User Reviews (324)

Add a Review

  • kyle_c20 July 2002
    I certainly wouldn't be saying anything new if I said that "8 1/2" is one of the most unique, fascinating, and personal pieces ever committed to film. It has consistently hailed as such, and its influence on film is far reaching and undeniable. It is certainly not one of the most entertaining movies of all time, and is actually quite long and difficult. But it is an incredible piece of filmmaking, and a gripping look at the difficulties of creating not just a movie, but art in general.

    Guido (Marcello Mastroianni) is a popular movie director who is working on his new film. Along the way, he struggles with his screenwriter, producer, wife, and mistress. Each presents a different problem and obstacle. More and more difficulties arise, not just in his attempts to complete the movie, but in his own mind.

    Guido, although flawed, is completely fleshed out, and draws sympathy from the audience. Yes, he is an adulterer, but he loves his wife. We see all of his personal desires and agony. We see how he suffers when he struggles with his desire to create the ultimate piece of art, one that offers something to everybody.

    The movie is technically wonderful. The movement of the camera, the lighting, and the direction in general is top notch. The movie mixes in dreams with reality to create a dreamlike world, and put us closer into Guido's own mind.

    Somebody who is looking for a movie as a two hour piece of entertainment will not enjoy this. But if you enjoy a movie that truly satisfies when it is finished, this is for you. It is quite long, and somewhat loose, but that is part of the interest. Moviemakers, or artists in general, will find that this film has a great deal to offer.
  • I know this film is loved and admired by countless filmmakers and fans. I know that the film is very artistic and wonderfully well made. And I understand that all serious lovers of film SHOULD see this film. But, despite this being a "must-see" film, I didn't particularly enjoy it--but I do respect what Fellini was trying to do. For the first time, Fellini was able to capture on film the psyche and inner turmoil of a director and although the film stars Marcello Mastroianni, the film is in many, many ways autobiographical. His inner struggles with traditional morality and god, sexuality and loyalty, all the sycophants trying to get his attention and the critic as well as his own childhood (including, of course his mother AND a representation of early sexual awakening in the form of a hideous but very sexual lady who looked a lot like Divine!) all come together in a series of somewhat disconnected images. All these factors that together work together to make the director's psyche are interesting, but very surreal--like the entire film is a dream or something that is the result of drugs. It is interesting at times, but also very tiring and difficult to watch at times and occasionally a bit dull. That's because it's a very choppy movie and only a child who is very hyperactive could easily stick with the ever-changing plot. As for me, what I liked best was the opening dream sequence--it was very amusing and brilliant.

    This type of self-analysis and parody was often copied in such films as STARDUST MEMORIES (to me, a blatant attempt by Woody Allen to steal or re-created 8 1/2) or DAY FOR NIGHT--though Truffaut's vision is much, much more conventional and lacks the surrealism and weirdness of Fellini. Many prefer Fellini's mad style, but as for me, while it is not as original or wildly innovative, DAY FOR NIGHT was a more enjoyable film.

    Overall, while not a fun or completely comprehensible film, it's a must for anyone who considers themselves a serious fan of film.
  • amaklp21 December 2019
    What can anyone say about this film? It's one of a kind, and simple words can't really describe it.

    The famous Italian director Federico Fellini presents us the journey of the highly surrealistic thoughts of a filmmaker, who suffers from, what we could call, Director's block. The protagonist, who seems constantly tired, is surrounded by many different people, friends, associates, priests and mostly... women; struggling with his weird fantasies of the current events of his life and memories of his childhood. All of these scenes take place in many different phantasmagoric sets, where multiple, for the most part random, conversations occur simultaneously, making him continually engaged and, in a way, frustrated.

    The production design is exceptional, with huge sets and dreamlike settings, while the cinematography (Fellini's last black and white film) is very unique and teases the viewer with alternate focusing and artsy compositions. The music theme is for the most part classical symphonies from Tchaikovsky, Wagner and Chopin, beautifully edited with the rhythm of the film.

    This is a drama with many subtle doses of comedy and a surreal analysis of the thoughts, relationships, affairs, fears, dreams and memories of the protagonist. Some viewers can find a bit annoying the randomness of the script and editing, where mostly unexplained things occur, but others can completely immerse in this insane trip and fully enjoy it.

    If you've seen some movies of Charlie Kaufman, a good explanation of what to expect is a wedding between Adaptation and Synecdoche, New York. If you haven't seen any of those, then you can go ahead and experience something you've never had before!
  • gftbiloxi24 April 2005
    Frederico Fellini's masterwork 8 ½ is difficult to approach largely because of its reputation. Many critics also state that the film is so complex that it requires multiple viewings to understand, and this is likely to intimidate many viewers. But in truth, and in spite of its surrealistic flourishes, 8 ½ is more straight-forward than its reputation might lead you to believe.

    The storyline itself is very simple. A famous director is preparing a new film, but finds himself suffering from creative block: he is obsessed by, loves, and feels unending frustration with both art and women, and his attention and ambition flies in so many different directions that he is suddenly incapable of focusing on one possibility lest he negate all others. With deadlines approaching the cast and crew descend upon him demanding information about the film--information that the director does not have because he finds himself incapable of making an artistic choice.

    What makes the film interesting is the way in which Fellini ultimately transforms the film as a whole into a commentary on the nature of creativity, art, mid-life crisis, and the battle of the sexes. Throughout the film, the director dreams dreams, has fantasies, and recalls his childhood--and this internal life is presented on the screen with the same sense of reality as reality itself. The staging of the various shots is unique; one is seldom aware that the characters have slipped into a dream, fantasy, or memory until one is well into the scene, and as the film progresses the lines between external life and internal thought become increasingly blurred, with Fellini giving as much (if not more) importance to fantasy as to fact.

    The performances and the cinematography are key to the film's success. Even when the film becomes surrealistic, fantastic, the actors perform very realistically and the cinematography presents the scene in keeping with what we understand to be the reality of the characters lives and relationships. At the same time, however, the film has a remarkably poetic quality, a visual fluidity and beauty that transforms even the most ordinary events into something slightly tinged by a dream-like quality. Marcello Mastroianni offers a his greatest performance here, a delicate mixture of desperation and ennui, and he is exceptionally well supported by a cast that includes Claudia Cardinale, Anouk Aimee, and a host of other notables.

    I would encourage people not to be intimidated by the film's reputation, for its content can be quickly grasped. When critics state the film requires repeated viewing what they actually seem to mean is that the film holds up extremely well to repeated viewing; each time it is seen, one finds more and more to enjoy and to contemplate. Even so, I would be amiss if I did not point out that people who prefer a cinema of tidy plot lines and who dislike ambiguity or the necessity of interpreting content will probably dislike 8 ½ a great deal. For all others: strongly, strongly recommended.

    Gary F. Taylor, aka GFT, Amazon Reviewer
  • It's been said before: Marcello Mastroianni plays Guido Anselmi, a fictitious, 43-year-old film director with a personal crisis that stunts his creative flow and his inability to get on with his new film after the enormous success of his previous one. The character is iconically brought to life by the immortal Mastroianni with artificially greyed hair and is universally identified as an alter ego of Fellini himself.

    The first time I saw 8½ I was in my teens and hated it. I then rewatched it only a few years later, in my early 20s, and something miraculous happened. It was probably a pivotal moment in my film-viewing experience: it suddenly gave me new parametres by which to judge movies and even art in general. I suddenly learnt this new language, so much more beautiful and sophisticated than anything I had heard before. What was most amazing was that after the first negative experience, I had somehow tapped into this language's secret, and it wasn't in the least bit hermetic or difficult, though more complex and sophisticated than other languages I already knew. Many of the movies I'd considered greats became amateurish or dwarfish in comparison.

    To me, this was no longer simply a movie, but Art in a more universal sense of the word, Art that just IS and has nothing to strive for or prove. Which is why I find it so nonsensical and contradictory to call something like 8½ "pretentious" - to me, pretentious is when an insecure auteur is trying consciously and hard to be profound, difficult, original, ground-breaking, and you can see their intent clearly, and detect the effort behind the artifice. Nothing of any of this is anywhere to be perceived in 8½, which makes creating masterpieces look easy.

    I admit that 8½ is not an easy movie, nor one for everyone. Visually, fewer movies are as iconic, memorable, original, poetic, funny, inventive, allegorical, exhilarating.

    The scenes I love are too many to mention, but here are just a few: The steam bath scene when in an odd procession/ritual, the patients are being led into what must be a Turkish bath. All the steam surrounding them, the men wearing sheets that look like shrouds or togas, all looking like mock-ancient Roman dignitaries... Then, through a loud-speaker Mastroianni-Anselmi is told the dried-up, turkey-like Cardinal, will now condescend to meeting him. Before Guido rushes off to meet the Cardinal, all his friends and colleagues beg him to put in a good word for them. This is such a gleeful stab at Italy's grovelling, nepotistic culture of ingratiating oneself to the powers-that-be by paying them lip-service even for the most petty personal advantages. Then Guido stands before the embodiment of Catholic paternalism and his obsequious minions. And everything is at its most pompous and lifeless - this dusty, mummified institution is less in touch with the humanity it's supposed to comfort and advise than it is possible to believe.

    I also love the character of Guido's mistress, Carla, played by Sandra Milo at her gaudiest and most voluptuous. Though initially it's difficult to understand what Guido would have seen in her, eventually it become more apparent. Meeting his wife Luisa, you see how well the two women's ways of being complement one another. See for example how she reacts in a simple, good-humoured, self-deprecating way when in the café scene, Guido's elegant, neurotic wife played by Anouk Aimée at her most androgynously attractive - mockingly compliments Carla's tacky outfit for its "elegance". In such instances one gets a sense that though Fellini is parodying his subjects, he also has a fundamental love and human compassion for them.

    The prostitute La Saraghina is probably one of the most memorable female characters put to film ever. She is probably somewhere in her 50s and rougher than sandpaper, overweight yet strangely fit and voluptuous, with lots of scary, wild dark hair, overdone raccoon eye make-up caked onto her aggressive, striking, sardonic face as she sits and dances on the lonely beach in Rimini next to her war bunker-home. Guido is fascinated by what is "young and yet ancient", eternal, meaning what is muse-like, archetypically, like the divinely beautiful Claudia character, perfectly embodied by Claudia Cardinale (the ultimate director's muse rather than a real woman or mistress). La Saraghina may not be a young woman like Claudia, she may not represent spontaneity and fresh, uncluttered artistic inspiration like she does, but she is also a muse of sorts - the muse of guilt-free pleasure and non-self-conscious, free, unidealised, earthy femininity. All this is La Saraghina - the town's young boys respond to this in her (including Guido as a child) and are bewitched by her and pay to her to see her demonic yet liberating, visceral dance.

    I have so much more to say about this movie, for instance about Nino Rota's memorable score, or how the movie's non-linear structure and juxtaposition of seemingly unrelated scenes emulates the rhythm and mood of dreams to perfection. Also, the scenes featuring Guido's parents and their embodiment of the emotional blackmail, that eternal sense of guilt and the stunting of individuality that the paternalistic institution of family at its most traditional represents in Italy. Or of Guido's touching childhood memories, of the wonderful way in which the movie ends, in a merry-go-round of what really matters in life, when all else has been swiped aside and all that remains is the desire to cherish (with all their imperfections) all those who have really mattered most in our lives...
  • Fellini's 8 1/2 opens with a stunning dream sequence in which a man is trapped in his car in the middle of a traffic jam. The doors and windows are locked and there is no escape. Other drivers simply sit and stare at him passively. The driver starts to panic as smoke begins to build up within the car. Propelling himself outside a window, he floats over the other cars and soars above the world until he is pulled down a rope attached to a tether on his ankle. The driver is Guido Anselmi (Marcello Mastroianni), a film director at odds with himself. Shot in black and white, 8 1/2 is an exhilarating, confusing, irritating, and inspired journey into a man's consciousness. It is not just a look at the inner turmoil of one person, but also a commentary on each person's struggle to make sense of their life. The film's combination of kaleidoscopic images, evocative score by Nino Rota, and amazing performances ensure its place as one of the greatest films of the century.

    Guido is preparing to shoot a new film with an expensive budget. He constructs a huge spaceship launch pad that costs $80 million but he is unsure of what he wants to say. Guido's dishonesty in dealing with his marriage, his career, and the fact that he really does not want to make the film forces him to falsely mislead people as to his true intentions. He feels like a failure and is physically spent. He checks into a spa to restore his health and well being but the contingent of producers, actors, writers, and hangers on undermine his strength. His feeling of being overwhelmed by personal and professional obligations provides the catalyst for dreams and fantasies that take him back to his childhood.

    Fellini shows his encounter with the prostitute Saraghina (Eddra Gale) and the guilt he has to deal with in a confrontation with the Catholic Church. Guido invites his intellectual wife Luisa (Anouk Aimée) to the set but their relationship has turned cold and passionless, and sparks fly when she has to confront Carla (Sandra Milo), his buxom mistress. Guido is misguided but he has an innocence and charm that allows us to overlook his indulgences. He enjoys his pleasures but has a conscience and feels guilty about cheating on Luisa whom he loves and is afraid of losing. He fantasizes that all of the women in his life are together in a harem where they all dote on his every whim. When they finally recognize how little he cares about them, he is forced to suppress their revolt.

    As image piles on image and the fantasy becomes indistinguishable from the reality, the viewer may get lost in a maze of dazzling incoherence. Fellini, however, always returns to solid ground and the film offers not only a satire on the frenzy, the uncertainty, and the clash of egos involved with making a film but also a serious commentary on the importance of honesty in a relationship. If 8 1/2 is occasionally exhausting, the ending is invigorating, letting us know that life is a game in which each of us is on the stage performing our roles and the only sane response to its turmoil is to join hands in love and celebrate the moment.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    (excuse me for my bad English)

    Thoughts on Fellini's carrier can be divided on people who think his peak was early neorealist phase (Vitelloni, La Strada, Nights of Cabiria) (do you remember the guy in the line from Woody Allen's Annie Hall?) and on the ones that praised his fantasy phase starting with La Dolce Vita and followed by 8 1/2, Roma etc.

    They are both wrong. Both periods and its films are very important, cinematically rich and skillful in directing. The fact that there are many followers of both periods and equal artistic success shows that the only real difference is among their aesthetics. And isn't that what makes a great director?

    This film is considered one of the best movies of all time among critics and directors. Many people have complaints of how this movie is difficult to understand. It is. When I first saw it, it was a rather very frustrating experience. But once you capture it fully its amazing. In fact, I fully captured it after the third viewing (and after that, every time I see it I can find something new or different). That's because this movie works differently. It works out of standard movie patterns and conventions we use to see in everyday cinema. Above, and most important of all, it speaks with the different movie language. And that is a real cinematic language, because 8 1/2 uses specific movie instruments to transmit it's content. It cannot be transferred in any other form, including literal. That's why it is so hard to put the plot into the words and that's the major merit of this film.

    After the tremendous commercial and artistic success in 1960. with his previous film La Dolce Vita, Fellini decided to make a film (8 1/2) about the movie director (played by Marcello Mastroianni as Guido) fresh from recent success who is not sure what to film next! And this egocentric director, under the pressure of his producer, actors, friends, fans and journalists, is escaping into the memories of his childhood, wishful fantasies and dreams.

    At the beginning of the film, there's a stunning famous dream sequence. Guido is trapped in a traffic jam. He loses his breath while unsuccessfully trying to escape from his car. People around (in their vehicles) are starring at him. The whole scene is mute (except the constant monotonous sound) and, from time to time, it freezes. Suddenly, he is free, and flying towards sky. Then, one of his assistants pulls him down to earth. And, he is awake. I think it's unnecessary to explain the meaning of this brilliant scene.

    There is also a scene where he is persuaded to ask a catholic priest for an advice about the content of his next film (since his films are widely released there is a moral issue). But he apparently has an aversion towards Church. And then, during a conversation with this priest, Guido suddenly associates his early childhood event (watching a dance of a prostitute Saraghina, and the subsequent punishment by one priest). So, the current event forces its cause to come out of his subconsciousness.

    Then, there is a scene – quarrel between Guido and his wife (played by Anuk Aimee) while sitting outdoors. She is complaining about his mistress(es) and he is denying everything. Then, his mistress (Sandra Milo) suddenly arrives and, after she saw Guido with his wife, sits to one table not so close. Guido's wife noticed that and realized that woman is his mistress. So, she is continuing her quarrel with him. And then comes one of the most visceral and fascinating scenes in the Movie History. Suddenly, wishful fantasy starts… Guido's wife stands up, coming towards mistress. They are kissing each other like longtime friends and making a nice conversation. Then, Guido enters his house from the childhood (which is shown before) with some presents in his hands. And, there are like 20 women around him fighting for his attention. He is whipping them (dominate them). And there is his wife – peaceful, calm, conservative, loving… So, under the pressure of all-around-him messes he is fantasying. This is psychologically known as the regression to the pleasure principle and is very common. This scene is known as "The Harem Scene" and like others is followed by brilliant, very suitable music score.

    From time to time, Guido is fantasying a beautiful young woman (Claudia Cardinale). She is another projection of his narcissism – an ideal woman to please all of his wishes not making a single complaint.

    Rosella represents (symbolizes) his super-ego. Pay attention to their phone conversation. Also in Harem scene (harem is actually his Id, fulfilling all his infantile fantasies) she is ABOVE him making complaints.

    His producer is "paternal figure". All his father's wishes, demands to Guido are now "reactivated" with producer. Pay attention to very interesting first "fantasy" scene in the movie (on the grave). Father asks a man something like:" How is my boy doing"? and the man makes face like: "Well...". Later we discover that the man is his producer.

    Guido's wife and his mother, the same thing. And we discover this in the same scene when his mother turns into his wife.

    Critical writer may represent his raw intellect but also artistic vanity while Conocchia is his neglected emotional aspect.

    At the end of the movie, he eventually becomes aware of the causes of his confusion and self-deceptions (this sudden awareness is symbolized by "shooting himself", shooting his confusion that is) and having a final monologue: "...Accept me as I am. Only then can we discover each other..."
  • Federico Fellini gets Marcello Mastroianni to play him. Yes. Right? Of course. The artistic block is something that Fellini dealt with all his life - Orson Welles once said that Fellini was a great artist with very little to say - that's part of Mastroianni/Fellini's block - He knows where he wants to go but he doesn't know if he has what it takes to get there - then of course the the distractions or excuses whatever you prefer, they are muses, mothers, loves, wives. I was overwhelmed by the access Fellini provides to his own heart and mind and by the audacity and poetry of the film. 8 1/2 stands alone in the virtual mausoleum of world cinema.
  • First time I saw 8 1/2 over twenty years ago; I did not like it then and I did not care much for a confused director who did not know how to make his next movie or how to deal with all women in his life. This time it was different. I knew it from the opening scene, from the first sounds of Nino Rota's music. I wanted to know how Guido would balance the demands of his producers and the insecurities of his love life. I sometimes barely could tell the difference between the reality and Guido's surfing the waves of his memory or building the Utopias in his mind where things were exactly the way he wanted them to be – and I really did not want to tell the difference. I just was there, following Guido on his journey where Fellini sent us. Then, that scene came, "La Saraghina's" lurid dance on the beach. There was something in that scene that made me return to it over and over again. What was it? The dancing woman was not young, pretty or graceful. On the contrary, she was fat and ugly but there was something about her – that smile, resilience, the promise of joy that attracted eager schoolboys. It was a last time the young Guido felt happy without guilt and shame that inevitably came after the encounter and stayed with him forever; he learned that joy and punishment are inseparable…

    There have been fewer than a handful of films that affected me as profoundly as 8 ½ did:

    Tarkovsky's "Zerkalo" – when the master holds the mirror in front of you that reflects his soul and mind, open you eyes and heart, don't say a word, just watch closely.

    Tarkovsky's "Andrey Rublev" – What is talent? Is it a God's gift or Devil's curse? Is an Artist free in choosing what to do with that gift?

    Bergman's "Persona" – How far can one individual go in opening his soul to the other without losing identity and sanity?

    Fellini's –"Nights of Cabiria" – "Dum Spiro – Spero" - While there's life there's hope.

    In 8 ½, Fellini explored all these subjects and in the final he took the idea of life and hope ever further: after all the characters in his film disappear from the screen, all what left behind is "a little orchestra of Hope with Love as its conductor". The last that we hear is the magic music of Rota, bringing affirmation, hope and love.

    Simply wonderful. Perhaps, one of five greatest films ever made.
  • Intellectuals have written volumes on this strange film by Italian New Wave director, Federico Fellini. I am not an intellectual, so my review will be brief. At its most basic, "8 1/2" (a.k.a. "Otto e mezzo") concerns Guido, a film director (supposedly a surrogate for Fellini himself), who is having what amounts to a midlife crisis. Guido is frustrated in his film-making, and by his relations with other people in his life. But the film's story does not proceed in a traditional, linear fashion. Fellini more or less abandons logical narration, in favor of "open form" narration, wherein the story's causal chain of events is broken.

    Thus, trying to figure out what is going on in this film can be hard. Guido's fantasies, memories, dreams, and reality co-mingle in a kind of cinematic stew. Fellini presents viewers with a kaleidoscope of surreal B&W images of ordinary objects and eccentric, chattering characters which interact with Guido and with each other, in ways that defy logic, and give breathtaking meaning to the term symbolism. Followers of psychologist Carl Jung would have a field day. In style, the film is flamboyant. In substance, the film is maddeningly subliminal. And yet, even the most metallic cynic, Pauline Kael notwithstanding, must surely appreciate the rareness of Fellini's probing introspection.

    Given the bizarre, unstructured content of "8 1/2", I wonder about the issue of necessity. Suppose Fellini had added an extra ten minutes to the screenplay, or deleted ten minutes. Would that have made any difference? Apart from Guido, if this or that character had been deleted, how would that have changed the story's significance? And if, as some have suggested, the film is a mirror image of Fellini's own confused psyche, can the story be construed as an intuition of his future film-making?

    "Otto e mezzo" is not for everyone. Like a Zen koan, "8 1/2" invites frustration. It is above all else a celebration of ambiguity and abstraction, a cinematic experience to ponder, especially on the heels of four or five martinis ... or 8 1/2, if you really want to induce immense intellectual insight. Cheers.
  • onepotato211 March 2008
    Warning: Spoilers
    I've never been in love with this from when I first saw it twenty years ago. It's not observant about life like Amarcord, which works with the same motifs (a hotel, a harem, a cinema, a beach, a whore). It's abstract and amorphous, and functions as an accumulation of moments that speak mostly about being a callous, privileged film-maker & sex-hound who instantly converts life into his next movie. It's not to be viewed casually or consumed meaninglessly like movies today. It's conspicuously non-linear "art." But one doesn't generally look at a piece of art for two hours straight.

    There isn't a frame of this that isn't beautiful. Whether it's a near-Islamic view of Guido's childhood home, a fantasy traffic jam, or finding sublime beauty in something as trivial and provisional as scaffolding. After watching it again, there are definitely aspects I find to be unqualified successes (cinematography, production method) but I admire it, more than I actually enjoy it, or get into it. Liking it seems to be beside the point. You're supposed to declare Fellini a genius and be done with it. But it sits very outside myself. I doubt I'll ever watch it in one sitting again, since it's merits seem entirely about gorgeous and fleeting moments. I can imagine a use for it as Rorshach content for your screen that can be popped into a DVD player for viewing bits of pure detached sensation now and then. But because nearly every scene functions as a short essay about maximalization and lost momentum, I find it exhausting.
  • 8 1/2 remains one of the most original and spellbinding films I know of. One of the beauties of cinema is to merge the artist's memory and fantasy; Fellini certainly utilized this magic to present his story and characters that embody both humanity and mystery. This film is an autobiographical piece (of Fellini himself) about a movie director named Guido, how his life is consumed by his increasing obsession with work. He avoids questions and problems as if they will go away somehow, only to experience more questions and problems. Ultimately, Guido realizes the only way to solve his problems is to face them rather than escaping, accepting himself instead of wishing he was someone else.

    The opening sequence--one of the most deftly crafted--is taken from Guido's movie (or his dream - can't remember for sure). The sequence brilliantly captures Guido's problems (which are dealt with in the rest of the picture) and exposes them metaphorically: him STUCK in traffic, TRAPPED in smoke, SUFFOCATING, wanting to escape, and pulled back down by his peers. Guido wants to make a movie about his (and Fellini's) MEMORIES: how once upon a time he learned about a chant that moves pictures, and the time he danced with the fat feminine prostitute figure. The other main component of his movie involves launching into space, a FANTASY that reflects Guido's (and Fellini's) desire to escape from worldly matters. In real life, Guido is having problems with everything from his wife to his movie. So he thinks a beautiful actress, whom he fantasizes but knows little to nothing about, will be the solution to all his problems. When Guido meets the actress, he realizes she can't solve his problems, only he himself has the choice. This realization leads to the film's closure, with Guido having learned what's important to him and the inevitability of taking responsibility.

    One of the film's powerful features is ambiguously blending Guido's world with his imaginations. Thus the audience is constantly deciphering the context of what's on the screen. This invitation to participate in the film is welcome, and if we think about it, a person like Guido who lives in his office might not be able to tell at times whether an event happened in his life or inside his mind.
  • I feel much the same about Fellini's "8 1/2" as I do about his "La Dolce Vita." It's a film that people tell you you should like, and it seems impressive and profound when you're a young lad studying film and don't yet have the courage to go against critical and popular opinion. But once you've gained some cinematic sophistication of your own, you realize what an empty-headed exercise it is.

    Federico Fellini is one of the most self-indulgent filmmakers who ever got behind a movie camera, and I simply don't have the interest or patience for the films of his later career. "8 1/2", again like "La Dolce Vita," is dazzling to sit through once, because it looks gorgeous and there's the promise that on a second viewing, once you're no longer distracted by the flamboyant and beautiful visuals, you'll be able to sink your teeth into the rich substance of the film. But then you realize that there isn't any substance, and the film's beauty is only, and sadly, skin deep. And then you're just cheesed that you wasted so much time on it in the first place....

    Grade: C+
  • "I have nothing to say," the hero says at least 4 times in the course of this film. Nothing is more true of Fellini's masterpiece. But beginning with this notion, the director takes us on a 2.5 hour epic to justify why he must say it nonetheless. That itself is rather clever and original, but--aside from the autobiographical elements which some may find tedious--it comes across as simply a glorified self-validation.

    In this respect I equate Fellini to Salvador Dali (who is ironically my favourite painter). Neither artist had anything definitive to say, yet they did it in the most artistic way possible. Stylistically it's well crafted; images are stirring, masterful and expressive. But there is no backbone, no profound underlying message to tell the viewer except "I have nothing to say." Toward the second half of the film, this is voiced in a poignant monologue by one of the characters in the film (the film critic), and the hero's response is one of inarticulate exasperation. And so we see that, if anything, the point of this movie is to express Fellini's own purposelessness and ennui. This was the original "slacker film".

    This was my first Fellini film, and I'm afraid it was a disappointment. My second Fellini film was ROMA which was an utter disaster (even Fellini fans should avoid that one like the plague). I've been told that the ideal way to indoctrinate oneself to Fellini is to start with LA STRADA, then NIGHTS OF CABIRIA, then JULIET, followed by LA DOLCE VITA... and only if/after you've developed the taste for such things should you try 8 1/2.

    My advice to you newbies, should you decide to see this film anyway, is don't think too hard. Treat it as if you're watching an autobiography, complete with director's commentary reminding you why you're watching. This film is Seinfeld without the jokes... a show about nothing.
  • After 8 or 9 unsuccessful attempts in the past, at long last I somehow managed to sit through & stay awake for the entirety of this unfathomable bore but at what personal cost. A towering feat of cinematic boredom that arguably has no equals, this avant-garde surrealist comedy-drama turned out to be exactly what I presumed it would be: too far up its own ass.

    Co-written & directed by Federico Fellini, the story of 8½ concerns a famous filmmaker who no longer remembers the film he wanted to make. The idea came from Fellini's own creative block during production and through all the pain that he underwent, he decided to make a story that captures the similar frustrations so that the audience can suffer just as much as he did.

    On a serious note though, the film does acquaint the viewers to an extent with the struggles of creating art and the personal sacrifices that the process demands. It's an exhibition of what a director's job actually looks like and how regardless of his professional & personal issues, he's expected to deliver. It is aimless & convoluted like the film within the film coz it is the film within the film.

    Overall, 8½ is a tedious, overlong & self-indulgent exercise that left me indifferent to everything it had in store and while I see the brilliance of its metafictional construction, the drama remains an insufferable eyesore filled with characters as bland & uninteresting as they can get. And the dream sequences are even worse. In short, this film is nothing more than a mere tick mark on a checklist for me.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Our tale begins on a congested road. Our Protagonist's car fills with gas. He desperately tries to escape. The camera gives us a claustrophobic sense and within the first few minutes I am on the edge of my seat. Needless to say our protagonist survives but the outcome of this scene reveals so much. Fellini's 8 1/2 is a brilliantly executed tale of a mans life crashing down around him. It is a semi autobiographical tale, Guido is a director who is in a bit of a creative slump. He is giving both the press and executives the run around in order to buy time--hoping to find inspiration. His marriage is shaky and his relationship with his mistress is complicated. Guido tries to escape by going to a spa but his escape is not so easy... This film portrays inner conflict through dream sequences and fantasies as opposed to Expressionism. It is these sequences that enlighten the viewer and add dimension to the tale. To me 8 1/2 is the greatest film in ever, eclipsing Citizen Kane (of course AFI's top 100 list is limited to American movies...) and proving to be enjoyable and insightful.
  • TheLittleSongbird27 January 2011
    I saw La Dolce Vita recently, and thought it was amazing. Then I saw 8 1/2 and was equally mesmerised. I cannot choose between which was the best of the two, both were equally outstanding and I would deem both as masterpieces as well. That said, I can see why people mayn't like this or La Dolce Vita, but I am not one of those.

    I loved the story of 8 1/2. It is a complex yet painfully honest and riveting story, that resonated with me admittedly. I also loved the mix of nightmares, memories, daydreams and frustrating confrontations, they alone made the film so watchable. Once again, Fellini's direction is immaculate. Like with La Dolce Vita, he may have had some troubles as he tried to expand on his reputation as a cinematic genius(a reputation that I think is deserved), but that didn't show to me, instead it showed a director who put so much heart, effort and soul into the film.

    The visuals are spot on. The production values and the like are beautifully realised and the cinematography is amazing. With Nina Rota, you get a wonderful score, as evident in La Dolce Vita and The Godfather. 8 1/2 is no exception. The music is beautiful, haunting and memorable and stuck in my head for a long while afterwards, actually it's still there. The acting I have no qualms with- Marcello Mastroianni is exceptional as the tormented film-maker while Anouk Aimee and Claudia Cardinale are equally superb.

    Overall, this is a masterpiece, I love everything about it. 10/10 Bethany Cox
  • Warning: Spoilers
    There are films that the viewer can assimilate and enjoy in one viewing. There are others that demand a second view, just to catch the missing clues or to re-live the story for the first time. Still, there are others, much better, who despite the plot revelations, despite knowing what will happen, produce the feeling of giddy anticipation taken to soaring heights.

    And then there are films by Directors -- monsters of film-making who even at their worst create compelling works of art that are the stuff of film theory. To see Federico Fellini's film 8 1/2 is to see such a creation. It is the gates of a Dalinian fun house where the past and the present and even the future converge into one intricate, tangled mess of a story -- but one that is beyond analysis, beyond interpretation, and exists in its own universe.

    8 1/2 is the story of a film director, Guido Anselmi (Marcello Mastroianni doubling for Fellini), who is unable to continue with the production of a science-fiction movie due to his lack of interest in it. A tightening noose of people who demand of him is beginning to take shape and suffocate him. There is his mistress Carla (Sandra Milo) who throws her earthy neediness on him. A barrage of producers, film critics, and his insecure French actress (Madeleine LeBeau) increase the pressure. His wife Luisa (a severe Anouk Aimee) is estranged from him. Gloria Morin (Barbara Steele) is Gothic-chic incarnate and only succeeds to annoy to hell out of her surroundings. The appearance of two nebulous women: the muse Claudia (Claudia Cardinale, luminous and ethereal) and the mysterious actress (Caterina Boratto) spark some mystery, but neither manage to do more than that -- throw a net of feminine mystique.

    Guido tries to throw himself into his own memories and see if he can come up with something: his sexual awakening as a boy to the songs and the overpowering carnality of La Saraghina (opera singer Eddra Gale), a Rabelasian woman who lived by the sea, the sanction of the priests, and a fantasy in which he lives in a household of all of the women in his life who are at his feet ready to serve him with abandon. Despite all this it becomes clear that the film in itself will not be made -- more so when his muse appears in the flesh and tells him he "does not know how to love." Her statement becomes evident when he is given the chance to reconcile with Luisa but remains the Director -- a control freak -- even when he himself has lost all control.

    8 1/2 is one of those films that can be seen in multiple ways. An extended conscious dream fusing itself with reality, Fellini plunges everything he can into a sensory overload where one event which happens in reality becomes framed with another which is a part of a memory or a fantasy. Many characters from his own reality are mirrored in other minor ones. Carla and la Saraghina both reflect themselves in the flesh-and-blood Claudia who tells Guido he does not know how to love, Luisa sees herself in an actress on-stage and recoils but she also shares a lot with Rossella (Rossella Falk), Guido's conscience, Claudia the muse and the Mysterious Lady are two and one, and on and on. They themselves are harbingers of a vicious relationship cycle where Guido finds himself at Stage One and unable to act or give in. This is a film that is not easy to review because it would require an in-depth analysis which would take pages upon pages to write, but in short, it's the slow evolution of a film creating itself when its own director/creator is on autopilot and a whirlwind of activity follows him like a swarm of bees. A masterpiece of film-making, a study of obsessions and unexpurgated demons, a collage of memories past and present, and a wicked roller-coaster ride: this is what 8 1/2 stands for and is, alongside CITIZEN KANE, a flawless black and white film and the womb for all other "Proustian" films which have come out, most notable being Woody Allen's STARDUST MEMORIES. From its standout opening sequence in which suffocating traffic is the catalyst for Guido's escape into the skies (only to be pulled back down by himself), to the glorious moment when Jacqueline the showgirl and Saraghina initiate a revolt against his misogynistic behavior to the moving final sequence where Guido as a boy orchestrates the descent of every person in his adult life and reveals them dancing, together, in harmony, in a conga-line, 8 1/2 is an unforgettable experience of iconoclastic cinema.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    I've come to understand why this film is called a director's movie, that is, a movie that should be considered must seeing for all directors. Fellini blends dreams with reality, abstraction with rigidity, and parody with truthfulness. The film is largely self referential for the proclaimed director, a movie about making a movie with a director being a director for that movie. I found it interesting that Fellini's own mental block following the success of "La Dolce Vita" was resolved when he decided to change the principal character here from a writer to a director. Fellini was not a writer, he didn't live in that world even though he knew many. But he could relate to a director's frustration and the change allowed him to throw off the shackles to creativity.

    I have to say, I wasn't getting it at first but the movie managed to grow on me in the telling. Unable to come to terms with the story he was trying to tell, Guido Anselmi (Marcello Mastroianni) kept putting off everyone associated with his project - the producer, the actresses, the crew, everyone. The stress intrudes into his personal life as well, unable to reconcile feelings for his wife and the women in his past. It all begins to make sense when Guido decides to accept 'what is' during this particular time of his life. He's then able to successfully approach his project unfettered by imaginary constraints.

    But granted, it's not an easy movie to follow and will not appeal to everyone. There are flashbacks and dreamlike sequences that don't appear to connect to anything. Mostly, the movie is a testament to Man's inner confusion and coming to terms with one's life. At the end of the picture Guido appears to have made his peace with himself, and one is left to wonder whether this condition is permanent or temporary.
  • bmmello7 March 2003
    Federico Fellini's 8 1/2 is revolutionary.

    Marcello Mastroianni brilliantly plays the troubled film director Guido which gets mixed up in his own dreams and memories as he tries to find ideas for his next film, while getting constantly annoyed with his producers, crew, friends and his wife. This is told with stunning visuals and great narrative.

    8 1/2 can be seen as Fellini's own autobiographical story and is definitely one of the best films I have ever seen.

    My rating: 10/10
  • Deeply personal and engaging, Fellini's story has an authenticity

    to it that is very unique. As we marvel at the method actors and old

    American films of the 50's & 60's, it is in the foreign films during

    this era where the most impressive and innovative work was

    being created (8 1/2 tops that list). I find films with stage-like acting, blatant morality, and little bits of

    exciting action (like the American cinema of the 50's and 60's) to

    be uncompelling. Personal stories are compelling. Personal

    stories that are well done and make the viewer feel what the

    filmmaker feels are even better. And 8 1/2 has two personal stories. One story is the dilemma the

    lead faces: should he make another flashy, "hollywood" type

    movie, or should he stay true to himself. The other personal story

    is from the director himself. He's claustrophobic, caught in a

    horrid web of making films that aren't true to what he FEELS is

    right. He must conform to producers' wishes; he must appease

    important people in the industry; he must make things flashy; he

    must give away what he KNOWS is truth to survive in this industry.

    It is in Fellini's 8 1/2 where he and the main character of the film

    say, "Stop!" This personal story resonated with me. It subtly (and I can not

    stress any more the subtle quality of this film) spoke to me,

    instructing me to not follow what THEY expect. Do what you feel

    you must do. Do what you feel that will fulfill your soul--not your

    pocketbook, your sexual desires, or other pleasures. You can read my writing and that's fine, but you must see the film

    because I am not doing Fellini's film any justice. It is in viewing

    the film (and the long period after seeing it) that you will feel the

    power of this film. As I am writing this review about 5 months after

    seeing it, it has taken some time to settle in my head. Finally after

    5 months, the revelations of the film have settled, and I can now

    finally fully appreciate what Fellini has done.
  • I watched this film in Italian, with English subtitles.

    I went into 8 1/2 expecting an exciting story about memories and dreams, something in a similar vein to Inception, minus the action. What I got was a confusing story of a man struggling in his career and life, running alongside a seemingly anthological and unrelated set of his memories and dreams.

    While I do believe there is some weight on the viewer to be smart and attentive enough to understand the director's vision, the rapid and unexplained switches between reality and fiction within 8 1/2 left me lost. It often took me a few minutes to realise a scene was in fact a memory or thought of Fellini's. The reality was strangely dreamlike, leading to everything becoming convoluted. While this was most likely intentional, to represent the protagonist's confusion and blurring of real life and dream, it made the film so much harder to comprehend.

    Now, you may be thinking that I should simply watch the film again, until I can finally understand it, however the film has a critical flaw here - it was rather unenjoyable. If it had been entertaining enough to warrant enough rewatches, it would potentially be far better received by me. My main two problems were with the characters and the story. Every character outside of Guido blended into one, with the exact same personality of a disdain for Guido. The story was slow moving, confusing, and relied on characters to push it forward; characters which I did not care for. So from an entertainment standpoint, this film was a boring, two hour drag. The horrendous syncing of dialogue didn't help at all.

    But from a technical standpoint? This film is fantastic. Where I was lost by the film, I was often momentarily mesmerized by the cinematography, the lighting, the colour. Shots such as Guido's leg tied to a rope, or a young Guido being cornered by his mother for a bath. The use of the camera was decades ahead of its time. Sets were heavily saturated with light to create an almost ethereal, heavenly atmosphere. Clean shadows were intelligently and intentionally cast, generating some enchanting images. Fellini had clearly mastered the camera and the light, just not the pen.

    Rating: 6.8/10

    --Admin-- Violence - One hanging, no blood.

    Sex/Nudity - Only implied once.

    Language - If there were any they were in Italian.

    Miscellaneous Themes - None.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    The film starts off with a nightmare and ends with a hazy dream sequence. In between reality usually takes a back seat to the director/hero's memories, dreams and frustrations. That Fellini is basically making a movie about making a movie, that Marcelo is the embodiment of the director, that the movie is basically a cathartic process for Fellini himself, a necessary stop after the phenomenal success of La Dolce Vita, is well documented. I would disagree with those who say that it is a difficult movie and that deep psychological analyses are needed for someone to grasp the meaning of the movie.

    The movie is a visual pleasure today and its story is actually quite neatly organized around specific sequences: the dreams, the harem, the catholic school, the mistress etc. Fellini is quite aware that, deep meanings and intellectual status aside, a movie is essentially the dissemination of the director's vision to the viewers. Marcelo understands that the arduous process of making the film needs to finish once he fantasizes crowds of journalists hunting him down, asking for 'smart' and 'intellectual' comments on the most basic questions of human life. Fellini is making a film about himself - but one that can be acknowledged and enjoyed by all his viewers.

    The different sequences are like small paintings or postcards representing the director's memories and dreams laid down side by side. The viewer need nothing but look at them and enjoy them for what they offer at hand: the poetry of the fat prostitute sitting on a chair by the sea, Anouk Aimee being transformed in the same movie from a neurotic wannabe-emancipated woman to a patient 'manager' of the harem, the carnival sequence of the last 5 minutes - possibly the most beautiful 5 minutes in cinema history. The movie even offers a happy-ending - in the end, it's THAT accessible! In the end the catharsis Marcelo finds by not making the film symbolizes the catharsis Fellini himself finds by making 8 1/2: He knows he managed to produce a personal, self-analytical piece of work that at the same time is engaging, humorous at times, visually pleasing, touching on various important subjects through lively dialogues and pretty settings. If anything, 8 1/2 is a celebration of the liberation potential of cinema, both for its creators and its viewers. The end credits find Fellini celebrating with his viewers the pleasures of this art.
  • I saw this once when I was about 19 and processed about nothing from it. I remember liking the opening sequence and thinking the rest was an empty bore. Well, it's no longer a bore to me, at 36, and it's far from empty, but it's still not the masterpiece to me that it seems to be to most film fans.

    The coolest thing about 8 1/2 is the way that it's clearly a film about the film itself... a film about a filmmaker who is making a film, whose analysis of the film he's working on is actually an analysis of the film you are watching - as you're watching it. Conceptually, it's brilliant - and it does do a very good job of making these layered themes work. However, it's simply not that exciting to watch overall - at nearly 2 1/2 hours, it is a bit of a challenge to enjoy all the way through. The movie somehow manages to simultaneously have so much going on, and still feel like so little is going on, for a great quantity of the run time. There are definitely some really phenomenal sequences - plenty of surrealism, often in visuals and sometimes in performance and dialogue. It's never DULL, but it's also not much fun.

    To be honest, considering one of the over-arching themes is "infatuation with women", it's kind of ironic that the movie does not feature more memorable female characters. There's only one who's iconic but that's because her character represents "the devil" and she's only in a couple of quick scenes. Then, there's the stunning Claudia Cardinale who gets top billing but is actually only in about 1.5 scenes - and her primary scene is a very important one, one of the most important thematically, but, we don't really get much of HER from it. The rest just kind of redundantly trail off in nags throughout the movie - intentionally, but, it doesn't leave you with much. And Marcello Mastroianni's lead character Guido is a bit of a bore but he needs to be because that's kind of the point of the character. Again, it occurs with great purpose but it's simply not very entertaining to watch.

    It's a complex film with a lot to offer, but not enough of what I enjoy about movies. It's a great accomplishment in a lot of ways, but I'll probably never watch it again.
  • The best 'Emperors New Clothes' of a film you will ever be brainwashed by. So far up itself it defies belief. If you want to be bored to tears for over two hours listening to hollow, tedious and meaningless conversations about people you have absolutely nothing in common with, then stay tuned - you're in for a treat!
An error has occured. Please try again.