Some places where the films differed were the assassination scene, and the acting of particular characters. At other instances, such as the orations, both editions were similar in the way they approached the scene. The advantage of a color version is an obvious one, and that is that the viewers feel as if the scene they are viewing is more realistic. A perfect example of how scenery and color was utilized to better portray the story was the assassination of Julius Caesar. Although a shocking event in both adaptations, the color version better fit the mood of the attack on Caesar’s life.
By 1815, the aims of these secret societies changed in the direction of driving out the Austrians and restoring old Monarchs. Consequently, these factors paved the way for revolts and armed the peasants with something they never had had before – power. In a large number, the masses could stand against the oppressive rule of the Austrians. Therefore, the events that followed in the years 1820 – 1849 were all underpinned by the resentment of this from Metternich and the importance he placed on controlling Italy. Metternich was the Austrian chancellor and saw the danger of Italian nationalism and the potentially threatening ideas that
Italian neorealist films place the viewer in an unusual landscape. Vittorio De Sica’s The Bicycle Thieves (1948) transports us to real life in post-war Italy; with all of its dismay, discordance, and hopelessness. Italian Neorealism rose out of the ashes of an Italy defying the glamorised Hollywood depictions, to illuminate the plight of the people, significantly, the working class. Seemingly devoid of deliberate staging, and shot entirely on location, The Bicycle Thieves (1948) was in fact a thoroughly ‘directed’ film (Bazin, 1971, p50). By taking us outside of the usual mise en scene of the American norm, The Bicycle Thieves (1948) directed our attention with deceptive simplicity to the largely unremarkable story of a lost bicycle.
“Fascism also recruited admirers from the ranks of the political theorists who sought an alternative to the representative model of liberal democracy and a radical prescription against the alleged decline of western civilization” 36. “In central and eastern Europe, fascism was markedly racist and anti-Semitic. In Hitler's Germany the genocidal "Final Solution" was the consequence” 37. “The fundamental structure of fascism is sometimes taken to be an authoritarian, centralized state apparatus sustained” 38. “A revival of Latin American fascism is possible, perhaps in response to the swallowing up of national economies in globalization; violence will undoubtedly remain endemic” 39.
Even though the structures of these enterprises would primarily make native Americans view the Italians as a problem in society, Italians had to make their money some how in America’s discriminatory nation. One form of economic enterprise that brought a lot of attention towards the new approaching Italians would favor was the “boss system”. The “boss system” was an intermediary, who was someone that spoke both the immigrant’s language and the english language, helped foreigners find work and give them a head start in industrial America. According to Dr. Egisto Rossi of the Italian Immigration Bureau, he gave his view on how the boss system worked, “...defined as the forced tribute which the newly arrived pays to those who are already acquainted with the ways...” (Nelli, 78). Another form of economic enterprise that many Italian men were forced to use was the Mafia.
To what extent does disappointment of the outcome of the First World War explain growing support for the Italian Fascist Party in the years 1919-22? After the First World War, Italy found itself in a series of crises. Economically and politically the war left the country weak, thus, giving way for a powerful figure to rise into power. However, it is important to note that Mussolini and the Italian Fascist Party did gain support in overwhelming floods and in fact, it was not until 1922, when King Emmanuel III offered the position of Prime Minister to Mussolini was their popularity secured. Long running weaknesses within the original political system aided in developing support for Mussolini, along with his ability to change the party’s policies to accommodate all members of society.
How did authoritarian governments emerge in the different countries of Spain, Germany, and Italy? Since the countries were in a state of depression, the government became weak, and this gave political parties a chance to rise to power. Mussolini increased military powers in Italy, and gained the favor of the people. He rose to dictatorship, and Hitler also increased military power. Later, Franco rose to power and ruled Spain.
To what extent was Italy politically and economically united in the years 1896 – 1914? Between 1896 and 1914 there were huge political and economic changes that occurred in Italy. There was some progress politically due to Giolitti’s system of appeasing people, however, various different political groups were formed like the socialists, nationalists and anarchists, which therefore show a sign of disunity. Although, economically, Italy did grow between these years with the boom in agricultural industry for example, this growth did not unite Italy as the growth was mainly seen in the North and less so in the South. Hence Italy was economically and politically fragmented.
Benito Mussolini had a very important role in his rise to the power of Italy. There were some factors that made the people think in a change in the politic system, and this was taken by him to consolidate his arrival to power. On the one hand, Mussolini made several moves that helped him get closer to the mandate of Italy. He promised to the people of Italy a political stability. By that time the political situation was chaotic, after the Paris conference very little beneficial resolutions were made for Italy.
In 1815 Italy was the country marked by the centuries of plundering attacks by foreign states, and then, in XVIII and early XIX century, by French and Austrian infulences. There was a long way separating the divided Italian states from unification of 1871. What citizens of those states needed were the strong political figures that would lead them to the consolidation. I'd like to concetrate on two of them - Giuseppe Garibaldi and Camillo Cavour. Two marginally different personalities, two different ideas of how should the future of Italy look like, and, therefore, different ways they followed to make those ideas come true.