La Dolce Vita

Starring: Marcello Mastroianni, Anita Ekberg, Anouk Aimee, Yvonne Furneaux, Magail Noel, Alain Cuny, Annibale Ninchi, Walter Santesso
Directed by: Federico Fellini
Rating: Not rated
Genre: Comedy, Drama
1961

Times Seen:
Tim: 1

Summary: A philandering tabloid journalist (Marcello Mastroianni) moves through high society, leading a glamorous but potentially shallow life.

Review:

Tim: I think I may not be the biggest Federico Fellini fan. I must admit, I'm troubled by this. I have to admit, this is only the second film of his I've seen and I really enjoyed both. But, I didn't love either one. I know that's a small sample size, but when you consider the two films are 8 1/2 and La Dolce Vita, I expected to love at least one of them. These are all-time classic movies. And, they are very good! This movie takes an unflinching look at a bunch of elites, living "The good life" or "The sweet life"- a life of luxury, privilege, filled with parties, beautiful people, and all the distractions life can offer. It features strong performances, excellent directing. Why didn't I love this movie? It troubles me.

I can answer that question, though. My issue with La Dolce Vita has nothing to do with the technical side- this is a brilliantly-made movie. My complaints come on the narrative side. Why did what we see on screen matter? We get less of a real narrative and more of a series of vignettes. We see the same cast of characters, circling around each other at various parties, dinners, events. We get some great individual sequences, but no sense of real momentum. Now, I know this was likely the point- Fellini's realistic approach to filmmaking ensured that this movie was rooted in real life, which often doesn't have a sense of momentum or narrative structure. We see these people living their lives, and part of the point is that many of them aren't going anywhere. They're simply partying their time away. I get that vision, but it's not that interesting to watch, especially when it involves watching it for 2 hours and 54 minutes. Nearly three hours of luxury, excess, and shallowness is a lot to take.

I'd have been more okay with this if I felt like any of the characters had a compelling arc. As I reflect on this film, I don't really see it. Who changed? Who evolved? I'm drawing a blank. Obviously, you'd hope the character of Marcello Rubini would be the centerpiece of this. He's the protagonist, and we spend a lot of time with him. Compare him at the beginning to the end, when he's wandering the beach after the weird creature scene. Is he different? Did he learn? Did he change? Perhaps that's the point, that all his experiences amounted to nothing (or at least very little), but that doesn't seem very compelling from the audience's perspective. Why should I have cared, or invested in any of the characters? They're all complicated and flawed, but no one here is the kind of person I'd lean into knowing. No one depicted here has any real depth, and that might add to the social commentary of the film, but it's not that fun to watch. This is where I think the film is held back. On a side note, I had similar complaints about 8 1/2, so again, it might be that Fellini is just not for me.

This bothers me, though, because there are so many terrific moments in this film. The highlight has to be the early scenes with the character of Sylvia. Actress Anita Ekberg makes a heck of an entrance, and the camera seems to be in love with her- Fellini shoots here as if she's the most important person in the room- she's not always centered, but it feels like the rest of the cast rotates around her. This depiction of beauty and star-power is excellent. Ekberg is incredibly memorable in her role, although I do think her performance was a tad uneven. This results in the famous scene of her and Marcello Mastroianni in the fountain. I thought that was a very cool, memorable sequence. I ultimately wish it mattered more, but it offered great visuals. I felt like Ekberg's presence injected the film with energy and vivacious life. So, of course, she quickly disappears from the story. Nothing we see the rest of the time is as memorable.

Fellini does give us a series of great shots, though. The opening scene with the helicopter carrying the statue is stark and compelling. I didn't understand what was happening, but I was invested in the story immediately. There's an intriguing dinner party scene where the host is playing records, and the crushing return to that scene later in the movie is impossible to forget.

One of the things I loved about this movie the most is the character of Paparazzo. I just find this unbelievably fascinating- he plays one of these photographers who has no care or compassion for his subjects, but will do whatever he can for the shot. He's annoying, aggressive, relentless in his work. That kind of photographer became known as a "Paparazzo", and the plural is "paparazzi." That term, which we all know, originated from this movie and that character. That is crazy- I had zero clue, before I watched this movie. It's also compelling because those scenes showed the future- that sense of obsession with celebrity, the aggressive photographers, the gossip-driven culture that celebrities face, it's all depicted here (in 1960!). This movie is incredible insightful and prescient in those sequences. That shows the brilliance of Fellini.

Marcello Mastroianni is quite good in the lead role. He's just such a cool actor and he brings this quiet intelligence to the role, mixed in with callousness, selfishness, and detachment. It's quite impressive to watch. I loved his work in 8 1/2, and he delivers another marvelous performance here. He's an excellent actor and he holds our attention throughout.

This film was nominated for 4 Academy Awards- Fellini received a nomination for Best Director, was part of the team nominated for Best Original Screenplay, and the movie also received a nom for Best Art Direction-Set Direction (black and white). It did win 1 Academy Award, for Best Costume Design. Four nominations for an international film and one win is impressive- again, I recognize the importance of this film and how well-made it was. Critics clearly saw the value and appreciated it.

For me, though, I can't call this a "great" movie. I think it's an incredibly important film- both to Italy and to global cinema. It's memorable, and it offers a scathing rebuke to the elitist world of super-stardom, fame, and fortune. Fellini tackles celebrity culture head-on, and we don't walk away from it feeling good. For me, though, to invest almost three hours of my life, I wanted more takeaways. I wanted to see a narrative where I could invest in the characters, feel like the journey was worth it. I needed to see some level of character development beyond the minuscule amount we get here. I needed something that packed a bit more punch/ I'm obviously in the minority here, but although I really, really liked the film and I've thought a lot about it, I can't quite call this film great. At some point, I'll check out another Fellini film- I want to love this guy and work, but all I can muster is really appreciating him.

Rating 1-10
Tim's Rating: 7.5



If You Enjoyed This Movie, We Recommend: 8 1/2, Nights of Cabiria, Divorce Italian Style