MovieChat Forums > La dolce vita (1961) Discussion > Fellini is so over rated

Fellini is so over rated


Fellini is not a great film maker. He's not even a good film maker. To place him on the same level with the greats is an insult to the greats. He is completely self-indulgent. His films are pretentious, smug, and worse of all boring. He is not a visionary, but a phony. This movie is just a clear example of that.
La Dolce Vita has no plot and is exceedingly dull at a run time of 3 hours long. Gone With the Wind, the Godfather, and Titanic-- I can see as deserving of 3 hours, but this piece of triviality could have been told in 10 minutes. It's been a long time since a movie has inspired so much hatred in me for what was on the screen. I would rather be subjected to a Jennifer Lopez movie marathon, starting with Gigli than to go through another viewing of this never ending tortuous meaningless journey through Marcello's vapid existence. In fact, throw in a Ben Affleck marathon while you are at it starting with Surving Christmas and I'd still gladly take that torture then another Fellini "classic." I've tried to like Fellini and this about the fifth movie I've seen of his and I'm sorry but he is not brilliant. Fellini should take lessons from Goddard on what a cool movie is supposed to be like.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

That was a stupid thing to say. Boring is a word that can be used to describe something. Movies can be boring.

It's going to be gone soon, enjoy it!!!

reply

Quote:"but "boring" is a word for people who want instant gratification and shiny colors."

Hmmm...rant1229 isn't that what Fellini did in Giulietta degli spriiti (Juliet of the spirits)- the remake of 8 1/2 (just in the perspective of a millionaire house wife gone aloof) try to blind us with color and crazy houses, decor and fashion? Trying to disguise the fact that this movie had basically the same premise as 8 /12 just with some crazy psychedelic colors and not to mention some of the worst acting in any Fellini movie! if you thought Vita's sound editing was bad and I def did... Juliet is even worse!

reply

8/12 ? hmm, gotta see that movie!
Enjoy!

reply

No, no, no. Giulietta is about the liberation of a woman repressed by every one who has been in her life except her grandfather.
8 1/2 is a search through the caves of memory for a treasure.
Giulietta is much closer to 'Nights of Cabiria'.

reply

Very well put

reply

I feel sorry for you. You will go your whole life not knowing what great art is. This is my favorite film of all time next to 8 1/2, which you proably also think is "not cool" and boring. You need to open your eyes and realize that Titanic is a piece of *beep* compared to this or any other Fellini movie. I bet that you won't change your mind after this post, but that doesn't matter since you are dead inside.

Respect the cock, and tame the *beep*

reply

"Titanic is a piece of *beep* compared to this or any other Fellini movie"
That statement says it all. Jim Cameron can wipe his sneakers on Fellini's head. Titanic is a masterpiece. La Dolce Vita (and you can throw in 8 1/2 and Satyricon) is terrible.
This film is not "art". It's pure garbage. There's nothing deep about it. To say that it's not supposed to be structured is just an excuse for the fact that this film has no direction. Fellini sucks. His movies suck. And, his supporters are so smug in how "deep" they are. Give me a break.

reply

[deleted]

you poor, simple-minded, Hollywood-bred cretin. poor is the right word. just like i can't get angry at you, how could anyone get angry with a small child for crapping all over himself...*sigh* poor moron. because that's what you just did, crapped all over yourself for saying such statements.

reply

[deleted]

this movie blew. you can call me simple minded and say i don't understand true art but that doesn't change the fact that this movie blew. it was awful. biggest waste of 3 hours of ever. not the worst film i've ever seen, but the ones that were worse weren't 3 hours of crap. anyone who claims that this movie was art and they understand the deepness is full of it. you're just kidding yourself into thinking you're better than everyone else. there was nothing deep or artsy about this movie. just because it's fellini and most people don't like it doesn't make it artsy or deep. just like the fact that you like something that most people "don't get" doesn't make you cool. in fact, in this case, it makes you a moron because there's nothing to get here. so go ahead, call me a poor, simple-minded, hollywood-bred cretin. then throw in another of your awesome analogies complete with a *sigh* for extra cool points. and then brag about how you're better than me because i don't "get it" and you do. and then go watch this film again and realize how right i am and utterly wrong you are. tool

reply

> so go ahead, call me a poor, simple-minded, hollywood-bred cretin.

Good you did it yourself.

Regards, Rosabel

reply

---------------------------------------------------------------------
"so go ahead, call me a poor, simple-minded, hollywood-bred cretin."
---------------------------------------------------------------------
If YOU say so I take it, you must be right. You surely know yourself better than we do. Thank you.

vivaLuis

reply

"just like the fact that you like something that most people "don't get" doesn't make you cool."


I don't like Napoleon Dynamite, which is something most people "get", so logically that makes me uncool. But according to you, I like certain movies just to be cool. So why don't I say I like Napoleon Dynamite, then?

"then throw in another of your awesome analogies complete with a *sigh* for extra cool points. then go watch this film again and realize how right i am and utterly wrong you are. tool"


I bet you do really good in logic based classes, like math, science, and philosophy. Wait, maybe they don't teach that to your age group yet.


Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the war room!

reply

It's not about what is cool and what is not... It's all relative honey, no one is right... Movies to people are about feelings and passion, some people go just to see a light show, and others go to leave feeling like they have gained something, and important lesson, or knowledge about something they did not know before... No one is better, you can only make yourself feel inferior, no one else can... Remember that@@

This is your life and it's ending one minute at a time.

reply

kurohuj, you have hit the nail on the head.

reply

oh chill everbody.....let's not compare art films with more mainstream fare..two different animals...(I watched both la dolce vita and 81/2...and you have to take it for what it is....surreal and anstract and somewhat dated...certainly not entertaining but thought provoking stuff that.. if one is honest usually requires more veiwings to catch things we may have missed the first few times round (personaaly that being said I would have to say that i much preferred Titanic)Anyway It's o.k to have differing opinions without resorting to name calling....but then again i guess for some that is a form of entertainment in itself...nuff said .

reply

Oh dude,then you must be a gay Leo fan.

reply

Anyone who compares Cameron to Fellini needs to seriously reconsider life. And to say that Titanic is great movie shows just how little you undestand real film making.

reply

I totally agree. Some people simply don't know what real art is.

reply

Actually he said that Titanic is a masterpiece (LOL) so I really think we should not even bother with him, he clearly has no idea of what he is talking about!

Here is a man who stood up

reply

To say that Titanic is a "masterpiece" and that La Dolce Vita is "garbage" is just one of the most absurd things I've ever heard in my life. Just because you don't "get" something doesn't mean that it sucks. For me, La Dolce Vita is an extremely important film as I personally relate to what the main the character experiences and goes through in the the course of the film. I've been in virtually everyone of those situations myself, which I suppose could mean that my life is sort of interesting. So I take your statements very personally.

Or maybe you just have a problem with films that are shot in black and white and/or require you to read subtitles. I just really hope that Ted Turner never colourizes and English-dubs this film for people like you.

And as far as leading men go, Marcello stomps Leo into the ground all day long. And that's a fact.

reply

I fell so sorry for you if your life reflects marcello's... but I highly doubt that is does.

reply

I don't care if you believe me or not. It's not all bad...At least I'm not stuck with a wife and kids.

reply

so what exactly about your life reminds you of marcello's like?

reply

You seem quite sure that Fellini's legacy is soley dependent on how "deep" his films are. Really, a person who's willing to dismiss a director such as Fellini with a word or two should not be taken seriously. From my viewing, Titantic offered nothing new to film other than being the highest grossing shipwreck in history. De Caprio, Celine Dion? Titantic was far too reliant on the whims of the entertainment industry at the time of it's making. (Which is not to call Leo an untalented actor).
One could go on and on. I'll restrain myself: you write "To say that it's not supposed to be structured is just an excuse for the fact that this film has no direction." Or could it stem from the way the film is written? A little of both probably. Ever since Paisan, Fellini showed a tendancy to write unstructured, abruptly segmented screenplays. For me, lack of structure only becomes an issue when the film becomes boring or too confusing. Is Fellini guilty of this? Usually. Does he redeem himself? Almost always, and in the most beautiful of ways.

reply

[deleted]

That statement says it all. Jim Cameron can wipe his sneakers on Fellini's head.


I don't know how to take this, as an insult or as a joke, but anyway that is the only thing you can expect from an american d*u*m*b*a*s*s, please don't you ever post any of your s*t*u*p*i*d thoughts in here.

¿Que no oyes ladrar a los perros?
Juan rulfo.

reply

You know I wasn't even crazy about La Dolce Vita - wasn't crazy about La Strada but it was better - and really loved Night of Cabiria. However, I wouldn't choose to watch Fellini more than once - I do get, well, bored. However, that's not to say he wasn't a great filmmaker. To compare Fellini's films with Titanic is just absurd. Titanic was titilating tripe compared to Fellini's art. Only Cameron could take an event that had enough natural drama to make anyone's head swim and their heat break in a million pieces and turn it into a cheesy hollywood blockbuster.

I don't enjoy watching Fellini's movies just because his cinematography is beautiful and it's so frustrating reading the subtitles when I want to be watching the screen. But even if I didn't really enjoy Fellini's films becuase I'm too stupid to interpret them - I can see plainly that they're art and that they deserve more of my attention, even if I'm not willing at this point in my schedule to give it.

It is an insult to all humanity to compare Titanic to La Dolce Vita!

What hump?

reply

Preposterous.

reply

[deleted]

"Titanic is a masterpiece."
Sorry guy but I cannot stop my laughing, just like saying M.Jackson is better than PinkFloyd. It is that strange. Of course M.Jackson has more fenatic lovers, but 200 years later, people will not listen to his songs. Its that simple.

You have the right to say anything about a movie you dont like. I myself tried to like star-wars, LOTR, Eternal..., DonyDarco, ... and I could not. Thats it.

reply

The difference between Titanic and a Fellini film is subtlety. Titanic, has none. The scenes are set up predictably so that the audience is cued when to understand when the love between protagonists begins, when to cry, etc. While La Dolce Vita is not an easy movie to watch, it demands of the audience. Titanic is entertaining, but it is highly sensational, and aims to pull at the heartstrings.

reply

There are so many things wrong with what you are saying I don't even know where to start.

reply

INLOVEWITHMOVIES:

I like your posts if for no other reason than they've got a lot of guts. To just bluntly remark that a director as highly regarded as Fellini is "terrible" may ruin your credibility. But, like all things in life, the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Have you ever seen "Closer"? Recall the remark Natalie Portman's character makes at the art show (I'm paraphrasing), "The pictures are only important because a bunch of smart people feel smarter lying about how happy it makes them feel to talk about art when all the people in the pictures are sad. And everyone loves a big fat lie." I get that impression in watching Fellini sometimes and I see your frustrations with his work. Because nearly every critic has to have a prerequisite love of Fellini, many so-called intellectuals admire his work prima facea because it makes them feel elite.

Look at the responses to your post on Jim Cameron for proof.

It has become so vogue to unmercifully bash "Titanic"--and it's skipper James Cameron--because if you like Titanic, so the thinking goes, you don't have any idea what "good movies" (read: Fellini flims) are. This is absurd. "Titanic" is a masterpiece with a very underrated plot structure, you are absolutely right. Cameron is a wonderful director--I'd argue a better, less manipulative version of Steven Spielberg. Indeed, no director or writer in the history of film is better during the third act of a film than James Cameron.

In Fellini's works however, especially so in "La Dolce Vita", the narrative is not in a typical three act structure. Alexander Payne, during the introduction to "La Dolce Vita", refers to it as a five-act novel style narrative. When you say in your earlier post that "La Dolce Vita" has no plot, your just misunderstanding the structure because you watch under the aspices that all movies--and therefore all plot structures--are created equal.

I'm not telling you anything new when I suggest Fellini was the real pioneer behind the Surrealistic Era of film. But what does this mean; or even better yet, how does it translate into film today? Well first off, Fellini's work had a direct impact on many of the great 1970's and 1980's films. Movies like "Star Wars", "Brazil", "Blade Runner" and "Apocalypse Now" would not have the startling imagery they display so brilliantly had Fellini not paved the way. Second, he helped modern directors effectively incorporate existential dream sequences into plot. "Momento" is a prime example of this. No matter how much you dislike Fellini, you have to admire how beautiful "La Dolce Vita" is to watch. It is, if nothing else, pleasing to the eye. This most likely contributes to it's lasting appeal in comparison to Goddard.

You are very right when you suggest "Fellini Lovers" are smug--they've proven it unknowingly by trashing "Titanic" on this board. Goddard and Jean Cocteau are just as important yet have hardly any following or are dismissed entirely. Fellini is a lot like single malt scotch. He's either an acquired taste or the taste of mouthwash. He isn't "terrible", but I certainly don't think he's as important as most people would have you believe.

reply

Well, as much as I love Fellini, I was prepared to accept your comments. To each their own and all that, but to place Cameron and "Titanic" over Fellini and "La Dolce Vita" is indefensible. I'll leave off with invectives you're not worth it.

"What's this war in the heart of Nature?"

reply

Titanic a masterpiece.... Of crap...
Now I know your hole premise is a big pile of nothingness

reply

Yes, you sure gave an insightful response to my post. You must be older than twelve to post on this board. Like I said, you prove your ignorance by bashing Titanic and it's followers by saying, "You don't know good art if you like Titanic". Please, off the top of your head, name me a director who is better in the third act of a film? You can't. Sorry, but "Titanic sucks donkey balls" isn't a worthy reply. If you'd like to give an insightful response to my original post...which was VERY kind to Fellini--and well written--I'd be happy to discuss. I'd also be open to a change of opinion. Until you can figure the difference between "hole" and "whole", stay off this board.

reply

Hello there, first excuse me if my english is not quite good, I´m from a not english country (Argentina) and never study your lenguage at all, all I know of it is from watching english movies from childhood to date, so, sorry for the hole-Whole thing...

About my previous post, I should not type when I´m angry... I was just too angry to think things straight after reading a lot of not backup stupid replies, when I awnser you... my problem :/ actualy I never pass the "Titanic" paragraph, so I could now say that I agree with lot´s of your points.

Well, now speaking from a thinking point, with all the anger flushed away, I will awnser you about two things, Fellini and Titanic.

First of all I dont like Titanic way before knowing the existence off Fellini and my criticism of this film has nothing to do with that director or the assumtion that "art-lovers" bash the film merely for snobism, I just find it too cheesy and obvious, I remember going out of the cinema feeling a void inside... the story was like every other romance movie, it has added nothing to me and the story of the sinking was very well done, but it not sum to the whole (thanks for correcting me) story. In similar movie stiles I really like films such as Pirates of the caribean or Matrix, you know "must seen in big screen" movies, but Titanic lost me from "the ship of dreams" aproach, all the characters are so unidimensional and static...
From Cameron I really like the Abyss, I felt it was a much powerful vision and much more interesting that Titanic in the same romance-disaster genre. But with better plot and gret acting.

Second, why the comparising between Fellini and Titanic? What do this director/film has to do to each other? If you want to compare something to Fellini´s work, either to critique or just to make an aproche to it, you can choose way better examples, like the work of Terry Gilliam, or (thinking in a more popular autor this days) even Tim Burton
Personaly if I would have to compare Fellini with todays cinema I would do it with Charlie Kaufmann films or his director in Eternal Sunshine of a Spotless Mind Michel Gondry (By the way his film The science of Sleep is the film that most aproach the visual-phicological aspect present in almost all the Fellini´s movies)

The importance of Fellini in film from my uneducate view came from lots of points along his carrear, starting with his personal focus into the neorealistic age and the great character development (a really nice point when you want to compare with films such as Titanic)
But his better achivement came from his more simbolistic movies such as 8 1/2 and Giullieta digli spiriti, both amazing portrails of human psyche. This films are both beautifly filmed and has great stories and memorable characters.

Well, i´m tired of tipping with my dictionary english-spanish over the keyboard so I leave you here, you can correct my speeling whenever you like it´s good to improve my use of english

Cheers

reply

Hey man, no worries on the English language thing. Your English is better than my Spanish (I'm assuming that is your native tongue?)...and on top of that you did post some very good points and in a second language no less.

The comparision I was making with regards to Titanic and Fellini had nothing whatsoever to do with the films...but rather the fan base. If you tell people that you think Titanic is a VERY great film, immediately they come up with some great line like, "You don't know art" or "You'll go your entire life without understanding great art" or "Titanic is Michael Jackson to Fellini being Pink Floyd", really insightful stuff like that.

My post was merely to show that you can love Titanic, admire it, respect it as one of the greatest works of modern cinema, and still understand what "great art" is and appreciate Fellini. They're independent of each other, Cameron and Fellini, as you say. Film snobs, of which I call myself one, come off as elitist pricks when they thumb their noses at Titanic and believe ONLY Fellini and Goddard and Eisenstein and Malle and Cocteau are worth watching. This is flat untrue. James Cameron is every bit the great writer and director those individuals are. You don't make a billion dollars on a film without doing something right. Again, I stand by my post, no one here or anywhere else can name me a better director in the third act of a film in the history of cinema. He is THE best in history in that regard. Fellini snobs can whine about that all they want but it's the truth.

The only other comparision I made between Fellini and Cameron was when I was DEFENDING Fellini! The poster who started this said, "Fellini is so overrated." To which I responded by saying that Alexander Payne hit it right when talking about La Dolce Vita when he called it a novel style "five act story" and not a typical "three act" film. I merely suggested that in that regard, it is like many historical epics: Lawrence of Arabia, Spartacus, and of course Titanic.

I have made very great arguments (if I may say so myself!) that Titanic is one of the greatest films of all time, and that doesn't make me any less educated or respectful of Fellini's work. For time's sake, I'll spare you my entire posts or critique on Titanic but here is a few things to consider when watching Titanic:

1. "The Heart of the Ocean" is the EXACT same narrative technique employed by Wells in Citizen Kane in "Rosebud". Both are the catalysts that propel a past story from a point in the future to a narrative in past tense. Nobody mentions how well STRUCTURED Titanic's script is, but everybody bashes how corny the dialogue is. Hey, Star Wars is as corny as a wheat field in Kansas, but it's considered, "high art".

2. Cameron has created a VERY great script in terms of how it moves the plot. The dialogue can come off corny at times, I give you. But Cameron uses dialogue to drive the action, not the characters. The Dialogue is very good at navigating you, the audience through the stories narrative. It's not the type of dialogue that reveals characters as in films like, "Closer" or "Dolce Vita" or "Casablanca", you know that going into the film because it's an "action" film. I give you an example of how great and underrated Cameron's script is: Recall the virtual display where Old Rose is shown an animation of what happened when the ship sank. That is screenwriting genius because when the ship is actually sinking three hours later, the audience knows what's going on and is focused on the characters and HOW they act to solve the main problem rather than scratching their heads saying, "Why is the ship turning right side up again?" Further, it lets the audience focus on Cameron's masterful CGI work and directing when you could be asking yourself, "Why did the ship just break in half?" Titanic is very subtle in how it manages to get the audience to feel tense about a shipwreck that you know is coming, so I respectfully disagree with you on that point.

These are two of a handful of very valid arguments I can put forth on its behalf, but I'll spare you the rest.

So, what I hope you and others take from all this is: not all Titanic fans are teenage girls who love Leo--I dislike him very much. And unlike most fans, I can actually back up and justify my argument in a thoughtful manner and feel confident posting said arguments on a Fellini message board rife with film snobs and gumshoe screenwriters who thumb their nose at Titanic and say things like "I could do better". Well, if you're so f!*&$!# talented, go out there and make a movie that gets 9/10 people to cry and makes a billion dollars in the process. Just because I like Titanic doesn't mean I don't like Fellini or lose any credibility on my opinions regarding his work. I believe Nights of Cabiria to be one of the most touching films ever put out...and 8 1/2, while personally not my cup of tea, I have enormous respect for because it is one of the all-time greats and is beautifully shot.

Great film, like great music comes in many forms. Rap is just as important as Mozart, and can be just as good. To merely dismiss popular art like Titanic because it isn't "deep" to literary snobs is a very sad way to watch movies because watching movies is above all else, supposed to be fun. Just like debating on a message board with a good guy from Argentina! Take care and enjoy the winter down there. By the way, Diego rules!

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Fellini blows.

reply

What you're saying is that you only like films that are structured around a classic narrative. Fellini draws on the traditions of tableau and pageantry. You don't understand this - so best to stop talking about it, you're simply parading you're ignorance.

Every frame of La Dolce Vita could be taken and hung on a gallery wall. You've obviously not seen it in the cinema - the opening scene is breathtaking.

Titanic a masterpiece LOL - how old are you?

reply

Hating on 'Titanic' isn't the best way to make the poiont that 'La Dolce Vita' is a masterpiece. Reading through this thread I've read some interesting things.

Someone said that Marcello is an unsympathetic character. I don't know where this comes from. He is a cahracter that like everyone else is being sucked into the destructive modern world of excess, only the "angellic" girl remains untouched. Even his father is sucked into it and is harmed by this world. Look at the body language in the film, Marcello hangs on the fringes at Sylvia's arrival, not getting caught up in the media hustle and bustle because he detestes it. When Steiner plays phantom of the opera in the church Marcello is haunted by this because he feels Steiner is saying something about Marcello's life (phantom) and the world he is being sucked into (an opera), this is reflected at the end where he covers his face with his wave. Marcello has many redeeming features, he has moments of tenderness with people. The girl, his wife and Maddalena all get to have moments of warmth with him as does Steiner and his father.

Next point 'Titanic' has many elements of the old epics, so you can't put a lot of blame on it being crap for being modern. It is an entertaining film with emotional moments. It uses a basic Hollywood dramatic structure, but this is not the only structure for telling a story. Shakespeare used 5 act plays, Beowulf is a massive poem that hust becomes more exaggerated as it goes on. In literature 'The Lord of the Rings' is technically told in 6 parts, in film it is done in 3, multiple act films. 'La Dolce Vita' skips out the business of having acts and just goes for an episodic structure. 'Goodfellas' uses a similar structure, as does 'Raging Bull'. There's nothing wring with the basic film structure, it is tried and tested, but it is not the only way that works.

La Dolce Vita and 8 1/2 are two great visual films where the emotion often lies within the shot and not in what is being said. Watch Marcello's body language in the film and you can understand how he feels.

"You're going to cross Sinai?"
"Moses did"

reply

At this point you really aren't addressing anything at all, to say that Fellini movies are just vapid, unstructured, pseudo-intellectual BS, that aren't deep is BS. It seems to me that the only thing that bothers you is the fact that it does not have the "tightly structured plot" that Hollywood has been bashing over the head with over the past few years. Similarly Godard films, which you mention, don't exactly have the unimaginative plots of films such as Titanic. I mean, a love story on a doomed cruise liner? Yeah, that is a real fascinating piece of film making. I don't see why you can't just appreciate Fellini films for what they are, imaginative, philosophical meditations, on the process of creation and what exactly constitutes a "proper life," the same way that I like Titanic for what it is, a pop corn flick that I know for a fact I can sit down and watch with my Mom and Grandmother.

reply

I have never seen worse director as Fellini.
Just yesterday saw 8 1/2 then La dolce Vita and seriously they are so over-dramatic and supreme-boring.

I agree with the topic maker Fellini is obnoxiously OVER-Rated.

and why the *beep* every movie of his has to have the main lead(male) cheating on his fiancee/wife by having mistress? Looks like he is mirroring his own pathetic life.

reply

Differing opinions aside, TITANIC is NOT a masterpice. I used to think it was, until I grew up, and realized that it has one of the worst screenplays on the face of the planet. TITANIC is merely a "good" film. It's not a "great" one. It's the story of a boat that sank, held together by a flimsy romance subplot. Fellini's films are art, because they explore the human condition on an abstract level that Jim Cameron can't touch. See AVATAR if you don't believe me.

reply

were smug yet your the one saying "Jim Cameron can wipe his sneakers on Fellini's head". are you aware of irony. Anyway titanic is not a great film, its a great summer movie, like independence day or top gun but i wouldn't really put it in the same category as taxi driver or la haine. However that is just my opinion, people are entertained by different things, i cant understand the popularity of lady gaga but im sure their are plenty of lady gaga fans who dont understand the popularity of radiohead. theres no need to be so derogatory towards other people and the art that they enjoy.

reply

alright, I tend to think that I have fairly good taste in film, being a film buff who wants to enter film as a profession. I have to admit that I do enjoy an occasional action flick now and then, and don't get me wrong, I absolutely adore art films of all kinds (persona, aguirre wrath of god, eraserhead, the seventh seal and nameless others) but in my humble opinion, Fellini is vastly overrated, sure his films are good to a certain extent,I love La Strada, but films like 8 1/2 and this film are very overly self indulgent if you ask me. I mean, I watched it when I was a bit younger so my opinion might have changed since then, but I think the nearly incoherent ramblings of a tabloid reporter for 3 hours isn't my definition of a good movie. So you, who have such a strong opinion as this, please don't bash on people because they don't like what you like, everyone is entitled to an opinion even if you don't agree with it. There are people who LIKE Brokencyde for christ sake, but I digress, i'm just going to make one more point, you sir are a snob of the highest caliber and though i dont like resorting to name calling, I think it fits you accordingly "you are dead inside" Really? do you have to be taht melodramatic and such a douchebag? Well, these are my two cents I hope I'm not dead inside either in your opinion, because that would be oh so heartbreaking.

reply

[deleted]

isn't it james cameron?

reply

He goes by James professionally but in every interview he gives, he refers to himself as Jim.

reply

Well I can tell you 2 Fellini films that aren't overrated - La Strada and Nights of Cabiria. Check them out, I think you might like them. They are not as long and there is more of a plot structure to them. I sort of understand what you're saying, in that Fellini was not really a "plot driven" director, so his films can seem a bit pretentious and boring at times. I guess to be honest the only films of his I really like are La Strada and Nights of Cabiria, which are two of my favorite films of all time, but maybe I just like those because of the wonderful acting of Guiletta Masina (Fellini's wife). But, still, his direction in the films is quite good, so watch those two films and you will see what Mr. Fellini is capable of. Some of his later films carry the tone of New Wave, existentialist, LSD-induced stuff so I can see how you may not like them. Still, he does create some memorable scenes. How about him and the blonde movie star wading in the waters?

"Say 'what' again mutha f@cka'!"

reply

Self-indulgent? Are you chucking and ''Annie Hall'' on me?

reply

"What I wouldn't give for a large sock with horse manure in it!"

reply

Cannot agree with u more this: "2 Fellini films that aren't overrated - La Strada and Nights of Cabiria". In fact, I haven't a chance to watch the latter, but after I've tried several others by Fellini, La Strada is the only one I truly like and gets itself a place in my top 100. His wife's acting is lifelike; the story is strong; the cinematography is beautiful.

However, I used to disingenuously like his other works 'cause all my friends around seem to be blown away by them and if I don't, I'd probably be ignorant or something. But this time, just after my second try on LDV, that did it. I couldn't relate it to most people's praises. The story is kind of loose and lame, some scenes themselves being just as chaotic as Fellini wanted to make them. I think I did feel the main character's confusion and occasional struggle in an insane world taken away by neon lights and falsidical media, but it just doesn't come out in the best way.

I'm don't think myself a stubborn Hollywood fan. I'd kill for Andrei Taikovsky, Lars von Trier and many others, always trying to get what a film want to give. But Fellini's most works were just not THAT excellent to me --- They may be good, but not that great. You see, every greatness has at least one essential reason to me, I love Taikovsky for his gorgeous cinematography, Lars von Trier for his raw stories, Almodóvar for his strong emotions... Maybe Fellini gets a bit in every part, but never one that could overwhelm me.

I don't mean to vilipend his works, I just really need to relieve my feelings.


What made the universe made me.

reply

Yeah, "Band of Outsiders" or "Breathless" aren't meaningless journies, right? There is absolutley no point to either film.

Sorry to break this to you, but Fellini didn't make cool films. They had meaning, not a bunch of idiots sitting on a bed talking for 1 hour or three other idiots seeing how long they could sit in silence.

Fellini's films were social commentaries, conceptual masterpieces, had studies of religion, childhood, loneliness, etc. Godard's films have a bunch of idiots sitting around talking about meaningless garbage.

I don't like anything he did after '8 1/2,' but he has three films in my top 20.

"The one thing I respect about Hitler is that he wouldn't take sh!t from magicians." - Larry David

reply

Well you have to admit some of the stuff he did in the 60's was kinda out there, and really didn't seem to have much point other than to be visual extravaganzas (Satyricon, anybody?). He didn't return to a more "normal" film until Amarcord, which won him the Academy Award for best foreign language picture (and rightfully so). I agree about Godard, I'm still puzzled as to what is supposed to be so great about him, and why Tarantino digs him so much. But, the tone and script of La Dolce Vita sort of reminds me of the few Godard or Truffaut films I've seen. (Though Truffaut's 400 blows was pretty damn good actually).

"Say 'what' again mutha f@cka'!"

reply

I understand why you are confused about Godard, i have seen two godard films, I saw Contempt then a few weeks later i saw the breathless DVD and without seeing it bought it. To enjoy Breathless do not watch any neo-realistic films that day or the day before, dont even think about fellini if you would liek to enjoy this film. The don't have the same feel. Even then it wont be great. Contempt on the other hand is one of my favorite movies and while not being on par with La Dolce Vita it has the same feel. One more thing call me crazy, I loved La Dolce Vita and Fellini Satyricon but somethign didn't click with me for 8 1/2. I thought it was very good, but critics calling it the best foreign film of all time is out of hand. I enjoyed contempt more and got more out of it. And La Dolce Vita in my mind was 10 times better.

reply

i'm just hoping this is a joke.

and if it's not, praytell;

what makes you such an expert?


Federico Fellini and james cameron aren't even up for comparison.

reply

But nihilistdude,

"Satiriycon" is not a widely recognized masterpiece. When in stating his films had points, I believe the first films put up for assessment of major points or studies contained in them should be his most popular. Someone would have to be a real idiot to say "Nights of Cabiria" (in my top 10 of alltime), "La Strada," "La Dolce Vita," "8 1/2" and "I, Vettolini" don't have "points." Godard's films don't offer this, they are just used for a bunch of charaters to sit arround and refference pop culutre. Fellini chose to explore themes of religion, innocence, childhood, loneliness, filmmaking itself, celebrity worship, acceptance, etc. in all his films. Comparing Godard to him is plain stupid (not because I dislike him, which I do, a lot, but because they are polar oppisites in thier approaches to thier films) and says enough about the starter of this post to begin with.

soldier of fortune, lost in the madness/brandish your weapon or get dropped to the canvas

reply