Thursday, April 9, 2009
Down and Out in Paris and Rome
Two films we have screened, Boudu Saved from Drowning, and Bicycle Thieves, portray the sometimes harsh life of those at the bottom of the economic ladder. How are the poor and homeless portrayed in both films (Boudu and Antonio Ricci) ? How are they similar and how different? Who or what is responsible for the character's poverty? Is there is a political message in either film?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Boudu is portrayed as a free-willed, anarchistic and inane person, who is invited to stay with a middle class family, but only manages to cause mayhem and disturbance. He does not care that he is impoverished, instead he relishes every moment of his life and has a good time with whatever life throws at him. In the end, Boudu ends up winning a large sum of money, but throws itaway and decides to carry out his pervious lifestyle as a free spirited vagabond. In Bicycle Thieves, however, there is a completely opposite illustration. Antonio Ricci is a lower class worker, who finds it a struggle and challenge to feed his family everyday. When he is given a decent paying job, his bicycle is stolen from him. Although he finds the robber, he cannot obtain justice since he has no concrete evidence. Therefore, he is driven to desperation and tries to steal a bike himself. However, he is caught and realizes he is not morally superior or any better than the person who originally stole his bike. The movie ends with the implication that Antonio’s family will face a bleak future filled with hardships.
ReplyDeleteThe argument can be made that Boudu himself is responsible for his own poverty. He is taken into a nice middle class family, is offered a place to stay and obtains a large sum of money. However, he decides he does not want any of this wealth, because it does not make him happy. Therefore, he decides to throw it all away and go where the current takes him. However, in Bicycle Thieves all of Antonio’s hardships and misfortunes stem from factors that are beyond his control. Poor government management, high unemployment rates, poverty, desperation, and lack of industry were all factors that plagued post war Italy and its recovery efforts. Worst of all, there was nothing Antonio or anybody from the working class could do about it. Therefore, sympathy is generated for Antonio and the working class, because even though he is a hard working and diligent man, there are going to be uncontrollable factors working against him and hindering his efforts for social progress and raising a family.
Boudu Saved from Drowning and Bicycle thieves portray the lower class in different ways. First, these two films cannot be compared too closely. Boudu is homeless. Antonio Ricci is a hard working member of society trying to provide food and shelter to his family. Therefore, in Boudu Saved from drowning, the lower class is seen as needy but greedy. Boudu's character is similar to that of the mouse in "If you give a mouse a cookie". Once Boudu is saved and given a place to live, he overstays his welcome and always wants more (until the end when he realizes that he likes his life as a nomadic homeless man and escapes back to the streets). However, in Bicycle Thieves, the lower class is shown as a very hard working group of people who just does not find success. Antonio Ricci tries to do anything possible to continue to feed his family. When he attempts to steal another man's bicycle at the end of the movie, Ricci displays the despair of the lower classes. In Boudu Saved from Drowning, the lower class is portrayed as decently happy with life and not hard working, unlike Bicycle Thieves. The only real similarity I can see between the lower classes of Paris and Rome are the fact that they do not have a decent amount of money.
ReplyDeleteIn Boudu Saved from Drowning, the lower class, particularly the homeless, is portrayed as a group of people who suffer from unfortunate circumstances because of their own doing. Boudu fails to try and make a life for himself other than as a man who wanders the streets with his dog. His lack of motivation is at first what seems to be the reason he is homeless, but we later see that he his homeless and poor because he chooses to be and being so makes him happy.
ReplyDeleteIn Bicycle Thieves, Antonio does not lack the motivation needed to rise above his status as lower class. The situation that his family finds themselves in is not due to action or inaction, but due to the circumstances of a post-war Italy. While Boudu was one of a few homeless people, Antonio and his family are part of a much larger group of lower class who find themselves without work or a means to an end. We see Antonio take the steps needed to better himself but realize that the situation overcomes anything that he could have had any control over. Boudu takes no steps to better himself and ends up where he began, although content.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThese two films portray two different types of struggling people and their situations. In Boudu Saved from Drowning, the homeless character Boudu doesnt seem to have much value in life and material. He is saved from death by a very good man and Boudu shows no sense of gratitude. While it can be said that he doesnt know any better but he makes not the slightest attempt to repay or give thanks to the man who provides him with "new life", food, shelter, and hospitality in general. Boudu does nothing in this film to try and make his situation better, he simply coasts, takes what comes to him and hasn't a care in the world. Because of these characteristics Boudu ends up right where he started, whit nothing.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, Antonio in Bicycle Thieves is attempting to improve his situation even it if it takes drastic measures. Antonio unlike Boudu is highly motivated to work and sacrifice to provide for his family. Again unlike Boudu, Antonio didn't get himself into his current predicament. His situation is due to the general state of post-war Italy. As seen in the film Antonio is even willing to resort to thievery to try and salvage his job and essential his families well being. While this isn't the best choice you can argue that desperate times call for desperate measures. Antonio lives in a world where the saying "survival of the fittest" is undoubtedly applied.
In Boudu the homeless man is portrayed as a simple, comical character that has no need for material matters. In Bicycle Thieves poverty is more of a serious matter where a father is struggling to provide for his family and survive.
ReplyDeleteThey both are similar in the fact that they are both dirt poor, but their differences outweigh the similarities. Boudou is a carefree character who doesn’t need much in life and is happy with what he has. Because Boudou is happy where he is he is not looking for a job or to changing his lifestyle. On the other had Antonio is least from carefree and is in dire need to provide for his family and himself. He is trying to make things better and keep a job so that his family can have a better life as opposed to Boudou. There are very few funny moments in Bicycle Thieves; for the most part this film mirrors more of reality, showing more drama and emotion while Boudou focuses on simple comedy.
There is no one specific thing that is responsible for the characters poverty in either movie. Antonio was in poverty due to war and hard economic times, Boudou may have had the same reasons but the film never explains why he is impoverished. Bicycle Thieves had more of a political message than Boudou did though both were able to send their messages across. Boudou showed that happiness doesn’t come from material matters and Bicycle Thieves taught us that poverty can cause people to do things they wouldn’t normally do in order to survive.
Boudu is portrayed as a crazy individual with animal insticts. He really only cares for himself, and does not stop to think of the lives of others. He even attempts to kill himself because of his impoverished and homeless state. Many view Boudu in a negative sense because of his attitude towards life, and his disrespect towards people, especially women.
ReplyDeleteIn Antonio's case, he is poor, but not homeless, and has his wife and son to take care of. He did not try to cause any harm to anyone, but once his bicycle was stolen, one he spent a great deal of his money on, he reverted to animal instinct which was to steal back. Eventually he was caught for this deed. In the end, Antonio and Boudu were not so different, as they both reverted to animal instinct, however Boudu only has animal instinct, while Antonio only acted animal-like when his back was completely against the wall.
In Boudou's case, as Andrew said, he is a selfish homeless man who throughout the intire film only thinks of himself and not of the kindness that he is given. he continulouly disrepects the family that brought him in and makes no effort to help out or to pay them back. he sees his life as hopeless because he is homeless, because he doesnt like himself because he s impocerished.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in the case of Antonio, he has things going for him, a family, for example. and he does the best he can to provide for them. he doesnt get down on himself and respects others, that is until other people dont respect him. when his bike gets stolen he starts to think only of his family and their needs, not of others, which still makes him better the boudu, but not by much because in the end he steals a bike so that he can get ahead and not be in poverty any more.