Claudio Carvalho In 1945, when the Red Army releases the inmates of Auschwitz, the Italian chemistry Jew Primo Levi (John Turturro) wants to go home in Turin. He embarks in a Russian train and befriends a Greek man (Rade Serbedzija). Soon he learns that the trains is heading to the opposite direction and when it stops, Primo and The Greek decide to walk but he is left alone. Along his journey, he spends a period in a Soviet Camp for former prisoners and befriends a group of Italian POW. Only nine months later, he arrives in Turin."La Tregua" is a movie about the journey of an Italian Jew returning home in the chaos of the after war. The plot is too long; boring in many moments; and seems to be unrealistic. The sad photos we usually see from Auschwitz show skin and bone survivors traumatized by the hellish period in the camp. However, Primo and his friends are able to walk for long distances, carrying heavy belongings as if they were athletes. When Hitler falls, surprisingly there are fireworks in a big party. Last but not the least, most of the cast is European and able to speak different languages; John Turturro basically speaks only English. My vote is five.Title (Brazil): "A Trégua" ("The Truce")

mahajanssen I watched this during the Liberation Day weekend along with 4 other Holocaust-themed movies so it was a bit of a challenge. The movie was good enough but the dialogue was rather chaotic. You had the Russians speaking Russian and the Germans screaming their heads off in German but how is it that the central Italian characters spoke English? I was in Rome recently and I must say they are very seriously inadequate in English there and I doubt it was any different especially in WWII. I could understand if the lead character and the Greek spoke in English but the other Italian characters all spoke English too. Perhaps it was necessary to reach a wider audience but the authenticity wasn't there. However, the movie did show subtle signs of the various myths of the Holocaust like when Primo Levi (John Turturro) tried to sell his wares in the Polish market but was shunned against; I had heard that the Poles practically handed the Jews to the Germans on a silver plate so Primo's experience showed a little of what the Poles were really like. I thought John Turturro did a brilliant job; he was almost unrecognisable. This movie did show how it was like after the fall of Berlin; the German soldiers were made to work without food and how one of them fell on his knees when Primo Levi showed his concentration camp uniform to him. It showed very subtle signs of the Holocaust but focused more on their journey home and how they tried to cope with their newfound freedom and the fact that their peers, friends and family were all gased and they survived. It was a good movie but it could've been better.

ladwash There are books and films. Two different ways of telling a story. Sometimes films are based on books. In that case one does good by not concentrating on the book and see the film as an independent work of art. Barthes already proclaimed 'the death of the writer', the discourse is not a message of the writer. But sometimes it's impossible to ignore the writers' work and his message. This is the case with one of this centuries' most important writers, Primo Levi. He didn't just write books, but was able to put in words his very own experiences in the German Lagers and this way put it in a much broader sense, he wrote history.Many years before, Rosi had succesfully filmed 'christ stopped at Eboli', which was also based on an autobiography (Carlo Levi, not related to Primo) of the fascist period. Rosi did well not to choose Primo Levi's 'if this is a man' (se questo e un uomo), which describes the unimaginable experiences of Levi in the German Lager, he chose what could be called its' 'sequel'. 'the truce' ('la tregua') in which Levi describes his journey home from the camp in Poland to Turin, Italy, which took him an absurd nine months.The film starts when killingfactory Auschwitz-Birkenau is liberated by the Russians and the survivors are freed and put in trains, not to go home directly, but to be send to other camps. From there the journey continues, by train, by foot, meeting various characters. Levi, played by John Torturro, is a silent man who now and then expresses wise words or memorable sentences, but somehow never really makes you think. It's a man we follow, but doesn't touch us, let alone move us. This is not Turturro's fault, he gives a fairly good performance, but Rosi wants too much tell an important story, forgetting the ones who ARE the story; namely the characters. None of them is very well worked out. Take the Greek Nahum, in the book a surpising, colourful person, here just one-dimensional. Symbolism is overly present; Levi who doesn't want to throw away his campjacket, 'to remember' is credible, but the survivors are faced with german prisoners twice and it's given an unconvincing weight, as one German throws himself on his knees, when he sees Levi and his yellow star of David, far too grotesque. Another unconvincing role is given to the music, it's overly present, even a violin is stolen (where Rosi had this idea from is very unclear??) for no good reason. Music should be on the background.I am sure Rosi had good intentions, but sometimes it's better to read and reread a book and try to reach as many people as possible in that way.**out of ***** If this is a man (se questo e un uomo)-primo Levi The truce (La tregua) - Primo levi The saved and the drowned (I sommersi e i salvati)-Primo levi

camel-9 for being a movie on such a sensitive subject, the holocaust, and directed by one of the great italian directors, I really had high expectations. But there were silly moments that were clearly intended to please the movie going crowds, those who can enjoy a romantic remark or stereotyped environment, but not challenging a movie audience to think a little more. Scenes like the dining table with italian soldiers, for example, was just silly. While all the pan-european characters spoke in their native tongues, the italian soldiers were dubbed in english. The dialoges were clearly intended to please the crowds, to show how "fun-loving" italians are, always singing, always eating, always together. From a great book, a mediocre movie. Contrast this with another holocaust movie made also in italy, "Life is Beautiful", and in this film, the language differences is instead exploited to make it a great film. As for the tongue that should be used to make a holocaust film authentic, Yiddish should be used, except of course for the russian and german soldiers, and the western european jews that spoke no yiddish. All eastern european jews that found themselves struggling together in the camps did not speak Polish, Romanian, German, or Hungarian, but the language that was common to most of all, Yiddish. Don't know of a holocaust movie that is like that.