Week 2: La Dolce Vita (1960)

Before Viewing

Ah, Fellini. What a discovery!

Growning up, I had obviously hear of Fellini and the term ‘Fellini-esque’, but it wasn’t until last year when I finally saw ‘8 1/2′ that I got what exactly that meant. What it DOESN’T mean is ‘wacky’, ‘disjointed’, ‘bizarre’, or any of the other connotations that Fellini-esque has become associated with. It means, quite simply, ‘dreamlike’. Fellini’s movies, especially the later ones, are the stuff of dreams. Things happen in his films that might seem implausable in real life, but doesn’t that happen in our dreams? I know that in MY dreams, I can do things I could never in the real world. Fellini simply took those dream images and put them in front of a camera, which, if you think about it, is the perfect medium for that. I’ve read a few books on him since then, and I’ve grown fond of his work, and well as gained a better understanding about the way he felt about men, women, love, sex, and food. With this in mind, it makes the meaning behind his films so much more accessible.

Since then, I’ve seen Nights of Cabiria, La Strada, I Vitilloni, and Juliet of the Spirits. I’ve had La Dolce Vita for a while, but haven’t had the time to commit to it. Until now!

My Thoughts After Viewing

I’ve always been fascinated with the look of Italy, particularly Rome. To me, it’s fascinating to see modern buildings standing next to old world ruins. After seeing a number of post-World War II Italian films, though, I also picture crumbling, war-ruined structures, crowds of children, lots of pedestrians and lots of scaffolding (Bicycle Thieves was a great example of this).  The opening of La Dolce Vita did not disappoint. The opening scene was great, establishing the setting as effectively as Blade Runner did with Los Angeles of the future. The helicopter flying the large statue of Christ over Rome almost made it appear as if Christ himself were blessing the city, which becomes ironic when we see all the debachery going on in the city, especially at night. Each locale presented in the film, although a part of Rome, was very distinctive. I’ve never seen the Trevi Fountain (more on that later), but I sure want to now. The apartments had a very contemporary look (for the year 1960) which added to the realism. I was amused by the fact that the paparazzi in this film are as ruthless as the ones we see blocking SUVs and chasing celebrities today. No wonder that term comes from a character in this film.

As far as the acting goes, it’s clear that the constant that makes the film is the magnificent Marcello Mastroianni. It’s his descent into darkness and dispair that is the heart of the film (especially since it really don’t have a plot and is more of a series of episodes). Marcello’s portrayl as a journalist who at first wants a tidy, successful life but later falls into dispair is what makes this film. I’d seen him before as Guido in Fellini’s 8 1/2,  but the character here is different than his mentally-blocked director in that film. Marcello the journalist is well-known, well-liked (although he does get physically threatened for a piece he wrote), and successful. The film follows him through 7 days and nights in Rome, where a number of different things happen to him. In the course of the film, he:

• Makes love to a celebrity after they pick up a prostitute and take her for a ride
• Rushes his girlfriend to the hospital after she tries to kill herself
• Cavorts in the Trevi Fountain with a beautiful buxom American actress
• Meets up and attends the party of his intellectual hero (and whose selfish act leads to Marcello’s loss of faith and direction)
• Witnesses firsthand religious fervor in relation to a false miracle
• Attends a party hosted by the young, aristocratic, and bored
• Spends some time with his father (with whom he is not close), seeing him in action with the ladies
• Attends an orgy, during which he becomes the ringleader

I enjoy watching Marcello the actor in these roles because to me, he comes across as an everyman. He’s not too young, or too suave, or too good looking, or anything that really sets him on a pedistal above the viewer. There’s some other non-Fellini films of his I’d really like to see. As a character, I liked the peek into his personal life, especially the love/hate relationship with his girlfriend. He seemed so much better suited for Maddalena, but sadly that doesn’t seem to go his way.

Although I enjoyed the film, I felt like some of the events could have been streamlined or even left out, and it would still have been successful. Personally, I loved seeing his sexual frustration when it came to the American starlet (and let me say here that Anita Ekberg is one of the most beautiful women ever filmed. Her romp in the Trevi fountain is the most sensual ‘fully-clothed’ scene I’ve ever seen), I was interested in his relationship with Steiner, his hero (and likewise horrified by his selfish actions), and I really found the episode with his father to be both funny and sad because of its meditations on mortality. Knowing what I know about Fellini, I’m sure Marcello’s father is a manifestation of his own father and their relationship. In my opinion, everything else could have been left out as long as the film ended with Steiner’s action and Marcello’s subsequent fall, illustrated by the orgy. Not that the other things were bad, mind you, I just found Marcello’s personal relationships to be more interesting than post-War Roman high-society. His fall at the end is sad and unfortuantely, but it comes with the life that he wanted. He looks so weary at the end of the film- what a contrast from the flirty, vivacious Marcello we first see in the helicopter over Rome.

The Final Say

A great film worth seeing for its performances. I purposely tried to be vague on some of the things I wrote about here as not to ruin any surprises. I plan to re-watch it eventually because there were some things I thought about after viewing that I’d like to see again. If you’ve never seen a Fellini film, see 8 1/2 first, then this one.