Federico Fellini's 8 1/2

[nikhilbhardwaj]

i'd read a lot of positive stuff about Fellin's 8 1/2.
and i finally decided to check it out.

to my utter amazement
i found it utter nonsense,
there was no plot and it didn't make much sense to me at all
just getting through the movie was a pain.

what i dont understand is that why do critics rate this movie so highly
is it just me or did any of you dislike this movie too.

let me know what you thought of this
a masterpiece
or a bunch of nonsense

[Bachstelze]

Imma let you finish and all, but 8 1/2 was one of the greatest movies of all time!

But that's fine, you can watch Twilight again if you want.

[nubimax]

I have found over the last 50/60 years that if the critics like the movie I usually don't.
M.

[nikhilbhardwaj]

I have found over the last 50/60 years that if the critics like the movie I usually don't.
M.

i'll have to agree with you on that.

i dont know if you guys watch south park but the episode
"The Tale Of Scrotie Mc.Boogerballs"
describes this perfectly.

very often people don't decide if something is good or bad
but just because some critic says its good they tend to agree with.

[nikhilbhardwaj]

Imma let you finish and all, but 8 1/2 was one of the greatest movies of all time!

But that's fine, you can watch Twilight again if you want.
i guess we have different tastes

i havent watched twilight
is it any good??

[sydbat]

First, you need to find out what the "critics" were smoking, then watch the film. You will likely decide it was "utter genius" "pure movie making" and other critic-related garbage just because it is subtitled.

ALL movies I have ever watched that some critic thought was "brilliant" because it was foreign were bad, unwatchable, nonsensical, idiotic, etc, etc, etc. And no, it has nothing to do with being from Canada.

I watch alot of foreign films and many are excellent. Critics are just posers who want to impress their poser friends. Those who listen to and reiterate what critics say are exactly the same.

IMHO.

[Dixon Bainbridge]

First, you need to find out what the "critics" were smoking, then watch the film. You will likely decide it was "utter genius" "pure movie making" and other critic-related garbage just because it is subtitled.

ALL movies I have ever watched that some critic thought was "brilliant" because it was foreign were bad, unwatchable, nonsensical, idiotic, etc, etc, etc. And no, it has nothing to do with being from Canada.

I watch alot of foreign films and many are excellent. Critics are just posers who want to impress their poser friends. Those who listen to and reiterate what critics say are exactly the same.

IMHO.

Perhaps these critics see or appreciate something in a film that you don't?

Perhaps when you are describing these films as unwatchable, bad, nonsensical and idiotic, you are defining the limits of your own appreciation of film as an artform?

[sydbat]

Perhaps these critics see or appreciate something in a film that you don't?

Perhaps when you are describing these films as unwatchable, bad, nonsensical and idiotic, you are defining the limits of your own appreciation of film as an artform?No.

I think that critics believe that if something makes no sense, has no storyline, is shot in black and white, and has subtitles, it has to, by default, be brilliant, etc, just because it is a foreign film. They also tend to dismiss movies made in/by Hollywood that follow the same formula as the foreign films, just because it is "cool" to do so, even if that Hollywood film is exactly the same as the foreign film because "North Americans just don't get it".

Sorry, but I call BS. That is being elitist.

I have seen far too many bad movies in my 4+ decades to know the difference. I have also seen many more good to excellent movies. And it does not matter where the movie is made/comes from either. Good film making is good film making.

Of course, it all comes down to personal taste and what you get out of a film (or anything else in your life for that matter), so my opinion is just as valid as someone who disagrees with me.

[johnb820]

Nope sorry, I have to call out the critics for a different reason. I think they purposely prop up several big blockbuster movies every year and are too quick to accept films that lack artistic quality.

As for Fellini's 8 1/2, it is definitely a masterpiece. Everything from the vision, the visuals, the cinematography, acting, and pacing is near perfection. Fellini's goal was to justify film as an art form and it succeeds brilliantly.

[sydbat]

Nope sorry, I have to call out the critics for a different reason. I think they purposely prop up several big blockbuster movies every year and are too quick to accept films that lack artistic quality.Agreed. Wholeheartedly. This is why I never take a "film critics" word for anything.


As for Fellini's 8 1/2, it is definitely a masterpiece. Everything from the vision, the visuals, the cinematography, acting, and pacing is near perfection. Fellini's goal was to justify film as an art form and it succeeds brilliantly.A couple of my friends agree with you on this. I do not. But, as I stated, everyone's opinion mileage will vary.

[Dixon Bainbridge]

No.

I think that critics believe that if something makes no sense, has no storyline, is shot in black and white, and has subtitles, it has to, by default, be brilliant, etc, just because it is a foreign film. They also tend to dismiss movies made in/by Hollywood that follow the same formula as the foreign films, just because it is "cool" to do so, even if that Hollywood film is exactly the same as the foreign film because "North Americans just don't get it".

Sorry, but I call BS. That is being elitist.

I have seen far too many bad movies in my 4+ decades to know the difference. I have also seen many more good to excellent movies. And it does not matter where the movie is made/comes from either. Good film making is good film making.

Of course, it all comes down to personal taste and what you get out of a film (or anything else in your life for that matter), so my opinion is just as valid as someone who disagrees with me.

Art is elitist. That's the point. Without that, art is nothing.

There is a place for trash and there is a place for beauty. What is trash and what is beauty is down entirely to the person viewing it, their tastes and to a large degree, their intellectual capacity and openmindedness.

[nikhilbhardwaj]

Art is elitist. That's the point. Without that, art is nothing.

There is a place for trash and there is a place for beauty. What is trash and what is beauty is down entirely to the person viewing it, their tastes and to a large degree, their intellectual capacity and openmindedness.

i think that you're a condescending sycophant.
you probably think modern art is cool
because no one gets what it means

[Dixon Bainbridge]

i think that you're a condescending sycophant.
you probably think modern art is cool
because no one gets what it means

Keep banging the rocks together, you'll catch up eventually.

[sydbat]

i think that you're a condescending sycophant.
you probably think modern art is cool
because no one gets what it means


Keep banging the rocks together, you'll catch up eventually.WOW. A nice, healthy discussion breaks down and name calling ensues. I have this feeling a mod will lock this threa

[Dixon Bainbridge]

WOW. A nice, healthy discussion breaks down and name calling ensues. I have this feeling a mod will lock this threa

Only if I make a complaint, which I wont. If people want to be pig ignorant, then thats there problem, not mine.

[nikhilbhardwaj]

If people want to be pig ignorant, then thats there problem, not mine.

what makes you think that you're superior to everybody else??

the only thing i could agree with you on would be not liking cricket.

[Iowan]

Closed for review. I expect it to be re-opened soon, but the combat must stop!