"La Dolce Vita (1960)" Movie Review Essay & Film Analysis

If I was a film critic and lover of Fellini, I would write about this movie so.
In his brilliant picture great and unsurpassed master of Italian cinema, Federico Fellini thoroughly turned inside out rotten wormhole Italian elite of the 50s, is bogged down on the ears in so-called "Dolce vite" consisting of idleness of continuum, corruption, empty drinking and secular evenings. Fellini characteristic him (and all the "new wave" in general) manner chosen plotless type of narrative, gathering his masterpiece, like a mosaic of several kinoeskizov:
«... do not have to worry about creating a narrative, this film does not have to It is a story a story. We do better than this: add together all the material collected, talk openly, to share thoughts, remember that we have read in the newspapers, in the comics. We put all our notes, all the documents on the table in the form of a chaotic ».
In the center of the picture Fellini shows the life of the journalist Marcello, who, serving as a kind of searchlight and a witness to the bourgeois expansion, haunting, like restless demon, shutting in its deserted and contradictory inner world, the slippery surface of a secular society in search of itself. And wherever untouched by Marcello, everywhere it can be seen that in all social events and parties, behind the mask of "sweet" life of all people are equally empty, worthless and miserable. They are bored. They squeeze out all the juice of life, they try to amuse themselves in any way possible to escape from the oppressive reality and their own spiritual emptiness. But here's the next orgy is nearing completion, the validity of palliative coming to an end, and they feel a depressing hangover of despair surrounding reality.
rich do not just cry and weep bitterly desperate and bitter all the poor. Italy, close the screen of architectural luxury and Catholic piety, appears in the form of a secularized similarity of Sodom, Gomorrah, in which nothing sacred (grotesque scene "phenomenon Madonna's children»).
An illustrative example of such deceitfulness of life is shown in a scene of the meeting with his father Marcello . Met by chance in Rome, the latter offers to go with her son to unwind and carousing in some restaurant. It can be seen that his father loved once funny sprees and suddenly decides to revive old. It ends it all by the fact that the father becomes ill, he was sitting alone in a chair with a devastated look and recognized Marcello that he "probably did not calculate their strength." In his view, we see the weariness and melancholy. This life is not for him. He was not twenty-five, and, in essence, is to forget about the old manners.
Marcello And here is the same embodiment of existential doom. He's trying to find some inspiration for life itself. He does not know what he wants ( "to write a book or articles"). He can not and does not know how to love. He is like a pathetic womanizer, endlessly chasing women, trying to drown out the complex always hungry alpha male. Deep down, he tries to find his ideal, in which he could forget their sufferings, which could find solace and a stronghold, but the woman for him, as they were, and remain, just a toy for adult entertainment. He suffers and makes others suffer. His fiancee hates and loves Marcello in the hope that he would marry her, or, at least, will love her and be faithful to her, but her simple and straightforward dreams not come true. Marcello crossed the fine line of no return, and, it seems, will remain forever because of this feature.
not accidentally appear in the film and the French to the Americans. Actually, the American diva Sylvia introduced in the story is not so much to show that Marcello will priudaryat and her many show the deplorable state of the elite not only in Italy but also in Europe and America as well. What an intercontinental collapse. It got everything, as they say. One of the USSR in that time was not up to Europe.
The wonderful ending, we see how Fellini ruthless hand down death sentence to the hero and society as a whole. First, we see how desperate hero in the party reaches its climax: he rages and playing the fool, unable to tolerate his society like demi deliberately hyperbolizing own psevdopotrebnost in amusements, which are eager to visit. By morning they were half drunk and tired, run down to the coast and watched the sailors pulled ashore huge ramp that "the third day as the dead." Fellini as it compares a dead sea monster with this rich rabble crowding around him and looking at him in the mirror, because they are just as doomed to death. They also thrown out of the sea of ​​life, because it no longer suitable for her. They also are ugly inside, like a sea monster from the outside, as loud and stink as well as the ramp for sailors, are nothing more than "a large fortune," for which nothing more is necessary.
final scene when Marcello sitting on the sand and a young girl standing thirty feet away, could not before dokrichatsya, brings the grand total of the picture. There Fellini emphasizes how far apart dear girl from ordinary people, which embodies a very purity, virginity, innocence and the rich Marcello spoiled and doomed to be unhappy to death. She cries harder, stronger and frantically waving his arms, trying to him something to convey. Marcello shows that he did not hear. And hardly even attempting to understand it. Between them is a huge gap, which has eroded the foam of the sea. And always will be. Rich and poor. Happy and unhappy. It is unlikely that they will ever be able to hear each other.
But since I'm not a film critic and not a fan of creativity of Fellini, proceed directly to impressions.
With all the presence of semantic load and food for thought, with all the authenticity of the documentary zeitgeist movie, oddly enough, it does not cling. Moreover, it suggests a very real boredom, because it does not give rise to any strong emotion or in relation to the action unfolds, nor with respect to the heroes and three hours of screen time just seem infinite.
In terms of the narrative concept to me is absolutely not close this style of delivery, which I mentioned at the beginning. It really is peculiar to the European representatives of the "new wave": Fellini, Godard, etc. by the list. Namely - the author makes a few scenes and sketches, forming not one piece to tell a story, and the chaotic picture, divided into independent pieces that are united by a common theme. With this structure, the film has no integrity and the viewer is not so interesting to follow developments as lost intrigue. Much nicer it would be to split the picture into a series of short films on the same theme.
So judge the film is difficult. Really nice picture in the theory. But in practice ...

How to cite this essay: