MovieChat Forums > Fellini - Satyricon (1969) Discussion > C'mon everyone, it's not that good reall...

C'mon everyone, it's not that good really...


Ok Ok, I know it's a visual feast and all that, but it's also absolutely hollow. I can't see how you can rate this film when there's so many other 'visual feasts' out there which also have other qualities like a plot and characters.

This film is masturbation.

But that's just my opinion.

reply

Im not sure if it was masterbation but it was rather messy. Too much dialogue and the pace was far to fast to take in any kind of visuals (which were good. Amazing production values though

reply

I have the book at home and it goes to show that Fellini didn't have a story to work with.
It was lost for hundreds of years and resurfaced in the 17th century. It is simply pieces of stories that happen to have a few characters flowing from one to another.

This film version is not simply gorgeous to look at but is a terrific example of how bored the Romans were in those days. Nothing could please them: sex was boring, homosexuality was wearing thin... Violence was different so they gave it a try (remember the colloseum?).

People say that Fellini Satyricon is egocentric but it an art house of imagination and of sci-fi, in the past.


D.

reply

A very inaccurate depiction of life in the Roman Empire.No,they did not think sex was boring.The fascination with and depictions of homosexuality are greatly exagerrated.Historians would have you believe that all of the Roman aristocracy and the Roman citizens themselves were sexually uninhibited and bisexual or homosexual. This is total nonsence.

reply

why would you post this? no one has any clue what the roman aristocracy was like. one of the most retarded posts i've read on imdb by a smart ass who thinks he knows everything

reply

I don't know... I own the book by Patronius and I like it much better. In the book I like the fact that Giton had more speaking parts and came back to Encolpius (would of been nice to see that part). The movie to me is fair. I like it's strangeness + ugly and beautiful characters (martin potter) but I do miss those other parts mentioned in the book.

"I never loved anyone like I loved myself.

reply

But this a reason why the film is so unique. It probably doesn't mean a thing, but its still great because its like being carried arround in a surreal and crazy land, with no rules and meaning, which is fellini's fantasy world. Its like a dream, and usually nobody can really understand the meaning of a dream, and like a dream, while watching it you have the feeling that anything could happen. And I also loved the way everybody acts in this film, so unreal, and there was always somebody staring in camera in a creepy way.
There is no film quite like this, but actually all of fellini's films are quite like masturbation, and this one more then all probably.

reply

[deleted]

I agree totally--this is a spectacularly good film . . . and I too don't understand cinephiles not getting it--it's as good as film can be: dreamlike, ethereal, unreal.

reply

[deleted]

Agree completely--the best cinema is that which expresses something that can't be done as effectively any other way. That's the mark of a pure cinema for me too--film that actually uses the medium to advance the story (or whatever) versus using the medium to just document a story.

I'm thinking, like me, you don't think that much of what you see is really good either . . . What, maybe 2 percent? And that's being generous . . .

reply

[deleted]

I'm not an IMDB professional user, or in the business, but I understood that the target audience was much younger: 11- to 13-year-old boys, especially minority or socially disadvantaged. This is the audience that needs a local, legal place to escape to on a regular basis, and one that will see certain movies over and over, the phenomenon that can create a blockbuster. Realizing (or believing) that has helped me understand and cope (and avoid) with the adolescent-targeted dreck, as you say, full of bathroom humor and CGI explosions.

I live in semi-rural Wisconsin (US) which makes things even more difficult. There isn't much available to me on the big screen, and, in fact, there are few things I want to see that actually NEED the big screen. I think the last thing I saw in a theater was the most recent Star Wars, which I enjoyed. Say what we will about American crap, the technology can still astonish. Star Wars falls into the category of the kind of thing that's required viewing in order to maintain some level of cultural literacy. And, next week, I'm travelling an hour away to see Strangers With Candy, not because it needs the big screen, but because I want to "support" it. It won't be "pure cinema", I'm sure, but I could really use the laughs . . . .

reply

[deleted]

I agree with you about Altman movies: they're always worth seeing. And his movies seem to age well, they have that timeless quality we were speaking of. I have PHC on my list . . .

Re Strangers With Candy: What's wierd is it's booked into one of the Madison art movie houses. I thought SWC would go into the multiplexes. Must be the rating. I was amazed it got here so quickly. Roger Ebert has said the E & R show has incredibly good ratings in Madison, so the two thumbs up must have done the deed. Madison--the San Francisco of the midwest--is nothing if not about diversity and cultural literacy.

I am surprised about Palm Springs--I mean, I thought there was a symphony there? it's one of the places I had on my list to scope out for retirement. It got off the list after I saw the summertime temperatures . . . and it's not exactly cheap, from what I could tell . . . .

reply

[deleted]

"It's horrid hot . . . 118 yesterday and today."

118? Might as well be 188! We had 98 for a couple days and I felt paralyzed. It didn't last, and, luckily, up here it'll usually get down to 65 or so at night, if not lower . . . .

"Snerk! They play mostly Broadway, big band, and Barry Manilow. If you showed them a Beethoven symphony, I expect they'd implode."

Maybe that's a good thing. There's a symphony in Madison, but they only play anemic versions of what a friend of mine calls "old chestnuts"--you know, 1812 Overture, Beethoven's 5th, Appalachian Spring, etc. No Manilow, that I recall, but some John Williams--just as depressing. Nothing I haven't heard a million times. I don't understand why they do that, because you can't help making comparisons to the recorded versions that are infinitely better. Milwaukee has a superb orchestra, really, almost Chicago quality, but it's a 200 mile round trip . . . . Luckily I got to hear plenty when I lived in Chicago and NY. Hated the NY Philharmonic (mushy), but the great thing was that orchestras from all over the world came to Carnegie Hall so you could hear the best of the best . . . . Miss that. I would think LA would get many too--it's not that far, right?

Saw Strangers With Candy couple days ago. I was a fan of the TV show so predisposed to like this prequel. Not quite what I hoped for, but a LOT of laugh-out-loud moments, something that doesn't happen much for me. If you don't know the show, you might like the movie even more.

"watched Buffalo Bill and the Indians on cable the other night"

I think I'll put that on my library list--haven't seen it in years and years, and I've been writing/reading about that era (a little earlier, actually), so may be more appreciative . . . thanks for the idea!

reply

[deleted]

"impressive performance of Smetana's "Moldau."

That would be fine . . . there's little eastern european music I don't like . . . calle me romantic, but I'm crazy about janacek: sinfonetta makes me weep . . .

"long time since Lenny, hasn't it. "

Oh, how the older "boys" loved to tell Lenny stories--James Levine too, for that matter. Wish I remembered them . . . Luckily, I never got opera fever. Managed to see some of the BIG ones, particularly recall being knocked back in my seat by Zefferelli'sTurandot. Everything but the kitchen sink. There's a lot of chamber music in madison, and some choral, especially during the school year, but again, it's at least a 90 mile round trip . . . so much easier to turn on the radio.

"where's today's Fellini?"

that's a good question. Today, they might get the visuals okay, or the story okay, but rarely both, and rarely both with that absurdist sense I love so much. I recently saw You and Me and Everyone We Know, which I really liked. Good script, I thought. But the visuals, while good, were no way in the Fellini stata, and I think they could have been. The only thing I've seen recently that I thought got visuals and story and everything right, was Brokeback, something very different of course. (Favorite line: "I complain too much. That teacher don't like me. Now it's your turn.")

Nashville was on TCM last night; I watched it with one eye while working (I work at home). My god, it's good . . . I'd forgotten about the bad singer/striptease scene. Comes right after that fabulous Karen Black line, something like "She doesn't even comb her hair" ....

reply

[deleted]

I'm crazy about janacek

Oh, my lord . . . we'd better get married. I'm a crazed Janacek fan.


What a flirt! ;)

reply

"Oh, my lord . . . we'd better get married. I'm a crazed Janacek fan. You know, of course, the entire score (lacking a few folk numbers) of Unbearable Lightness of Being is Janacek's chamber and piano music. Though it's the operas I know best. Have you seen the animated film version of Cunning Little Vixen? It's delightful."

I don't know about marriage. You sound like you know a lot about music, and I'm very much an uneducated dilettante. Saw Unbearable Lightness but don't remember the score; will have to revisit. And I looked for the Cunning Little Vixen (2003)--IMDB shows it not available DVD/VHS . . . but 1995 version is--are they both animated? I can never see that title without remembering one of Nabokov's spoonerisms: cunning stunts. I was about 16 when I read Lolita and kept wondering if they were intentional . . . .

"was born and raised in "Brokeback" country (though Colorado, not Wyoming). I grew up with people like that and let me tell you, the film captured them with the most eerie accuracy."

I grew up in suburban Chicago in what I thought was a hopelessly conservative family, but which I later realized was quite progressive. In '65, when I was 19, I went to school in Mexico City. Got into a relationship with a boy from Texas. He was taciturn, like Ennis. A stormy relationship; the fights were real fights. When we were back in the States for the summer, I got a Dear John letter saying he'd got a girl pregnant and was going to marry her. I never saw him again, and in some ways, I never recovered from it.

Of course, in subsequent years, in my mind, the relationship is remembered as some idyllic perfection, which was far from the case. Still, none of my other LTRs, which were good, were in the same category, by a long shot. So, can't speak for the Wyoming aspect, but they got Texas and heartache right. I'd read the story and couldn't imagine that it could be made into a movie at all, much less such a faithful and good one.

Saw Mysterious Skin and Come Undone over the weekend. MS not bad, much preferred Come Undone. (Recently joined Netflix to see the gay-theme movies I've missed over the years....)











I complain too much. That teacher don't like me. Now it's your turn.

reply

As an aside, I don't mean to interrupt your fascinating exchange: ekeby, there's a lot of recommendations here: http://www.imdb.com/board/bd0000007/flat/45469914?d=49289283#49289283. I don't know how to find the url of the entire thread, so you have to scroll to the OP yourself, hope you don't mind :-)

Regards, Rosabel

reply

thanks for the link rosabel . . . a posting there links to a wikipedia list of gay/theme films that has to be the most complete I've seen . . . although it includes some films I wouldn't. All About Eve, for example; I think that's a stretch. But very useful. Here's the link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lesbian%2C_gay%2C_bisexual_or_transgender-related_films






I complain too much. That teacher don't like me. Now it's your turn.

reply

[deleted]

IMDB shows it not available DVD/VHS
Oh, fie! Well, you might try Arkiv Music . . . they might have backstock.
Or you could try your local library; I've found the most obscure titles imaginable at mine.

reply

Remeber as well its not as if Fellini only made massively surreal films- not only was he involved in severeal neo-realist productions, La Strada combines elements of both movements.

reply

[deleted]

That "Godot" play could use some action, too, do you think?

Why do SO many people bother leaving comments that mean noting but, "I don't get it."

Remember the nice old guy and his wife in "PRoCairo" complaining to the screen characters that they weren't enjoying the moie, and that his wife, she "likes a sti-ry." O.K., go somewhere else, but why does anyone else in the place have to give a s--t?

reply

it's no 8 1/2.

reply

We just saw it..
I then immediately looked up Roger Ebert's critique on it..
I have to agree with him..
Back then in pre Christian Rome..Things were different.. No sense of moral judgement..As they did not know.. really..Mr Ebert compared it to the summer of love.. Woodstock era ..Free love and debauchery..and let it all hang out!
It was live for the moment...I think Fellini tried to capture that..though he was quoted as saying .. Well I am paraphrasing here..I wanted to show life back then, like we were visiting Martian on their planet..
The grotesque imagery stands out..I never saw so much excess.. But I did enjoy it...

reply

[deleted]

I have to agree with Cardron. I'd like to think I'm no target-audience-zombie; my physical DVD library has everything from Death in Venice to The Madness of King George and Ali G: Indahouse - I love all kinds of movies. But, with this movie, it's like the title says "c'mon, it's not really that good." Actually, it's terrible. It's this Godawful jerky acting and choppy flow that people with foreign passports get a free pass to pass off as "art" or "style" that is in fact just crummy direction and laughable acting. The horribly fake and loud laughing of EVERYONE, the lazy movements and slurred speech it's all like a bunch of kids with a YouTube release.

This argument about the brokeness of the original, well that's what a movie is, fiction - make it up! Fill it in, or simply focus on the complete part.

Don't just take in this string of borrrrring crap and embrace it because it's "a visual feast." If I want a visual feast I'll go to an art museum.

reply

[deleted]

"engaging and fascinating unlike this tripe," eh? For a minute I was worried that your post might come off as shallow and middle-brow. Close call!

reply

[deleted]