Counter-Currents
3,306 words 
Federico Fellini’s La Dolce Vita (The Sweet Life, 1960) is one of the most hailed and fêted films of all time. It was both a commercial and a critical success. It had an immediate and enduring influence on film, fashion, and popular culture in general. It won the Palme d’Or at Cannes in 1960. It was nominated for four Oscars and won Best Costume Design. Nino Rota’s music is also iconic. To this day, La Dolce Vita is regularly included in lists of the greatest films of all time.
Subscribe here to keep reading
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
12 comments
Nice review and I agree it is tedious and pointless. Just one of those movies that you’re required to watch if you’re a cinephile. Just like Ben Hur, The Ten Commandments (a comedy) or Colonel Blimp.
Tedious yes, but not pointless.
I watched this once when I was young and recall enjoying it, although I didn’t think there was any point or plot to it. When they are flying the Jesus away, I suppose you are right that it represents the godlessness of modern life. Perhaps it’s a tale told all in visual symbols, like kubrik’s 2001? I need to rewatch with my heightened mature sensibilities. My favorite Fellini film is Satyricon, naturally. I wonder if Fellini is attempting to point to Petronius as his artistic influence. Satyricon of course is simply sort of a color poem of life in Ancient Rome.
I think the washed up fish is just a momento mori–death looms, heightening the sweetness of life. Not to be overthought.
Thanks for your review, Greg. I do not have Paywall access, but would check this article out when it becomes publicly available.
As far as I can tell, you are not sympathetic to the film. If so, I would agree. It has some merits, but Fellini’s works generally contain a lot of circus. A good film if you want a lot of woman quarrels and a headache afterwards.
By the way, I think it would be nice to read your thoughts on Malle and Godard. Maybe for some particular films, or even an aggregate for both directors. In my opinion, they do not merit separate reviews. And you have promised an article about “El Topo”, which is definitely promising.
Fellini had an extraordinary talent, but his tendency for self-indulgence became increasingly unfettered during the 1960s and 70s, until all the flaws of “La Dolce Vita” would take over entire movies. He still created films with fantastic and unforgettable scenes and images (my favourite being “Satyricon”). In the 80s, his work started to severely decline. “Ginger & Fred” is still a charming film.
The Steiner episode always seemed too contrived and “messagy” to me.
Steiner is probably the second most important character in the film. I am not entirely happy with how the three scenes connected to him are handled. What are your criticisms?
Steiner also killing his kids f. e. was a bit “too much” I think.
On the subject of Fellini, I recently tried to watch 8 1/2 and I just couldn’t do it. I consider myself a pretty dedicated cinephile but it was just too….arty or something. I rarely say that about a film (I typically don’t trust people who describe a movie that way), but that one was just too much. I kept wanting to turn it off and binge the entire Police Academy franchise.
In contrast to most of the comments and review, I admire La Dolce Vita. Granted, it is a long movie, but I never found it boring. It is a kind of fresco, a series of paintings almost like scenes from the mysteries of the passion, and while offering funny and thoughtful contrasts between participation in society and renunciation, it is also a comment on the Americanization of Europe, in effect Hollywood conquering the spiritual essence of Europe. Emilio Dorfles, the Italian critic, said in his book Kitsch that Italy was the most Americanized country in Europe. It was fun seeing the bit with Lex Barker, an actor in grade B films, treated as a celebrity, which is what mass culture does to anyone and everything. The result of our victory for “democracy.”
I’m also impressed by Marcello’s constant seeking and spurning of all his women, from Emma to Maddelena, Sylvia, and finally Paola, who tries to communicate with him between a body of water but he can’t hear her, caught up with a new woman and life following a new, pointless sensation. It’s a lot of fun and thoughtful views of what we want, think we want, and how we get swirled up in society. Steiner, the “thoughtful” intellectual, is almost enticing and seductive, but in the end is pointless and perhaps bogus, like Holden Caulfield’s mentor is in Catcher in the Rye. Is life “sweet” or pointless? whatever it is, Marcello and we are in the thick of it.
Gore Vidal said: “you must think of him (Fellini) as the last of the great painters. He is painting on celluloid. He’s doing the Sistine Chapel over and over again. You look at him, but you don’t listen to him.”
If you don’t like Fellini, then go and pig out on Police Academy. It’s your patriotic duty.
Fellini’s critique of shallow, decadent hedonism aside, this film always makes me want to live in this Dolce Vita world, where people, cars, clothes look so good and stylish. It’s a bygone Europe by now, which invokes heavy nostalgia (at least for me).
Absolutely. The aesthetics of the film are vastly superior to the grotesquery of the late sixties that is now creeping back into the present.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.