Umberto D. (1952)

Review:

It’s hard to look at Vittorio De Sica’s film “Umberto D.” without wanting to compare it to De Sica’s most famous film “The Bicycle Thieves” (1948). In some respects, the films are very similar. They are both prime examples of Italian Neo-Realism and both involve a man on a simple quest with a small companion at his side. But “Bicycle Thieves” is perhaps the better-known film because it speaks to something more elemental – our need to survive. “Umberto D.” is more akin to Kurosawa’s “Ikiru” (1952) or Capra’s “It’s a Wonderful Life” (1946) in that it chronicles a man’s quest to find something worth living for.

Umberto (Carlo Battisti) is a retired, old man who lives in a run down boarding house. His corrupt landlady rents out his room during the day to young fornicators and she continually threatens to kick Umberto out on the street if he doesn’t pay his rent. Umberto lives a lonely existence. He has no family or real friends to speak of. His only companionship comes from the landlady’s maid, Maria (Maria-Pia Casilio) and of course Flick, his trusty dog.

Throughout the film, Umberto pleads with acquaintances and strangers to buy his watch or to lend him money. He is nearly destitute. His government pension is not enough for him to live on. As Umberto walks through the city, he is forever accompanied by Flick.

In one heart wrenching scene, Umberto grapples with the notion of becoming a beggar. He practices putting his hand out for alms and finds he cannot do it. In the end, he resorts to using Flick, who holds Umberto’s hat in his mouth while Umberto hides behind a pillar. Many have described this most famous sequence as Chaplin-esque and I would be hard pressed to disagree. It possesses that certain bittersweet comedy that Chaplin was so good at making.

Another great sequence comes when Flick runs away and Umberto must go to the city’s pound to find him. In this sequence we see and understand the conflict in having a loved pet in poverty. Perhaps the saddest line in the film comes from an extra at the pound. He simply says “But 450 Lire…”

The best part of “Umberto D.” comes at the end, when Umberto has reached his pinnacle of desperation. I will not describe what happens, but suffice it to say, I felt myself going through a vast array of emotions in a relatively short span of time. Only animals in movies can really do that to me.

Ultimately, De Sica’s “Bicycle Thieves” is a better film than “Umberto D.” but “Umberto D.” gives it a run for its money. “Bicycle Thieves,” I think, strikes at the human soul. “Umberto D.” strikes at the heart.

Rating:

On a scale of one to Casablanca, this film is a “Life is Beautiful” (1998).

Rationalization:

If you don’t like to have your emotions tugged all over the place, this film may not be for you. But if you’re ready to just sit back and stretch your laughing places and crying places, “Umberto D.” may be a good choice for you. This is a film that stares into the canyon of despair and then turns around to find something better to look at. If you have two wits about you, you’ll be able to guess where the climactic scene is going, but who cares? When it’s done this well your emotions will take over and you’ll be happy you made the time to see this movie.