Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Good actors but the script based on Petronius' writings is ambitious but flawed. Petronius' own writings is partially lost. Fellini tries to connect the surviving tales and loses credibility while trying to connect the surviving fragments. The highlights: the short but evocative performance of Lucia Bose as a slave owner who frees her slaves and commits suicide with her husband who are facing bad days ahead, The others are Capucine and Magali Noel (a Fellini regular) who have a commanding screen presence in their brief roles.

If a filmmaker's appeal were solely based on seduction, then Federico Fellini would epitomize the expression "hard to get". Still, what a relief when we finally 'get' him! I remember a few years ago, my first intended immersion into Fellini's universe was through his groundbreaking "8½". As a result, I waited one year and half before giving a second chance to Fellini. This is how disappointed I was, maybe less by the film than by my inability to claim that Fellini was an avant-garde genius. I guess I dived too brutally in cold water, while I should have approached it step by step. I started then with his neo-realist period, and after "Nights of Cabiria" and "La Strada", my heart was conquered and the rest of his oeuvre, including "8½", confirmed my feelings that Fellini was on the field of emotions what Ingmar Bergman was on human psychology, essential to Cinema and complementary like libido and psyche for humans. And through the most libidinous "Satyricon", Fellini signs the most defining of all his films. And defining is the right word, because from our perspective, it means that Fellini's detractors would certainly pick "Satyricon" as a proof of Fellini's self-importance, while his adulators will consecrate it as the quintessential artistic expression of a genius, who was the mirror of human's most pervert yet fascinating sides. But let me be the devil's advocate, when talent can allow such magnificent deviations, it can afford pretentiousness, which in Fellini's case, is never a posture, but a risk-taking dynamic tunneling us into our most repressed sensations. Still, all through "Satyricon", I kept wondering how much time I would have waited before giving the 'second chance' had I seen it first. The film is a hyperbolic depiction of whatever Fellini stood for, a universe made of freaks, weird, funny-looking characters, debauchery, boredom, sexuality, amorality, poetry, blood, gluttony, feast and fantasy, as nonsensical and unsettling as they could get in the mind of the most twisted of us all. But it takes Fellini's genius to transcend the inner ugliness of humans and make such a cinematically significant movie. As I said for "La Dolce Vita", the morally worst can bring the aesthetically best."Satirycon" was loosely based on a poem from Petronius, a writer who lived under the reign of the lunatic Emperor Nero. The poem, discovered a few centuries ago, was made of disjointed fragments, the perfect format for the director who, since "La Dolce Vita" and before "Amarcord" cherished movies' structure made of independent little vignettes. The Fellinian experience is like a trip in a dream-like universe, when episodes don't need a connection to have relevance, where characters are defined by their mythological, mystical and sometimes physical attributes rather than any psychological notions or plot devices. And like a perfect dream-like escapism, the dazzling cinematography made of purple skies and splendid combinations of lights and shadows, reinvents the settings of Antic Roma in its most decadent days, before Christianity would set a new tone, when lifestyle was made of weird and bizarre distractions meant to conceal life's suffocating boredom. The film is made of one stunning sequence after another, and will probably be most remembered for the unforgettable orgy in Trimalchione's house, a sort of trip in an Antic world that never seemed as modern. And we hypnotically follow him as if we sensed a cathartic effect in this orgy of excesses, succumbing to devilish voyeurism to better expiate from our lowest impulses, just as Peckinpah's use of excessive violence in "The Wild Bunch". "Satyricon" is a journey in a world where normality is meaningless, where beauty is asexual, and sex is ugly, but both so appealing. A world where everything is corrupted and even poetry is traded for honors, food and fun. "Satyricon" is moral corruption is like a form of salvation as if it extrapolated Fellini's own impulses, own desire to dare such shots for the sake of digression. And it works because Fellini is pretentious but not self-important, his excesses create a coherence that makes the calmer and ordinary moments more awkward. Two men marry together, a beautiful black woman ignites fire from her vagina, a slave has his hand cut-off to entertain a hysterical audience in a theater, and we have no choice but to plunge in the lowest parts of humanity, like the abysmal depths of Pompeii before its imminent explosion."Satirycon" is beyond any explanations, and a real challenge for criticism. It is an Odyssey in a Roma that probably never existed, but had all the predispositions to allow Fellini to project his inner demons and most pervert fantasies into it, the universe created is unsettling but had it tried to be normal, it would have been a disaster just like Visconti 's "The Damned", released the same year. The film was as bizarre, as unsettling, but its realistic setting made the experience confusing by trying to battle in too many fronts of our perceptions. What a year for filmmaking anyway, released in the summer of love, "Satyricon" is the exaltation of freedom, it embraces the total zaniness of its project and therefore belongs to the category of 'films victims of their own greatness'. I used the same terms for Stanley Kubrick's "A Space Odyssey" and John Cassavetes' "Husbands", the movies convey the very feelings that inhabit the director's heart, illustrating in the form the point made by the content and transmitting it to the audience, at a time where cinematic creativity was at its peak. Watching "Satyricon" made me regret the crowd-pleasing aspect of today's cinema. And Fellini didn't give a damn about pleasing crowds: as a true author, he created immortal classics. Not that I'm planning to watch the film again, not that I believe it's a masterpiece, but it's a film of guts, of images and entertainment, sitting majestically on the throne of its ugliness, above our boring prudishness.

My friends and I were high school juniors in 1970 on a school trip to Paris. We were abandoned (emancipated?) by our chaperon on the second day on the Left Bank, and left to our own devices. We went to see Fellini's Satyricon in the original Italian with French subtitles. The theater was sloped the opposite of American ones, and we could smoke. I remember that we had only a dim understanding of the plot, but the visuals were stunning. Even today, more than forty years later, I can still see the image of the hermaphroditic Demi-god, his chalk-white skin and feeble eyes. So, though my high school chaperon probably broke several laws by leaving his French honors students to fend for themselves in Paris, his decision altered my life and my appreciation for Fellini.

I admire Federico Fellini and what films so far I've seen of his. While not a bad film at all, of the 8 films I've seen(La Dolce Vita, 8 1/2, Amarcord, La Strada, Nights of Cabiria, Roma, Casanova and Satyricon), Satyricon is my least favourite. I did find the story disjointed, some scenes are fine but others are not sure what tone it wants to be or I wasn't sure what they were trying to do. While the characters are not as detached to the audience in the way the titular character from Casanova is, whereas I identified with the leads of La Strada and especially Nights of Cabiria the characters were never really developed enough to make me care properly. Pacing has rarely, if ever, been an issue in Fellini films, I am well aware that his pacing is largely deliberate, but with a story and characters that I was indifferent to on the most part I will admit that my interest did waver. Also, the parts dealing with sexual immaturity were really quite bizarre to put it politely. However, Satyricon is stunning visually with striking roman garb and costumes beautifully photographed, and Fellini's direction while not as nostalgic as personal as some of his other films is accomplished. The score positively sweeps and accompanies the film very well, while the acting from especially the two leads is very good. Overall, there will be people who admire this film and others who'll find it self-indulgent and perhaps cold. Coming from someone who still isn't sure what she makes of Satyricon, I can understand both sides. I am glad I watched it, however I can't see myself watching it again. 6/10 Bethany Cox