Roma (1972)

Too much of everything

Best movie ever!

Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

"Roma" is a feature with neither plot nor timeline and composed by an edition of disconnected footages of Rome, the Eternal City. Fellini makes a homage to Rome and depicts and entwines moments of the ancient and the modern Rome, such as during the fascist period of Mussolini; building the subway; in a traffic jam; a fashion show for the Church members; brothels with clients and prostitutes on display; repression; ordinary people on the streets and restaurants. For fans of Fellini and Rome, this movie may be a must-see; otherwise, it may be boring and too long. My vote is five.Title (Brazil): "Roma de Fellini" ("Fellini's Roma")

The first half an hour of Roma is as good as anything that Fellini has made. Not following any real discernible plot, these 30 minutes largely show the thrill of a sprawling, wild lower middle class house that a young man (Fellini?) comes to stay at in Rome in the late 1930s. The scene where all the families in the apartments come out to eat pasta and snails(!) in the open air at night is thrilling for its use of stream of consciousness switch from one conversation to another - portraying the dynamism and the cheeky irreverence of Roman street life. This is film making at its best. Thereafter we switch to 1970s Rome and the mood becomes bleak. A long sequence of cars in a traffic jam in the rain with the conversations now all separate as people sit secluded away from each other. This appears to be a bleak comment on how Roman life has lost its zest. There are more switches of mood and scene all with no clear link other than they are based in Rome. Its all a bit confusing, but the first 30 minutes make it worth it. Woody Allen was clearly watching as there are many references here used in his films.

Come and take a tour of the Eternal City with its most famous citizen from the cinema world. Here, Federico Fellini disposes of practically all normal and conventional ways of making a film and uses it for what it may have been intended for primarily. Here, the story is extinct and all we are left with are images, and in the hands of Fellini they are some stunning images. All take place in Rome, that great capital of Italy that has been through so much over the centuries and Fellini attempts to capture all of it. He uses a young man first coming to Rome (representing him), who encounters a small apartment he has to share with about ten other people and children, a huge outside venue where nearly everyone in the area comes to eat and socialize, and then takes a journey to his first brothel, then goes again.As it is with many of his other films, Fellini uses dreams and exaggerations to explore the world of his subject, in this case the city of Rome. It is as he imagines it, which makes it all the more confusing and unusual. The women are big-breasted, loud and mesmerizing, and to watch these people fight, make up, or just talk with one another alone is interesting and funny in the way they express exactly what they are feeling. This frankness is something Fellini admires and it is a characteristic of Rome where things happen because they should, not because people want them to or not. Another interesting aspect was using a film crew to show us the underground of Rome where there is so much more history to be discovered.The ending is just as unconventional as the rest of the film. Here, a large group of people (perhaps representing the city or all the people Fellini knew in his life) ride on motorcycles all throughout the city. As they turn corners and go down main streets, the camera swirls and turns to show us the famous standings in the city that represent it, all coming to an end at the Coliseum. This is the film's finest moment because it is a culmination of all things Roman and all things Fellini. In many ways, it is like the end of 8 1/2 as we watch all these aspects come together, whether you want them to or not. As much as Rome is eternal, it is with a purpose and you cannot change it to your liking, only record what you see. Fellini has done just that.

Fellini's Rome is a very weird film: it has not a clear plot, in fact there isn't any main character but the great city of Rome. We can watch different people from different times living and enjoying Rome. As a movie without plot it could become absolutely boring and annoying, but the greatness of Fellini transforms it in a curious portrait of characters that go up and down in the city. It is clear that it is an exercise of exquisite quality in directing, the main problem is that it is difficult to the film to be more than that. Had the movie a worse director, it would have been one of the worst films ever made. Being directed by Fellini, it becomes a curios strange film. I have not liked it at all, but I have to admit that the directing is great.