Fellini. Perhaps only Coppola has a 1-2 that can match 8 ½ and La Dolce Vita which come out as #2 and #3 film of the 1960’s behind 2001. The 1960’s is the strongest decade and this means that Fellini’s second best film, is superior to anything by Kurosawa, Truffaut, Godard, Renoir, Bergman and many other great auteurs- that’s his case. Fellini’s roots are in neo-realism (co-writing Rossellini’s Rome, Open City and Paisan– two staples of early Italian neo-realism) and though I Vitelloni (Fellini’s breakout Mean Streets film – or vice versa) is based on some real-life experiences (and is no less personal) his work clearly goes from neo-realistic tendencies (La Strada) to the fantastic and surreal towards his wonderfully bat-$hit crazy self-named- “Fellini” films in the late 60’s and early 70’s (Roma, Satyricon, and Casanova –all fantastic, bizarre, and admittedly a notch below his work from 1960-1965 where he gave us, in a row, three of the best 82 films of all-time) over the arch of his career.
Best film: 8 ½ . An autobiographical catharsis and surrealism come together in a mad circus of a film filled with scene after scene and image after image of some that culminate in an achievement worthy of a top 10 film of all-time.
top 100 films: 3 (8 1/2 , La Dolce Vita, Juliet of the Spirits)
top 500 films: 7 (8 1/2 , La Dolce Vita, Juliet of the Spirits, La Strada, Amarcord, The Nights of the Cabiria, I Vitelloni)
top 100 films of the decade: 7 (La Strada, The Nights of the Cabiria, I Vitelloni, 8 ½, La Dolce Vita, Juliet of the Spirits, Amarcord)
most overrated: So TSPDT has 10 Fellini films in the top 1000 and I’ve seen each at least twice. None of them are vastly overrated. I’ve seen most of Fellini’s other career work (outside the TSPDT top 1000) and I’d skip Ginger and Fred (1986). It’s too bad it took this long for the first film starring both Masina and Mastroianni. Both, and Fellini at this point, are clearly past their prime and it’s not too good.
most underrated: Juliet of the Spirits currently stands at the catastrophically underrated position of #890 on TSPDT. There’s no way there are 889 better films (I’ve got it at #82) than this sprawling and entertaining exercise in film bravado and visual splendor. It’s his first color film and he took on the challenge like few after him would.
gem I want to spotlight: I Vitelloni. If you haven’t seen it you’re in store for a treat. I can’t imagine what cinema enthusiasts thought of it in 1953 because the style behind the camera put on showcase by Fellini smacks you in the face. It’s surely the arrival of Fellini, who, after this, would give us 3 of the top 100 films of all-time in the next 10 years.
stylistic innovations/traits: Fellini has three important phases, from I Vitelloni, to La Strada and Cabiria in the 50’sthere are still roots in Neo-realism—one of cinema’s most important movements. It’s his break from that though, in the symbolic (water means youth , seven deadly sins) La Dolce Vita that starts his peak-work. It continues with 8 ½ and Juliet of the Spirits where he blends surrealism—daydreams, flashbacks to childhood, fantasies. His period from 1969-76 starting with Satyricon, peaking in this period with Amarcord, and ending with Casanova where he permeates in exceed gone overboard (but in a good way)—full blown expressionism. Fellini really mastered both— the crisp formal allegories in La Strada (which would make Rossellini and De Sica proud) and the world-building personal cinema and expressionism that would make David Lynch or Wes Anderson proud. Fellini’s mise-en-scene would mirror this transition and would grow busier and busier (think Wes Anderson in Bottle Rocket to Grand Budapest change). The photography in La Dolce Vita, 8 ½ and color work in Juliet of the Spirits is immaculate. He loved formal parables. His camera tended to track forward or backward with a character (or two or three talking over each other) talking to the main character (Marcello, or Masina in Juliet) slightly off camera- this is one of the foremost stylistic trademarks of Fellini. His main characters here are really just empty vessels watching the spectacle and circus of life dance around him. In his 1950’s films the truth cuts you like realism can— and in the 60’s and 70’s it’s the magnificence of excess (in the mise-en-scene) that washes over you. These films are meditations on glut, ego, fame, indulgence and nostalgia—extremely personal cinema—it’s no surprise his greatest work is about the struggle of trying to make a movie.
top 10
- 8 ½
- La Dolce Vita
- Juliet of the Spirits
- La Strada
- Amarcord
- The Nights of the Cabiria
- I Vitelloni
- Fellini Satyricon
- Fellini’s Casanova
- Fellini’s Roma
By year and grades
| 1952- The White Sheik | R |
| 1953- I Vitelloni | MS |
| 1954- La Strada | MP |
| 1955- IL Bidone | R |
| 1957- The Nights of the Cabiria | MS |
| 1960- La Dolce Vita | MP |
| 1963- 8 1/2 | MP |
| 1965- Juliet of the Spirits | MP |
| 1969- Fellini Satyricon | HR |
| 1972- Fellini’s Roma | R/HR |
| 1973- Amarcord | MP |
| 1976- Fellini’s Casanova | HR |
| 1983- And the Ship Sails On | R |
| 1987- Intervista | R |
*MP is Masterpiece- top 1-3 quality of the year film
MS is Must-see- top 5-6 quality of the year film
HR is Highly Recommend- top 10 quality of the year film
R is Recommend- outside the top 10 of the year quality film but still in the archives
i’m surprised he isn’t numero uno. you once had 8 1/2 and la dolce vita in top 10 i believe. i plan on maybe watching amarcord today.
His peak didn’t last long enough to be no. 1. Compare that to Stanley Kubrick who from 1957’s Paths of Glory to 1999’s Eyes Wide Shut, literally all his films were masterpieces besides Spartacus which in my opinion is a must see. Fellini has a great streak in the 60s but I think personally he only has 3-4 masterpieces which is legendary but Kubrick has like 9 of his 13 films as masterpieces.
@James Robbins- obviously we arrive at the same place so it may not be worth it to nitpick- but I think it is hard to say Kubrick is at his “peak” still in say 1993 which is certainly in that stretch of time you’re talking about. Counting masterpieces is a much better way (which Kubrick wins)– whether they come over long period of time or all together like say Godard
Yes you’re right, poor choice of words. Although I would argue that It’s difficult to find a peak time period for Kubrick because after 1964’s Dr Strangelove he’d only make a movie every 5-6 years, Godard would literally make 2 movies a year in the 1960s, so it’s much easier to judge when his peak would be.
@James Robbins– for sure– good point on Kubrick. If forced I guess I’d have to say 1968-1971 as I have 2001 and Clockwork as his two best- but yeah— it isn’t like talking about the peak period for some others like Antonioni in the early 1960’s or Fellini with those two films back to back. Though Godard’s productivity isn’t the reason for his peak, right? He really hasn’t slowed down and his peak is still easy to find.
The ‘silhoutte work’ in the second Pic Is from 8 e mezzo, not La dolce vita.
@Benedetto– thank you for the help. Fixed now.
in the introduction you say”The 1960’s is the strongest decade and this means that Fellini’s second best film, is superior to anything by Kurosawa, Truffaut, Godard, Renoir, Bergman and many other great auteurs- that’s his case.”i don’t think the 1960’s is the strongest decade i think it is the 1950’s the strongest decade for many reasons but one above the others.in 1950’s all the cinema arount the world shines brightly.american cinema?hitchcock is at his best by far,john ford made his best films with the searchers same with howard hawks rio bravo,billy wilder with sunset blvd and some like it hot(and other films),orson welles with touch of evil,Mankiewicz with all about eve,night of the hunter of laughton,fritz lang made his best films in his american period singin in the rain etc…but i think the quality of american cinema in 1960’s is much weaker compared in 1950’s(kubrick is the exception and three of four masterpieces of ancient directors) i think american cinema made a shattering return in the 1970’s of course i didn’t say there is nothing in 1960’s american cinema i think this is a transition period. asian cinema?no comment kurosawa,ozu,mizogushi mikio naruse and satyajit ray are all in their golden age by far in 1950’s in comparison the asian cinema in 1960’s is a million miles away?for european cinema this is much complicated i think italian cinema is really superior in 1960’s even if there is wonderful things in 1950’s.for bergman this is a matter of taste.for french cinema this is even more complicated.in 1960’s this is mostly the french new wave (even if it started in 1959)and two masterpieces of bresson,playtime by tati la jetée by chris marker and some others.if the historical importance of the new wave is indisputable the artistic quality is more debatable for example apart two or three films i think godard is the most overrated directors in history of cinema.in 1950’s french cinema there is 3 masterpieces of bresson,the first great films of the new wave(400 blows and hiroshima mon amour) Casque d’or by jacques becker,wages of fear and les diaboliques by clouzot Mr. Hulot’s Holiday and mon oncle by tati and all the great films of Max Ophüls in his french period etc…here again this is a question of taste.dreyer make one masterpiece in each decade and for bunuel this is again very complicated(mexican period against spanish period)for 1960’s we must quote the first two films of tarkovski.in summary even though this is debatable for the european cinema(even perhaps an advantage for 1960’s) but for american cinema for me there is a huge advantage for the 1950’s and for asian cinema it’s even bigger.I still specify that I find anyway that the 2 decades are the best but i give an advantage for the 1950’s
@beaucamp– great argument for the 1950’s. For the record I think every single decade has exceptional filmmakers and films of course. For me it is simply looking at my top 100. For example in my top 100 I have 22 films from the 1960’s and 14 from the 1950’s.
drake of course each decade has great films but I still think that the level of cinema has dropped drastically after the 1970’s and i find the 2010’s really disappointing(which does not mean that I think there is nothing good)
@beaucamp- interesting- I do think the 1950’s-1970’s were the strongest period in film history– maybe time will be kinder to some of these 2010 films- I found 2019 specially to be a very impressive year
Finally today I got to watching another film. After a silent past week or so after Dead Ringers, The 400 Blows, Bicycle Thieves in one day and Seven Samurai afterward (all great!) I planned to view La Dolce Vita the next day but was caught up with other things. 7 days is probably the longest I’ve gone without seeing a film in a very long time, especially after beginning the great cinematic journey some months ago. I finally was able to set aside time for it today and it was just absolutely amazing. I think Mastroianni is slightly superior in it than he was in 8 1/2 though he is absolutely amazing in both but 8 1/2 is a stronger film all around. The next three I’m planning to watch are Aguirre, Breathless and Jules and Jim in no set order.
Although I believe Drake slightly prefers Mastroianni’s performance in 8 1/2, and all three of us believe the 1963 surrealist masterpiece to be the greater film, I agree that La Dolce Vita is Marcello’s best acting. Both performances are spectacular. Ironically, I would select 8 1/2’s Guido Anselmi as the greater character, but Mastroianni is given the opportunity to exhibit slightly more emotional range in the earlier Fellini masterpiece.
It’s ironic that it was seven days between your viewing of La Dolce Vita and the previous film you saw. Many consider its episodic structure to be broken into seven days (look at the Wikipedia page).
Indeed. Anselmi really is a wonder of a character. As a director, who would seem pretty far removed from the common man, which is displayed even further by the people he associates with who are certainly in the upper class of society, he would appear to be kind of pretentious coming from Fellini, and well he kind of is in all fairness (not that that has any effect on my opinion of the film as a work of art whatsoever; it is simply amazing). But despite that, he becomes this amazing everyman, even more so than Rubini in La Dolce Vita, and his struggles feel so real; he’s sympathetic, unlike Rubini who is often not so (and unsympathetic characters are often so captivating to watch, like Hopper in Blue Velvet, thus the reason Mastroianni’s performance in La Dolce Vita is superior).
All that being said, I could see myself calling 8 1/2 Mastroianni’s best performance the next time I see the film; he’s just so good in it.
a great essay on Fellini from Scorsese if anyone is interested https://harpers.org/archive/2021/03/il-maestro-federico-fellini-martin-scorsese/
Saw this I believe on Reddit? I don’t have time to read it now but I’ll save it for later today.
@Drake – heard about this essay before, watched 8 1/2 last night (viewing # 4 or 5) and reading through some Fellini articles, this was an excellent read, Scorsese writes so well, he manages to give a succinct yet effective overview of Fellini’s key films. For me La Strada and 8 1/2 are my favorite Fellini films although I have not watched La Dolce Vita in a while. I get Scorsese’s annoyance on streaming algorithms and focus on “content” which is one reason I love The Criterion Channel which is infinitely better than Netflix.
I am curious if you could have a beer with one director (dead or alive) who would you pick? Assume that language barriers are irrelevant.
@James Trapp- probably some boring answers here but it would be Scorsese I think. Maybe Tarantino or del Toro or Truffaut going back in time. These are some serious cinephiles on top of being all-time great auteurs.
What about this incredible frame from Juliet of the Spirits?
https://imgur.com/a/6EVQNuV
@Zane- really strong- good one!
I’m lucky today i will see 8½ at the theater, that’s incredible, i always dreamed of seeing this in the theater.
As a curious fact last year around this time they screened la dolce vita and i missed it, i felt absolutely devastated.
Today i will redeem myself.
You lucky bastard. If only I had the opportunity to see old films at the theater.
HAHA, it’s definitely luck, i had to give up another movie to see 8½. I read somewhere that you were from the USA, there is full of arthouse cinemas, just look for an art cinema. If i lived in LA or New York would not come out of the cinema. Literal in the city where i live there is only one art cinema of the more than 200 cinemas in the city.
Yeah, but the problem is I don’t live in a big city, which is mostly great but difficult largely for this reason. There is a cinema about an hour-and-a-half away from where I live that occasionally plays old Hollywood movies (they were playing The Quiet Man some weeks ago and To Kill a Mockingbird is playing there tonight) but still it’s a bit far away and I’m busy most days. If I lived in a larger city I would go to arthouse cinemas all the time.
Sorry Blade Runner and some others, but 8½ is the best cinematic experience.
I think Nino Rota’s score is quite underrated, it is rarely named among the best and it should, it’s absolutely essential to the movie or it’s probably just me.
Lastly, asa nisi masa.
Is Juliet of spirits in french?
@M*A*S*H- nope- it should be italian
Fellini Satyricon has to be one of the weirdest movies I’ve ever seen, but an absolutely gigantic achievement nonetheless.
Of particular note, in my opinion, was its use of sets; often, in scenes set in outdoors, Fellini does not actually shoot on location but instead in sets built in Cinecitta, and the obvious nonmoving skies and clouds – the opposite of what occurs in reality – enhance the idea of the insane world that Fellini is building here. It almost feels to me as if this film was Fellini declaring war on reality and realist cinema, but something about it tells me he did actually have his shit together while making it, for all its chaos when you get down to it you must admit it’s a very measured work after some reflection.
I think it’s clear how much this influenced directors like Gilliam or Jodorowsky, Lanthimos, or Pasolini towards the end of his career; Salo came up in my mind a number of times while watching it but less as it went on and the film’s brilliance became more clear to me. Of course films with deliberately confusing plots like Lost Highway, Mulholland Drive or The Mirror have some influence as well but obviously Fellini’s approach is different from Lynch’s or Tarkovsky’s. There’s a scene at the beginning of Encolpio and Gitone walking through a brothel of sorts through a variety of sexual encounters that resembles the mansion scene from Eyes Wide Shut as well and I assume this influenced Kubrick some.
My recap of the plot of Fellini Satyricon:
This one guy stole this main dude’s boyfriend and then sold him to a showman, then the main guy gets him back but then loses him again to the first guy, then there’s an earthquake, then the main guy meets a poet and goes to a party, and a lot of weird shit happens at the party, and the poet gets abused for talking shit to the guy hosting the party, then the first 2 guys are on a slave ship all of a sudden, and they and a bunch of other dudes are going to be sex slaves to the Emperor, and the main guy gets married to another old guy by the old guy’s wife, then the Emperor gets assassinated and the old guy gets killed as well, and then two people kill themselves, then the 2 main guys have sex with a slave girl, and then the two main guys find a demigod or something, then the demigod dies and they fight her protector and kill him, then the main guy has to fight the Minotaur in a labyrinth, then they become friends and he tries to have sex with a girl, then the two lead guys go into a building where they party with prostitutes while the primary lead gets his ass beaten (literally), then the secondary lead dies in a field to the dismay of the primary lead, then they have a funeral or something, then the main guy is on a ship and pauses mid-sentence as the camera turns him into a fresco and then moves throughout various frescos of the film’s characters as the movie ends. All of this happens with almost no explanation and they’re not really tied together very closely other than that they have a lot of the same characters and are in one movie. One scene ends and you’re on to the next unexpected bonanza.
I don’t think I’ve completely unlocked everything in this film, and that a second viewing might clear it up even more, I mean Fellini changes course like the wind in this film, you’re barely able to realize where you’re at before you’re somewhere else that you don’t know and never do know but what I witnessed was an astounding achievement that makes me excited to revisit a few of Fellini’s films, Juliet of the Spirits especially which I’ve always felt I’m underrating (I’d have it about where you have Amarcord – #129 – and I’ve long had Amarcord about where it’s at on TSPDT – #70). I wish I could say more, but I’m not even sure what to say about this film. It’s such an individual, unique work.
Haha I wonder what the elevator pitch for that film was.
Probably went like:
“My name is Federico Fell-“
“How much money?”
@Zane– haha. A wild comment which is very fitting for a wild movie
I’ve been sitting on this for about 10 days or so without posting it cause I didn’t know if I wanted to pair it up with a rewatch of Satyricon and maybe Amarcord or something but it’s been long enough, I may still do those things anyway but here’s Casanova:
Many of these frame within a frame shots in this scene as he is screwing around with this “priestess of love” they’re doing this weird foreplay sequence while this other guy is watching them from the eye of a fresco of a fish
There a sequence set on a dinghy Sutherland is driving but it’s obviously not actually on the water; it kinda looks like a massive trash bag with air running under it
Sutherland gets imprisoned for his wild antics and, over the course of his stay in prison, reflects on the events that brought him to this confinement; he recalls his past love for a much younger (I think underage) woman who he eventually rapes; he escapes from prison and seeks refuge at the court of the Madame d’Urfé in Paris
The costumes are so strange; reflections of Fellini’s crazy vision of the world; obviously they influenced the costumes in Greenaway’s The Draughtsman’s Contract; it is worth noting that this is listed as one of Greenaway’s favorite films on TSPDT
There’s a scene at dinner at Madame d’Urfé’s court where a little girl is speaking about the Virgin Mary; eventually, her voice fades away and the lights dim (except around d’Urfé (Cecily Brown) and Sutherland); they come look at eachother as Rita’s haunting score plays
The content of this film is absolutely wild; a bit about how Brown wants to be impregnated so her soul can be transferred into her baby
Awesomely weird Shakespearean dialogue; there’s one about the “manhood going forth and puncturing the root of the opposite sex”
Wonderful blocking using fruit at another dinner scene at 55 minutes
Shadow work during this performance scene in front of the nobles; not unlike a similar scene in Roma
Rota’s score is extremely interesting; sounds almost like an early electronic score (think World on a Wire) from time to time
Sutherland’s acting is often intentionally “bad” so to speak, and it works like a charm
“Whore? Well I certainly wouldn’t give a chance to be one with YOU!”
“Liar! It’s that little, rotted worm of yours… that contaminated ME!” This conversational scene with these two prostitutes he’s in a carriage with is so wonderfully over-the-top
Magnificent imagery of Sutherland standing alone in a sea of fog; isolation
I’ve heard this called closer to La Dolce Vita than Satyricon because it’s more of a story about one man; yeah, this isn’t true, and even on that level Satyricon does still have a protagonist
Wonderful chaotic scene at yet another dinner banquet; Fellini at the true height of his “organized chaos” directorial style coming actually from Juliet and onwards (though his two best films are still LDV and 8 1/2); the way he adapts to color cinema is breathtaking
Again, I should mention that the sex scenes, which are obviously simulated, are purposefully over-the-top
Stunner profile shot of Sutherland against a crackling fireplace at 110 minutes; some shadow shots in this same scene as well
Sutherland shot from the profile really does look like an alien; perfectly fits the character
There’s a mechanical bird toy that appears whenever Sutherland is having sex; honestly the film is just too abstract for me to understand much of what it actually means after one viewing
Shaky cam in one particularly violent sex scene; incredible
Great sequence with the chandeliers lowering in the opera house as they are spun by massive hand fans; epic imagery here
Stunning landscape shot of Sutherland watching a carriage leave at 124 minutes
There’s this scene where there are a shitton of pianos built into the wall and everybody playing them (none seriously) all blends into this discordant sound
There’s a scene where Sutherland has sex with a robot; it ends with a fade to black on the robot, arms and legs outstretched, and the hole clearly in view
Like Fellini’s nostalgia for Rimini, Casanova has a deep nostalgia for Venice, often asking around about it, and it is the last thing that comes across his mind before the ending
The final sequence where all of the women he had taken over his life appear to him in a vision, before dancing one final time with the robot as the screen cuts and Rota’s wonderful score (truly some of his best music) plays, is simply the film’s crowning jewel; masterpiece quality scene
Fellini’s sympathy for Casanova famously increased over the course of the shooting; at first, he despised him and it showed in the rather negative portrayal of his actions earlier in the film but in that final scene, you really see how Fellini came to identify with Casanova’s loneliness and inability to feel love
Obviously the main story with the influence here is Greenaway, but I actually really think this influenced WKW as well; I’m not sure 2046 exists without this film
A Must-See film after one viewing; excellent albeit with some dull sequences; excited to revisit
Do you think you’ll have time to fit in a Fellini study before your top 500 update next year?
@Zane- I’d love to say yes, there is just never enough time. I’m still able to get to about 50 films a month on average and am thankful for that but it is still not enough. I’m not sure is the answer on Fellini before the next top 500/1000 update. Even right now I’m try to balance getting to the greats (considering Kubrick, Bergman) – along with making sure I’m making an effort to get to those that I’m less familiar with (Rohmer) or those I know almost nothing about (finishing up a Derek Jarman study now).
I think these are potentially the strongest shots in Amarcord , so many to choose from though…
https://i.postimg.cc/fbndRJ9K/Screenshot-25.png
https://i.postimg.cc/FRhJ08Gk/Screenshot-30.png
In 8 1/2, Mastroianni makes 1/2 a film before the production collapses.
[…] 5. Federico Fellini […]
In my opinion:
1. 8 ½
2. La Dolce Vita
3. La Strada
4. Nights of Cabiria
5. Satyricon
6. Amarcord
7. I Vitelloni
8. Casanova
9. Roma
10. Il Bidone
11. Juliet of the Spirits
12. And the Ship Sails On
13. Orchestra Rehearsal
I have Fellini as 4th best of all time behind Bergman, Tarkovsky and Hitchcock
The White Sheik R
I Vitelloni MS
La Strada MP
Il Bidone HR
The Nights of Cabiria MP
La Dolce Vita MP
8 1/2 MP
Juliet of the Spirits HR
Fellini Satyricon MS
Fellini’s Roma HR
Amarcord MS
Fellini’s Casanova MS
And the Ship Sails On R
Intervista —
Do you consider I Clowns a narrative feature film? I’ve seen its genre listed all over the place on different websites. I personally only include narrative features in my rankings/archives (I don’t include F for Fake in my Welles ranking, don’t include many of Godard’s works, etc) and a little confused on whether or not to include it in my Fellini ranking.
@LeBron Smith- Hopefully others can chime in here and help- but I have not had the chance to see I Clowns myself.
My ranking of Fellini`s films that I`ve seen:
1. 8 ½ MP
2. La Dolce Vita MP
3. Amarcord MP
4. Juliet of the Spirits MP
5. La Strada MP
6. Fellini Satyricon MS/MP
7. I Vitelloni MS/MP
8. Nights of Cabiria MS
9. Fellini`s Casanova HR/MS
10. City of Women HR
11. Roma HR
10 Best Performances
1. Mastroianni- 8 ½
2. Masina- La Strada
3. Masina- Juliet of the Spirits
4. Mastroianni- La Dolce Vita
5. Masina- Nights of Cabiria
6. Quinn- La Strada
7. Aimee- 8 ½
8. Cardinale- 8 ½
9. Sutherland- Fellini`s Casanova
10. Sordi- I Vitelloni
@RujK – thank you for the shares here- love seeing Juliet of the Spirits as a MP
This page is obviously old and I’m loving keeping track of the best actor page, but I’m currently in a Fellini study so this page is relevant for me. I recently rewatched 8 1/2 and La Dolce Vita. I liked them before but now after a second rewatch they are both probably in my ten favorite movies ever. However if forced to choose I really think La Dolce Vita is the superior work. I love the dreamlike nature of 8 1/2, but to me La Dolce is the most beautiful picture ever made. The seven chapter format to me is brilliant and the symbolism is incredible in the film, and that for me puts it ahead of 8 1/2. Anyways i’m just curious why every critic obviously loves both but consistently puts 8 1/2 a little higher. I checked to see if you had reviewed them and you hadn’t.
@James Robbins- Thanks for sharing. I’ve seen them both half dozen times a piece- maybe more. But am thinking of doing a full Fellini study again here in late 2023 or 2024.
Great I’ll be looking forward to seeing that
@James Robbins- been 6+ years since I’ve seen both- that’s just too long
Just watched 8 1/2. It was different from my expectation. Not quite as fast paced and wild, more contemplative. The fantasy and dream sequences only took up a small part of the movie (maybe a quarter, at a wild guess). The moral didn’t really mean much to me, and the self-reflexive or auto-biographical aspects also don’t seem to be much of a point in favor or against the movie, any more than it being a horror movie or a war movie would have been to its credit.
On the other hand, while the subject might not be important, the fit between form and subject is. The sympathetic portrayal of Guido’s struggle put an optimistic tone in every scene, so the sentimental ending didn’t feel out of place. The subjective (fantasy/dream/memory) sequences were always perfectly timed to keep up the pace, and I burst out laughing when Guido hung the pestering critic. The story seemed to flow completely naturally, despite being all over the place, and fit perfectly with the confused director. The score was impressive; the cast was flawless (Marcello Mastroianni gets all the credit, but everyone else was flawless).
But the camera work was the real star. Both the subjective camera and the tight 3rd person shots were brilliantly, and the constant movement in certain scenes (meeting with the crew in the hotel) created a sense of mania in what was really a slow paced movie. Overall, I would say the structure (which is confused but seemless) and the camerawork were the two most impressive aspects.
I don’t have a ranking for it yet, but I would love to see some other opinions.
@K – “The story seemed to flow completely naturally, despite being all over the place, and fit perfectly with the confused director.”
The flow of the film, moving between dreams, fantasy, and objective reality is crucial to the film’s self-reflexive character study. The way I interpreted this aspect of the film is that for Fellini dreams and fantasy is just as crucial and meaningful to him and who he is as “objective reality”. He does not view these as independent concepts. I do not mean to imply that Fellini was delusional or that he literally could not differentiate between fantasy and reality but rather that his dreams and fantasy life was just as valid to who he was as a human being and of course, as an entertainer. Fellini had a life long obsession with the Circus, he incorporates this into many of his films. He was a born entertainer, a true showman and his films, especially the later ones reflected this. The line between “fantasy” and reality became increasingly blurred as his career progressed. There are certain auteurs, Terence Malick certainly comes to mind, who are very private (nothing wrong with this to be clear) in regards to their personal lifes. Fellini is not one of these auteurs, it is not surprising to me that his wife, the great actress Giulietta Masina, was someone he worked with.
@K – I think 8 1/2 is one of the five or so greatest films ever made. I could easily see a case for it being #1. Beyond the obvious photographic beauty and the astonishing surrealism, Fellini’s formal construction is just amazing. The way he juxtaposes reality and fantasy, contrasts masculinity and femininity (through his characters and through visual symbols), and even raises postmodern questions that challenge modernist storytelling (Bergman comes to mind, specifically) just blows me away every time I watch this film. It endlessly repays re-watches. Definitely watch it again when you can.
I have been thinking about 8 1/2 since last night. I think the formal rigor is the greatest aspect, above even the brilliant camera work. The story is so fractured, but so fluid. I will need to read more about the form and structure of this movie, really an incredible achievement.
@James Trapp – Fellini’s views on fantasy and reality were absolutely correct observations: our mentality, fantasies, perceptions play at least as big a role in our life as our actual physical circumstances.
@Pedro – I think a more detailed investigation of this film, would probably reveal an even more complex system of juxtapositions and counterpoints. Whenever I have an intuitive feeling of rigorous structure in a book or movie, it is usually the result of a system of parallels and repetitions working beneath the surface. Out of curiosity, what would be your top 5/10 movies?
@K – Absolutely. Fellini is a bit like Lynch in that way, I think; most of his choices are intuitive, but there’s a reason he chooses A and not B or 1 and not 2 – whether he knows that reason or not is another story. It’s been a while since I’ve seen Vertigo, and I recently re-watched Marienbad and was blown away, so this might change, but as of now here’s my top 10:
1. 2001: A Space Odyssey
2. The Passion of Joan of Arc
3. 8 1/2
4. Raging Bull
5. Tokyo Story
6. Apocalypse Now
7. A Brighter Summer Day
8. Citizen Kane
9. Blade Runner
10. Stalker
Some directors are intuitive, others are planners, but what matters is the end result, and for Fellini and Lynch (at least from his television work, I haven’t seen one of his movies yet) the end result is always beautiful and harmonious. I am glad to see you like 2001, and I hope Marienbad makes it into your top 10. I haven’t even finished the TSPDT Top 10, so this list is very tenative, but I’ll put it anyway:
1. 2001: A Space Odyssey
2. The Shining
3. Vertigo
4. Last Year at Marienbad
5. Sunrise
6. The Rules of the Game
7. Singin’ in the Rain
8. Taxi Driver
9. The Searchers
10. Apocalypse Now
Honorable Mentions: Sunset Boulevard, Battleship Potemkin, 8 1/2 (I need more time to think on those last two movies)