Hellen I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

BelSports This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Brenda The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Philippa All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Dario Vaccaro Rossellini's "Stromboli, terra di Dio" is a film on the line between fiction and reality more than usual for the acclaimed director. Most of the central part, where Karin just lives in Stromboli and complains about stuff was not written as in a normal screenplay: Rossellini chose possible elements of the environment or popular habits and filmed them in the movie, putting Karen in it like an extrernal observator. This has a double effect: neorealism comes to some of its highest achievements (like the tuna fishing and the eruption of the volcano) but to the loss of a fantastic actress such as Ingrid Bergman, who always feels out of place. Careful: I didn't say KAREN, I said BERGMAN. Because as a character she should be out of place, and she is even esthetically: she's always combed and white as the moon, while the inhabitants are rusty and dirty. But the actress herself is out of place in this film, and that is not a good thing at all. Her lines are dumb, repetitive, and Bergman actually did a great job managing to not disappear in such irrelevance. She still lives the scene, but her attempt is clearly forced into a new, uncharted territory as was Italian filmmaking for an American diva. We could say then that Ingrid is just as lost as her character.What I just can't stand in this film is the necessity of squeezing the religious conversion (I'm talking about the Italian version of the film, American and International versions have slightly different endings for that time's commercial policies). It was the result of Rossellini's collaboration with powerful politicians and Church men, to be specific Giulio Andreotti and Felix Morlion, whose intention was to use a critically acclaimed author's cinema for political propaganda. I hate when other interests interfere with artistic purposes, and here the last moments are definitely flawed with an out of the blue realization of the power and existence of God for no good reason.As I said before, neorealist features are what makes this film enjoyable and a classic. Apart from the brilliant scenes I mentioned above, I really liked the harsh depiction of the patriarchy that unfortunately still exists and thrives especially in the South of Italy. I actually felt bad and angry at Antonio as he jerks his wife with no respect and beats her like an animal, but I know very well that even today that is the norm in so many families and that simply pisses me off. Kudos to Rossellini for depicting that so realistically, but then again he's a great director exactly because of scenes like those.

tedg I have a special interest in films where the filmmaker is directing a woman he is in love with, often freshly in love. This is a rather iconic example because of the publicity surrounding its release, together withe critical rejection. Usually you can see the way the film is bent because of the love. This case is different. Its the actress that bends to the filmmaker, who has some very bad artistic intuitions. Oh, the philosophy of real narrative in a close-to-real container is well enough. Its a clean ideal, simple to describe. When it works you get the effect and you understand its effectiveness at the same time. Unfortunately, that effectiveness is rather blunt, of the kind a fishmonger would form. Since the method and the conveyed effect are linked you get films that when they work, are effective and comprehendable, but don't matter.This one doesn't even work. Sure it has a real village and villagers, real volcano and real fishing activity. I suppose it also is genuine in its depiction of lives and the church. But it seems random. Like a dogma picture — a similar manifesto — the real to purity compromises what matters. There's only one false episode in this, meaning one episode where it deviates from the realist ideal. It happens to be for me the only part that touched me.Its when the wife has decided to leave at any cost, that moment when she sits down in front of what would have been a dressing table in a better world. She is flustered and unsure, but determined. She — Ingrid — demonstrates this. Its acting of the highest order. It fits nothing before or after in tone because for that brief moment she escapes reality to show us what is going on inside her. This would not be how it would appear in reality, but in that case we wouldn't see or know anything. Here she acts and we see truth. Its the only place where we do.There are two other noteworthy things here that I caught.The first is that the story has some tentative shape that wants to emerge. Something not followed but indicated: a lover who isn't there for anything but escape. We learn at the end, after we know that she is seriously beset, that she is pregnant. The revelation may have been simply that the actress really did become pregnant and in the service of realism it was inserted. But there's a tantalizing reverse invented narrative that we can glimpse about the handsome fisherman who she secretly meets. Is he the father? Its counter to the world of the story, which simply grinds along. But its an attractive feature. The other interesting thing is how Rossellini has decided the world works. Its against us. Society is, the church is, nature is, individuals all are. We are trapped in a pinball machine of forces that simply don't care and its random what punishment you get for being alive. Its hard to see how Ingrid could have been attracted to such a man, and enlist to help him draw this for others. She does so not just in this film, but in a personal life she built with this man, stirring up unnecessarily hostile reporting on what otherwise would have been a simple romance. She becomes pregnant in two worlds.Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

whpratt1 This film was a very controversial in 1950, mainly because of Ingrid Bergman's personal life which was talked about from every pulpit in the country and was actually banned by the Catholic Church. However, in today's standard of living, this would not have made much difference, we hear about such things going on in Hollywood all the time. Ingrid Bergman,(Karin), " Cactus Flower",'69, played a very frustrated young gal who tried to escape from one place and married a fisherman and witnessed a horrible smelly fishy scene with large tuna being hauled into small fishing boats. Karin also had the experience of having to go out into the sea in order to avoid being burned up by a volcano that was pouring down lava into her town. Poor Karin also gets locked up in her own home and starts flirting with a local man to help her escape. Karin winds up climbing up a huge mountain without a suitcase and only the clothes on her back. Ingrid Bergman gave an outstanding performance that will be long remembered. Great Film to view in Black & White.

Ray Newby Having spent a recent holiday on the Aeolian Islands this was a film I was very eager to see. I wasn't disappointed as I thought it was great. The film looks a little dated now though but in the early fifties would have been very good. If this film was made today there is no doubt today's special effects would certainly enhance the volcanic eruption scenes no end. The Tuna fishing scene was also very interesting but not for those of a squeamish disposition. The acting was first rate from both Ingrid Bergman and Mario Vitale. I was particularly interested in seeing this film after seeing the house on the island where Roberto Rossellini and Ingrid Bergman had stayed whilst this film was being made. A plaque on the property bears witness to this. All in all a very good film that I would recommend to anyone.