As we know, the system of meaning within a film includes so much more: music, how a film is shot, how the narrative is structured, editing choices, sound effects, and all the various visual elements like props, locations, and performances.

In film, signs are more than the words spoken by characters. A word - “bicycle” - is a sign, which works in relationship with other words to form phrases, concepts, ideas, and stories - systems of meaning. The way this works in language is fairly intuitive. In these theories, a sign is a unit of meaning and signs work together to form systems of meaning. There’s a cluster of sociological and linguistic theories called “semiotics” that’s all about how words, sounds, and images create meaning. However, it’s Bicycle Thieves that we see pop up over and over in media, from direct parodies like The Icicle Thief (Maurizio Nichetti, 1989) to homages like Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure (Tim Burton, 1985) to comedic television adaptations like Modern Family‘s “The Bicycle Thief” (season 1, episode 2, 2009) or Master of None’s “The Thief” (season 2, episode 1, 2017). Both films are lauded representatives of Italian neorealism, of equivalent quality, and well-known to cinephiles. But that doesn’t explain why some very good films persist as touchstones in this way while others don’t.Ĭompare Rome, Open City (Roberto Rossellini, 1945) to Bicycle Thieves (Vittorio de Sica, 1948). After all, they are often great films that help form the aesthetic sensibility of subsequent generations of filmmakers. We may be tempted to assume that classic films are continuously referenced because of their quality. Why do some films seem to get endlessly parodied, referenced, and remade decades after their release? Like the sequence of the baby carriage rolling down the steps in 1925’s Battleship Potemkin (Sergei Eisenstein) or the eponymous “red balloon” of The Red Balloon (Albert Lamorisse, 1956), we see iconography from certain films repeatedly ported into others.

The red balloon by albert lamorisse