'El Alamein' is a WW 2 movie, sensationalist and exploitative, unassuming and episodic; British, Germans and Italians fight unsparingly in the African desert, and we recognize the dunes, the hills of gray sand, from the westerns of the '60s, the envy and intrigues cause the temporary removal of Rommel, meanwhile the Germans loose most of their tanks due to the British's perfidy but also abnegation and determination, Rommel is sent back, only to assure the retreat, against the leader's order
. We will also think about the difference between a movie as a popular show, and a movie as a work.
We look at war from the headquarters, and from an Italian stronghold. The main ideas are toughness and courage, both amply provided by all the military involved; 'El Alamein' also shows strategies, the British duping the Germans with a phony map of the minefield, the Germans using the Italians to back their retreat. Characteristically, the movie isn't good-natured, but amoral, indifferent to ethics, which makes the plot plausible; the credits boast the support, and possible the approval of the Italian army. The protagonist is lieutenant Giorgio, from one of Folgere division's companies; goodish cast (Hilton, M. Rennie, Ira Furstenberg, Hossein, Salerno). The known commanders, Rommel, Montgomery, Canaris, have supporting roles or cameos. Rommel's military genius is undermined by intrigue and the leader's insanity.
The battle scenes seem a bit shapeless (except those of the heroic resistance of the company against the British tanks, while the Germans retreat), as the real aim of the movie are some generic effects: like hell-raising, etc.. This is the main idea of a popular show: not as a work, but as providing a set of generic emotions. It doesn't need a director, but a hack.
I enjoyed 'El Alamein'. Loosely structured, accomplished for what it was meant to be, cynical, rhetorical, episodic, sometimes with the sense of hopelessness and despair known from the Italian genre movies, and also the familiar sloppiness, it doesn't relish in filming landscapes, or people. In an American war movie, there's the effect on the audience, and also the scene as thought in itself, as depiction, as insight, as shaped; the Italian genre movies seem to undercut this idea of a scene, right to the effects themselves. So they care less about shape, about work, and more about the popular show. Even very humble American genre movies have this objective structure, this dramatic shape, which the Italian movies don't care for. 'El Alamein' has a plot, but not a dramatic storyline; the Italians didn't rip off a structure, but some topics. Further, the American genre movies also resort to an essentially English lyricism, which is wholly alien to the Italians. The Italian rhetoric may be sentimentalist, but dry, without lyrical depth.
(This is a typology; these are ideal types. The European genre movies aren't the only to belong to the 'Judy and Punch' type; not all of them belong to it. Once acknowledged this _ideality of the types, the national criterion will lead one to a further understanding: e. g., the Italian genre movies lack a dramatic structure, but have charm, appeal, zest.)
We look at war from the headquarters, and from an Italian stronghold. The main ideas are toughness and courage, both amply provided by all the military involved; 'El Alamein' also shows strategies, the British duping the Germans with a phony map of the minefield, the Germans using the Italians to back their retreat. Characteristically, the movie isn't good-natured, but amoral, indifferent to ethics, which makes the plot plausible; the credits boast the support, and possible the approval of the Italian army. The protagonist is lieutenant Giorgio, from one of Folgere division's companies; goodish cast (Hilton, M. Rennie, Ira Furstenberg, Hossein, Salerno). The known commanders, Rommel, Montgomery, Canaris, have supporting roles or cameos. Rommel's military genius is undermined by intrigue and the leader's insanity.
The battle scenes seem a bit shapeless (except those of the heroic resistance of the company against the British tanks, while the Germans retreat), as the real aim of the movie are some generic effects: like hell-raising, etc.. This is the main idea of a popular show: not as a work, but as providing a set of generic emotions. It doesn't need a director, but a hack.
I enjoyed 'El Alamein'. Loosely structured, accomplished for what it was meant to be, cynical, rhetorical, episodic, sometimes with the sense of hopelessness and despair known from the Italian genre movies, and also the familiar sloppiness, it doesn't relish in filming landscapes, or people. In an American war movie, there's the effect on the audience, and also the scene as thought in itself, as depiction, as insight, as shaped; the Italian genre movies seem to undercut this idea of a scene, right to the effects themselves. So they care less about shape, about work, and more about the popular show. Even very humble American genre movies have this objective structure, this dramatic shape, which the Italian movies don't care for. 'El Alamein' has a plot, but not a dramatic storyline; the Italians didn't rip off a structure, but some topics. Further, the American genre movies also resort to an essentially English lyricism, which is wholly alien to the Italians. The Italian rhetoric may be sentimentalist, but dry, without lyrical depth.
(This is a typology; these are ideal types. The European genre movies aren't the only to belong to the 'Judy and Punch' type; not all of them belong to it. Once acknowledged this _ideality of the types, the national criterion will lead one to a further understanding: e. g., the Italian genre movies lack a dramatic structure, but have charm, appeal, zest.)