Watching the film again in class, here really was a slightly different experience because I noticed things the second time that I missed out on the first time. I think part of it may have been because I now recognize more of the Italian words in the film and spent less time reading and more time viewing the film which does allow for a slightly deeper look in to the events taking place. What I loved about the film was the experimental story telling that Fellini uses. He introduces Marcello through his interactions with other characters in the film. What kind of bugged me about the film was that there is no real climax, or change. It's more of just a continuous story that is taking place.
The article was very interesting to me because it talked about the religious properties of the movie and the reaction it stirred through out the italian world and the film world. Many Italians were very offended by the film. In Italy my class discussed this in depth. We talked about other films that depicted this situation such as "Divorce Italian Style", in that film the characters plan on seeing "La Dolce Vita". The men were discussing the rumors of what the film was about many people called it a "porno" and many women were not happy about their husbands watching this movie. The religious aspects of the film are also very interesting. We have that opening scene with Jesus "flying" above the city. I don't believe Fellini was anti-religious in doing this, I think he's making a statement to the audience. In a way he is saying there doesn't have to be just one way of living, we can enjoy ourselves in other ways and have fun in a more carefree way, he goes for shock value not for insults.
I think if i knew Italian I probably would have had a better depth of knowledge with the film. I like how there is no real climax or change, it is just the everyday and ordinary of a normal person. I don't understand why Italians were offended throughout the film. It ids interesting the way Fellini used shock value to get people's attention instead of insulting them. I think back then, anything related to religion that wasn't the typical ideas was offensive to many.
ReplyDeleteWow, I wanna go to Italy!!! Jealous.
ReplyDeleteAnyway, I agree with Hawco about the way there is no typical climax and how that is important for the realistic nature of the film. Pretty strong message to have a hyper-realistic film where our protagonist (if you can even call Marcello that) doesnt really change or learn his lesson at all.
You bring up a good idea about the structure of the film being laid out as having no real rising action/climax. In conjunction, Tom makes a really interesting point about the main character not experiencing any sort of change at all. Which is a staple of the film industry, people go to films to watch characters much like themselves experience growth and change for the better. This film does not give you that. Instead it gives the run down of a day in the life of the ultimate party boy and how that affects him, which doesn't seem to be very much.
ReplyDeleteSome really interesting observations. I hadn't known that about Fellini studying Picasso. I think the question isn't so much whether or not the film is religious. Pasolini's point is something more like, it's a little bit overly religious in the kinds of opposing values it appears to set up.
ReplyDelete