography gives 120 minutes!) There is a strange mis-match in the editing in the first attic scene, which may indicate some foul play. I can't recall any specific missing scene, though. Details aside, this really is a great film.