8 1/2: The Film About Itself

I was torn about which movie I should watch first on my new TV. It’s kind of a big deal. Whenever we got a new TV or made a change to the surround sound, the go-to in the house I was raised in was True Lies, but there hasn’t been a definitive way to view that film since it released on DVD. So I wanted the momentous movie to be something I’ve seen several times, for comparison purposes, and something that would demonstrate the inky blacks and high contrasts possible on OLED display technology. (Who am I kidding? I didn’t even know what the “O” in OLED stood for.) I deliberated over this decision for what felt like hours, halfheartedly testing big budget Hollywood flicks here and there, before going all in on 8 1/2.

A sixty year old black and white movie may not seem like the perfect test drive for a new TV, but I marveled over every pore in Marcello Mastroianni’s face, scrutinized every wrinkle around his haunting eyes, and distinguished every armpit hair on the beautiful Italian women who surround him. Considering I first saw 8 1/2 on a badly worn VHS, then a handful of times on plain ol’ DVD (which I believe was $40 at the time), to say the Criterion Collection’s latest restoration is an upgrade is an understatement.

8 1/2 is Federico Fellini’s semi-autobiographical tale which, by his own count, is his eighth and a half movie. The film depicts a director who’s torn about what his next picture is about, so much so that he frequently dodges his eager collaborators’ inquiries. Constantly hounded by his wife, her protective friends, his mistress, his producer, a brutally honest film critic, and a chain-smoking entourage of jackals, Mastrioanni portrays Guido as a filmmaker who glides along the edge of stress-induced madness, avoiding his problems whenever possible. (At one point he’s literally dragged to a press junket like a tantrum-throwing child.) The meta aspects emerge as he’s told he’s too young and inexperienced to make a film about childhood memories, which is ultimately the very thing Fellini himself is doing.

The film opens with a famous dream sequence in which Guido levitates over gridlocked traffic and takes flight through the clouds. Moments later he frantically tries to untie the rope he discovers fastened to his ankle, but it’s too late: the man flying him like a kite laughs as he jerks the semi-fictional movie director back down to earth. The “real” Guido awakens from the dream-turned-nightmare with a start. Florescent lights flicker to life as Ride of the Valkyries plays and, for the first time, we see Guido’s face framed in a mirror, his weathered eyes suggesting he’s weighed down by far more than your average forty-something.

Guido is a man who copes with the pressures of the real world—poorly—by escaping into childhood memories and self-serving fantasies. His last picture was a rousing success and everyone’s dying to know what’s next, but even Guido’s not sure. He just knows a lot of people are counting on him and he’s the reason an enormously expensive film set has been constructed on the beach. Guido has postponed production, ostensibly to relax at a spa where all the other guests move in lockstep with the music. There the line between fantasy and reality is blurred yet again as he’s served mineral water by his ideal starlet, Claudia Cardinale, who haunts his thoughts like a ghost.

You can never be 100% sure what is real and what is fantasy, if Fellini even cares to make distinction. It sounds like a muddled mess. It’s not.

Terry Gilliam on Fellini’s 8 1/2

In one flashback/dream/fantasy which perhaps represents Fellini’s own sexual awakening, a twelve year old Guido and a handful of his delinquent friends visit Saraghina, a large woman who lives on the beach and dances seductively for anyone who’ll watch. The boys rally for her to emerge from the remnants of an abandoned building, which she does like a vampire raised from the dead. Later, Guido imagines all the important women from his life (including Saraghina, a showgirl, his wife, his mistress, and a woman he merely saw in passing once) living in a harem where they feed, bathe, and pamper him. There they live only to serve until they reach the age of forty, at which point they must ascend to the attic, never to be seen again. However, even this juvenile fantasy devolves into a nightmare as the imaginary women revolt against his misogynistic ways. The fact that even Guido’s fantasies become self-critical represents another facet of his conflicted character; consider how much he hates the film critic and simultaneously values his suggestions. Still, Guido fantasizes about the critic hanging himself in a theater.

But talking about plot and meaning completely misses the point of a Fellini film—those elements don’t even become clear on the first or second watch. It’s like praising the the set design in a porno… why? What really drew me to his movies (and, I imagine, literally every other fan in existence) was the eye candy. The poetry of his camera movements and precise blocking is unrivaled. Every scene contains more richness than most filmmakers muster in an entire film. The camera frequently pans to performers who seem to be standing in place, waiting for their cue, but it’s always intentional as if Fellini wants us to believe that their actions are only significant if we are watching. Many have tried to ape his style and end up looking dreadfully pretentious.

Martin Scorsese on Fellini’s 8 1/2

I could watch Fellini films every week of my life—and damn nearly did for a significant chunk of my twenties. 8 1/2 is my favorite of the director’s films, precisely because the eye candy is laid on so thick. Some people enjoy rich fudge. I’m one of ’em. Even if it’s not your cup of tea, you gotta admit: Marcello Mastrioanni sure looks cool in sunglasses.

Final Destination may be my favorite Horror Franchise of All Time

As absurd as it is to believe that humans could intuit some sort of grand design, such premises are irresistible in movies, where even stinkers like Nicolas Cage’s Next can be engaging. The Final Destination series has two great premises: A) What if you could cheat Death? and B) What if by cheating Death you merely bought scant time alongside a hefty penalty? In the original Final Destination, Devon Sawa’s Alex is treated to a premonition of his impending demise, which allows him to save himself and a handful of his doomed acquaintances… initially anyway.

You would have a hard time naming many mainstream films that deal with ideas as unsettling as predeterminism—and that’s before you begin to ponder what, exactly, Death is and whether or not there’s an equal and opposite force that wanted Alex and company to live. Perhaps his premonition was merely a supernatural glitch—a bug in the cosmic code. Wisely, the series has yet to ruin its emergent questions with answers, although reports say the next installment will flesh out Tony Todd’s undertaker character, presumably because Hollywood screenwriters are allergic to mystique.

Great premises can only take you so far, but the series exhibits fine execution as well. Whenever Death’s preferred design fails, it devises Rube Goldberg levels of wildly entertaining events to correct its mistakes. The fourth film in the series, idiotically named The Final Destination, is the worst of the bunch with its SyFy levels of production value, but even it features a white supremacist getting dragged down the street by his own vehicle while somehow setting himself on fire in the process. If that’s the worst you have to offer, you’ve got yourself a solid franchise. Incidentally, my favorite Final Destination is the most recent entry despite some rather stupid character decisions, which is notable because there’s no other franchise in horror movie history that manged to save the best for last.

The formula is so novel, it holds up the weight of five films with ease. In the opening reel, our hero must find him or herself dying in a horrible accident that kills dozens if not hundreds of innocent bystanders. Moments later, the hero will wake up to find it was a bonafide premonition of the future, a future which can be changed. Unfortunately, it won’t be long before the large cast of expendable characters learn that Death will come back for them with a vengeance. What’s interesting about the formula is the filmmakers keep tweaking it with new rules that don’t conflict with the old ones.

In the first film, the principal characters learn that Death comes back for them in the order they were originally supposed to die, picking them off one by one like an invisible slasher. The second film reveals that Death, if unable to carry out its hit list forward, will work backwards (this one is the least logical Destination film because its heroine has multiple premonitions for no other reason than it’s convenient to the messy plot, but overall it may very well be the most entertaining). The third outing seems to suggest Death has at least enough consciousness to taunt its victims with photographic clues of their demises. The fourth expands the mythology in no discernible way at all, which is probably for the best considering it’s the least imaginative entry. And the fifth movie introduces the most radical expansion to the rules to date: Death will give you a pass if you willingly take someone else’s life. This leads to a boringly routine climax (a Final Destination movie really didn’t need a shootout scene), but also the most satisfying twist ending ever put to film.

Yeah, I said it. Eat your heart out, Shyamalan.

There’s a lot of silly stuff in these movies, most of it intended, which compliments the heavier implications. Nothing is more thrilling than cheating Death. Unfortunately, Death always wins in the end, it just so rarely does in the movies.