Hmmmm. Depends. Are you looking for sheer entertainment, or do you want something that's been pretty polarized as far as reviews go? Sometimes I like to watch the more controversial films because it gives me a chance to really read heavily into the pros and cons of it. I usually recommend Wertmuller if you're in the mood for that, and especially Seven Beauties. If you want a great, sort of introspective philosophy on government, I haven't gotten there yet, but in the 90's there's one "Open Doors," about a court trial (I will write more about it tonight). Of course, my two favorite Fellinis, Nights of Cabiria and Dolce Vita; lean towards the former if you want something more humanist, and the latter if you want something more distant and with a bit of self deprication. If you want to focus on De Sica, get Bicycle Thief and Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow, which are both incredibly different as far as tone and content. So its a good way to experience what he's capable of. Comedy, of course, Divorce Italian Style. Or, you can take the plunge with me and see what is considered incredibly taboo, and might actually be a failure and watch 120 Days of Sodom. Its one of the most written about movies in italian Cinema, and may very well have been a case of Pasolini chewing off more than he could handle. But he always pushes that border as far as I'm concerned, so I actually want to see what happened with 120. We can weigh in on it together.

Does that cover it? I kind of need to know what mood you're in to hone it down.

Haha, yeah, I think that covers quite a bit of it. But let me narrow it down a bit further; on dvd, I can get the following easily: Django
Il postino The postman
La traviata
Fellini Satyricon
8 1/2
The Bicycle Thief (which I plan on seeing)
La strada
Ossessione

Of those, do you recommend any highly?

(I feel like I've been saying this a lot these past few posts, but if I figure out the vhs player (or buy one soon) I'll have a lot more choices. Til then, dvd is much much easier :o )

Well, I've seen La Traviata live, and there are a million versions of the opera, so I don't know which you're reffering to. If you like classical opera, could be fun, but I wouldn't recommend it. As far as I'm concerned, most opera to dvd looks like a stage (which it is) with the exception of that version of Carmen with Placido Domingo that was created originally as a move and has film landscaping, backdrops, dynamics, etc.

Of those, I'd say 8 1/2 is the most revolutionary as far as cinematography and perception. Its a real groungbreaker. But most of my friends have found La Strada more fullfilling. Its more sympathetic to its heroine (Masina films always are vs. Mastroianni ones), and her acting abilities are not to be missed. She's unknown here but deserves more attention that she got. KNowing your feeling for French New wave, I'd encourage you to take La Strada over 8 1/2 too. Satyricon is really self-indulgent. Its Fellini's most lavish and yet least resonant era for me. wertham loved it, as did someone I used to work with, but I wasn't as into it. It gets to deriding and bitter, into itself, but is certainly I sight to see and well done. Il Postino is very *sweet.* Probably one of the better movies of the 90's and the biggest cross-over here until Life is Beautiful and Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon. Its quite good, and a nice simple story. Because Neruda is one of the main characters, it dwells heavily on the power of poetry. Nice, high gloss, sentimental. Not my favorite throughout all the decades, but one of the recent good ones. I haven't seen I have not seen either of the two Ossessione, but if its the one by Visconti, he's huge, so it might be worth checking out even though I can't vouch for it. Then you can let me know if I should check it out.

I've actually watched 8 1/2 long ago...one of the earlier foreign films I saw, really...but it was VHS with white subs, and I just couldnt get into it... so maybe that'd be worth a revisit. Anyway, I'll pick something, and discuss when the time comes. don't wanna stuff this thread with nothing but rec's and such. thanks, though. :o : )

Ennio Morricone


Ennio Morricone (born:10. November 1928 in Trastevere, Rom) is an Italian composer and conductor. He has also worked under the pseudonym Dan Savio and Leo Nichols.

Ennio Morricone has made music for over 500 movies. His name is normally linked to the Western Genre but he has "only" wrote the music for about 30 Western.

Ennio Morricone went to the conservatory of Santa Cecilia. He studied trumpet and choralmusic. He was teached by Goffredo Petrassi. 1956 Morricone married Maria Travia. 1964 he started his sucessfull work with Sergio Leone and Bernardo Bertolucci.
In that time he wrote among other movies the music for Once Upon a Time in the West and A Fistful of Dollars. Since then he wrote music for about 15 movies a year.

He has impressive credits. Watch here http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001553/.

FILMO. I have a double cd of all of his music. Its pretty good, but some of the scores are exceptional. Twice i tried to mix a dance music into The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly theme song, but it never worked since I don't know how to mix. Then we went into this clothing store in Chicago and there it was.....the dance music version of TGTBTU blaring through the store! It was incredible.

**1990's and 2000

The 90's through today procurred a mixed bag for me. On the one hand, the Italians produced a wider range of mass appeal comedies, dramas, and love stories, and the new wave of directors debuted, on the other hand, they produced a wider range of mass appeal comedies, dramas, and love stories...

Amongst the selection though, the big gem is Gianni Amelio's Open Doors. An incredibly introspective and well done film about due process in the courts and the rise of fascist governments under the arguements of public safety. In the film, Tommaso Scalia goes on a rampage one morning killing his boss, his job replacement, and raping a killing his own wife. Now Amelio does you the pleasure of showing you his actions at the opening of the film. So his culpability is never in question. He demnds an expedited trial and the death penalty while simultaneously poking at the court system's need to bypass the system in order to quickly close the case and ease public sentiment. Judge Vito Di Francesco, also played by the striking Gian Maria Volente, refuses because he opposed to Capital Punishment and believes in due process. One juror, Consolo (Renato Carpentieri) also has doubts about the handling of the trial, and Open Doors pretty much follows the juror and especially the judge as they work through the case. My favorite novel The Brothers Karamazov, also gets a moment of screentime too, which is the icing on the cake.

Roberto Begnini really busts out onto the film scene, starring in Federico Fellini's final movie, the mediocre Voice of the Moon. Begnini is actually a huge slap-stick comedian in Italy with several books including one he wrote after {b]Life is Beautiful[/b] gained international reknown. Its called "With You, Life is Beautiful" and no doubt returns to his fun slapstick love comedy style.Prior to Life, he did two comedies that can be found here. Johnny Stecchino and The Monster.

Stecchino, which came first, is actually quite fun. As in all his movies (and a large chunk of Jim Jarmusch's ones, Begnini plays opposite his real wife, the charismatic and sweet Nicoletta Braschi. In Stecchino (Italian for toothpick) Begnini plays two characters. The mob head Johnny Stecchino, and the unfortunate Dante whom the mobsters wife Maria (Braschi) has found to serve as his body double. Dante doesn't realize why people keep trying to shoot at him, or why this lovely woman of his dreams has fallen into his lap and his taking him shopping and on vacations, etc. She's doing it because Johnny is housebound hiding from mad mobsters, and the two believe if Dante is shot, the mobsters will leave him alone thinking they've accomplished their mission. Quite fun and a great role for Braschi, who ends up being the power that runs the fiasco. The Monster is a slight reprieve and not as creative. In it, Braschi is a policewoman who is sent undercover to trail a suspected rapist by pretending to be his girlfriend. Of course its another mistaken identity bit, and Begnini is actually an innocent guy. Both were directed and acted by Begnini.

And of course, there's Life is Beautiful where he realigns his psychsical humour to have the bittersweet emphasis on saving his son from the atrocities of the concentration camps. Alot of people were upset when this movie came out and argued everything from "he wasn't Jewish enough" to "he made the death and work camps into a game." Personally, I think those people really missed the point of the movie. But I'll keep that for discussion for anyone who watches the movie and/or wants to discuss it during the festival.

Other greats were Il Postino by Michael Radford about a postman who delivers mail to the exiled poet and activist Pablo Neruda. The film is charming (a term I too often use once the 90's hit). But what sets it above other movies of the genre is Radford's emphasis on poetry, and the simple postman Mario Ruoppolo (played by Massimo Troisi) discovering the power of the word, a new light kindled in himself, and how to express his love to the local bar worker Beatrice (Maria Grazia Cucinotta). Note her name...anyone who knows (almost) original Divine *ahem* Love will know why her name is so apt. Its actually a well done and very interesting film considering the content, and Radford keeps the viewer invested depite the pace and the fact that its pretty much a feature length film which is just dialogue and beautiful landscape shots. Highly recommended as one of the better films of recent times.

Mediterraneo is also a decent film about several sailors sent to invade a Greek Island in WWII. Its a pretty dud mission and the guys end up wondering why they were sent to the adandoned island. Only they discover its not abandoned, its chock full of women and children (all the men have left for war) who were hiding from the unknowns until they decided the sailors wouldn't harm them. The sailors proceed to live out their lives in the isolated but friendly village without much further knowledge of what is going on in the rest of the world. They get inklings of news through a radio, and eventually reality seeps back in and they must decide where their futures lie.

2000 has prduced one decent dramedy and two duds as far as I'm concerned. I won't even begin with The Last Kiss since I saw it in Italy with no subtitles, so may have missed some of the finer nuances. But it makes Lost in Translation seem like a profound relationship, which its not.

Malena otherwise known as "That movie that we first saw Monica Bellucci in if we hadn't seen Under Suspicion[/b] was god aweful. Pretty much the story of a gorgeous woman who moves to a *provicial* town where the men all get erections when she walks down the street, and their wives get bitter and vengeful. Alone, since her husband is in the war, the town goes nuts on her, and when it is declared that her husband is dead, they lose and final reserves and just beat up on her. I guess one could say this is a story of survival of the individual against the gendered cruelty of society, but that would be stretching it.

Bread and Tulips is almost the good story of an unhappy housewife who leaves her family (accidentally) only the husband is so terrible it doesn't really make the arguements about "tearing the family apart" make any sense. Perhaps if he'd been simple, or giving, like in Hedda Gabler, or The Awakening, or even The Piano (sort of). But no. Its still a pleasant look at a woman who hitchhikes to Venice and begins a new life with a makeshift family of locals though.

There are two movies that made pretty big waves in the U.S. which I haven't seen however, but have heard great things about. The first was an Italian suspense/horror film that came out two and a half years ago called I'm Not Scared about a boy who discovers something he shouldn't in the fields of his farmland. The second, which is in theatres right now is called Caterina in the Big City and has 93% Cream of the Crop over at RT. http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/caterin ... _big_city/ So if anyone could see either of those two, I'd love to know what you thought.

That wraps up my decade reviews, and I hope I touched on the eras, topics, genres, and content amply. If any topic interested you, even the ones I disliked and you'd want to judge for yourself, heh, please check out the films I assoctiated with it. Ask away for recs, etc, and FILMO has been showcasing the Leone/Marricone due that has given us the *other* vision of the west. I wasn't even aware there were other directors for Spaghetti Westerns! But as he's shown, there are, so if you liked The Man with No Name, I'm sure there are others he did write-ups on that would interest you.

Enjoy!

Your Italian film loving hosts,
FILMO and dolcevita

Fellini Satyricon was a bizarre, gross, self-indulgent movie. I'm still on the fence if I liked it or not. It just gives me too many creepy memories.

Though I think Fellini deserved his Oscar nomination for directing the film. With a scope and subject like that and to keep it stylized, I give him kudos.

I've got my hands on a copy of Il Postino. I'll watch it this comming week.

Clint Eastwood

Yes right. Clint Eastwood. The Italo Western made him big.

Born: 31 May
Place of Birth: San Francisco

Eastwood started his career with minor rolls in less known movies like Tarantula. His breakthrough was the roll of a cowboy in Rawhide. In the mid 60s he went to Europe. He worked with Sergio Leone in the movie For a Fistfull of Dollars. The Dollar-Trilogy became a huge sucess and made him a worldwide known star. After he was a big star as "Cowboy" he started as Dirty Harry and become even more famous. 1971 he started as well a carrer as director with the movie Play Misty for me. With his late western Unforgiven he had finally his breakthrough as a director and producer. At the moment Eastwood is very sucessfull as director with movies like Mystic River and Million Dollar Baby.

btw: Eastwood was married several times and has 7 children. 1986 he was elected as mayor in his hometown Carmel.

Watch it a couple nights ago, but I figured I'd wait til the first to post this (which I typed at around midnight - please forgive incoherancy/spelling)


The Bicycle Thief

The Bicycle Thief was much different than I expected. I knew the basic plot because one of my favorite films of recent years, Beijing Bicycle, retells it in a modern setting; however, in Beijing the protagonist is a boy who needs the bike for his job and personal gain, whereas in De Sica's original it is a father trying to provide for his family. Much bigger a difference, though, is that Beijing Bicycle deals more with the after effects of the theft and eventual discovery of the bike; The Bicycle Thief is a father-and-son tale chronicling the search itself.

It is in this way that I was most surprised. I knew the plot – I did not know the story. I did not know that finding the bicycle would take a backseat to the relationship of Antonio and his young son, Bruno. Within the first twenty minutes, the situation and characters are so well developed, that the few short minutes following the theft are heartbreaking. The relationship between Bruno and his dad becomes evident and strengthens throughout the film as Bruno follows his father literally looking up to him as they search. He doesn't speak much, but his actions tell plenty of his feelings towards his father, and his great admiration of him. Likewise, Antonio clearly does not want to disappoint his son, leading to his difficult and character shattering choice towards the end. It is this loving, incredibly strong friendship on which the rest of the film rests and strictly as a father-son picture the film excels.

I know little to nothing of De Sica as a director, but clearly he knows how to get the most out of his locations. Many key scenes in the hunt feature large crowds, tall walls, and other general sets that serve to overpower Antonio and make his search seem hopeless. Even with the oft crowded and chaotic scenes the focus rarely leaves Antonio. Speaking of whom, the actor playing this character was incredible – so much was said with his facial expressions, even when he wasn't speaking. Extraordinary, considering all of the actors were amateur (or so says IMDb).

My biggest complaint is that there are many instances of clearly audible dialogue for which there are no subtitles. Perhaps this was intentional, to show Antonio's focus or something, but I couldn't help but feel like I was missing something.

There is much more I'd like to say on this film, but I'm tired and my memory really does suck. However, it truly is a great movie.

As a P.S., I'm not sure what you think about the film, dolce, but if you like it, I'd recommend checking out Beijing Bicycle. I don't know that you'll like it as much as I do, but it might be interesting to see a quite different take on it. Perhaps next year if we have a China Thread.

I will take part in this one.

On my list to watch:

A Fistful of Dollars
For a Few Dollars More
Il Postino
Malena


What about Ferreri's La Grande bouffe. From all I have seen and heard, it looks pretty good to me.

Also, Best of Youth should be added...amazing film!

*there will be spoilers in this post*

Yep, De Sica used unknowns after the war, and everything was shot on location. He really explores the sort of destroyed and chaotic feel of the city. The one day search has a consistent sense of forboding. Like I knew he wasn't going to find his bicycle, and I'm pretty sure Antonio knew it too. Remember the scene were they stop for lunch, and Bruno doesn't want to order anything because they are financially strapped? To compensate Antonio lets him order what he likes, but eats nothing himself. And Bruno offers him up some of his pasta even though he is starving (he dives into his pasta when it arrives).

The points that interest me in these movies, and distinguish it from De Sica's other loved down-n-Out movie Umberto D., is exactly what you stated above, about Antonio and Bruno's relationship. De Sica's content is depressing, but he chooses not to focus on "Oh the horror...look at the vicious downward spiral" and instead focusses on this man and his boy looking for the bike and clinging hopefully to eachother for support. It becomes less a didactic hit over the head and more just this exploration of how desperate they are. But they are desperate because they want to support eachother, because they want to see life get better, because Antonio when he first got his job was so excited.

Its shattering to see Bruno watch his father fall apart. First with the fight over his supposed bike with the (even poorer) man, and secondly when he actually sees his dad steal the wealthier man's bike. Antonio knew he didn't want to dissappoint his son, so sent him away on the bus before his actions, but it doesn't work, and the boy sees his dad's ultimate downfall and disgrace. And when the people say to him he is "lucky" the wealthy man will let him go, you're just left thinking the wealthy man didn't really need the bike, but gets it, and Antonio does need one but goes home empty handed.

I like that it doesn't spell out the struggle the following days and weeks, but just leaves the viewer knowing that the ultimate pain didn't come from losing the job as it came from the boy losing his innocence and the father's loss of hope.

Kypade, if you like De Sica's style, please watch more of his stuff (even umberto D despite my complaining, its one of Ebert's faovrite movies) and get a stronger grip on his life's work. Its quite rich and diverse.

I agree completely. Which is why I enjoyed the first twenty minutes so much. It imediately sets the tone of the situation and characters so well that by the end when it seems hopeless, and you realize he's going to steal the bike himself, despite being a strike against the father's character (maybe it's just me, but I had him built up as a pretty moral, good guy) I didn't mind the actions. Just thinking about when he rode up at the next stop and picked up his boy, the inevitable smiles on their faces, and the fact that they'd be saved, to eat, felt good. But that his son doesn't get on the bus, and does see his fathers actions, and they don't get away with it, it's so harsh and sad...they're right back at square one, with no more options.

And I already added 3 or 4 of his films to my queue.

HOT! That's what this festival is for. To discover films one may not have otherwise stumbled upon. Dqare I ask which? Please Say Milan, Yesterday etc, and maybe Gardens of Finzi-Continis? Which which? I'm dying to know now.

Heh. Umberto D., The Garden of Finzi-Continis, Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow, and Too Bad She's Bad (in which De Sica is an actor, I believe? It's directed by Blasetti.) I don't know that I'll get to any of them during the course of the festival, but if I have time, I may bump one up to the top later. As it is, though, I already have one more of your recs sitting in the DVD players. Gotta spread some views around, yknow?

Oh course! I'm trying to watch at least one from each thread (esxcept horror, unless i work my nerves up). Just wanted to know is all. Great to hear you discovered a new director. I have to tell you, as a body of work, no one beats the Italian directors from the 50's to the 70's.

You HAVE to see at least one from the Asian horror thread!

I do plan to watch other countries (in fact, I have a Canada sitting in front of me), but it just has worked out that Italy has come first. So, here's another review:

Blow-Up

Interesting. I've read the short story, and while I am not sure I understood it all, it had about it an innocence and ambiguity that I found truly intriguing. It's about a guy, who is out with his camera taking some pictures. He photographs something going on in a park, involving a man, a woman, and a boy. From what I got of the story, he is looking back on the event, wondering if perhaps what he saw was a crime in the making, and if his photography, which causes the boy to run away, saved a life. Like I said, I don't know that I absorbed all that is in the short story. But reading it, I couldn't help but like it. So strange and interesting. I knew there was a film adaptation, so when this opportunity came along to view it, I figured I'd might as well.

It was just so clear in my mind how the film adaptation would be. It would start with the young photographer sitting at his desk, looking at the oversize picture of the man, the woman, and the boy. It would flash back to the event, him leaving the house and coming upon the scenario which all of the story is. I pictured it in black and white, and I pictured it being as ambiguous and thought provoking as it's source.

If you've seen Antonioni's film, you know I was in for a shock. From the opening scene, this was all wrong. This guy, this
Thomas, is older than the main character I'd come to know. He was also a professional photographer, and far richer than the man in my head. But quickly I realized this was an adaptation, more bases on the idea and plot of the story than the story itself. It would be silly to think the film in my head could be stretched out to feature length anyway, or that the story in the book could be captured for what it really is. So I watched the rest of the movie as a movie, and immediately felt much better about it.

The only thing that really fails, is the character of Thomas. He is too young to be such a renowned, respected, wealthy photographer. This lost major credibility points. I just didn't understand how he could be so good.

Well, that's not ALL that fails. Truthfully, I found much of the film to be just plain boring. My mind drifted more often than...uh...you get the picture. I had to struggle to keep my eyes on the screen, despite the relatively gorgeous imagery. Perhaps this was some other problem. Maybe I should stop watching movies so late at night. Maybe I was inherently disinterested when I realized this movie did not equal the story. Because I can't think of any particular faults in the story, nor technique's that turned me off from it. Maybe next time I watch it I will become completely engrossed. I don't know.

Easily the best part of the film, and (perhaps oddly) the most engaging, were the long, silent, introspective portions focusing on Thomas (well, for the most part). The scene in the park where the initial pictures are taken, filmed in long shots with little people against large green fields, for example, was beautiful, amazing. The development of the pictures, if I recall, was similarly long and speechless. And just as capturing as photographing the park. Towards the end with the mimes was funny, outrageous, amazingly shot, and one of my favorites scenes in cinema.

So despite feeling kinda bored, and disbelieving the main character, and generally getting a huge shock as far as content vs my expectations, I think it was pretty well done and definitely not a failure.

Thanks for watching another one Kypade!



The short story that Blow-Up was inspired by has as its premesis a viewer (its a first person narrative) in a park who sees a sex transaction. Initialy, the viewer is sure that the woman is being traded/bought. However, his mind rambles through the exchange changing the position of each of the members involved until he ultimately decides that it was actually a younger man being given to an older one. Its a stream of contiousness piece that explores the position of each member in the park in relation to the other, and while the reader knows what the viewer/narrator ultimately concluded, one is left to realize that its still up for grabs in "reality."

Antonioni took this literature and really fleshed out the idea of the entire scene being constructed in the mind of the viewer. That's pretty much the parallel I see. That the scenario changes everytime the "outside" eye keeps looking at it. It has nothing to do with what actually happened. I read the short story as well, and it was incredibly engaging. Its basically just the viewer in the car always second guessing who was trading who off...



Ahh, well I guess that was a bit of a surprise then. ;-)



Well? I don't think his economic viability and name had that much to do with it. Fashion photography has always been a bit up and down. Who does the technicals and who has the big names. Sure, he has some photoshoots, and travels in certain circles, but he's also a photojournalist. Remember at the beginning when he's coming off the train looking all wrecked? Goes to a pay phone. He's just spent overnight in a sort of halfway home, "posing" as a homeless man. That to me is a sign that there's a split between what he thinks is reality and how he fits into it. He thinks he can "understand" situation just by immersing himself in it for a whopping twelve hours. He's a condescending sort of upper class man who occasionally descends from on high to mingle with the commoners he cares oh so much about. But he doesn't get it. He is famous enough to be totally clueless, and to operate in an isolated circle.



Its certainly paced, and an aquired taste. I know a couple other people who got disinterested halfway through. So much of the story is Thomas just wondering around doing random stuff like buying helicopter propellers, and making out with a couple girls who think they can get a photoshoot from him if they try hard enough. There's a lot of pot smoking, which I think is a further reference to perception, and its certainly drawn out. The party scene, where he's kind of irritated and wants to go see the body, but everyone's too doped up, and so is he.

Antonioni is always kind of like this. L'Avventura and Red Desert are also incredibly monotone. Its a uniform delivery where no one really gets emotional. Thomas sees the gun in the photos and thinks maybe to call a friend and say he saved someone, but its not like he goes animatedly to the cops. He just makes a call and then goes downstairs to hit on his neighbors wife. There's a complete split between "what is going on" and how Thomas and his circle respond to it half-hazardly. It doesn't really make a difference to them, which is probably why he could keep changing the story over and over again in his head. Its also perhaps, why he becomes obsessed with it, but can't act on his obsession? He's so used to doing the "one night in a homeless shelter" and then return to the good life, that he really has no ability to respond to something outside of anthropology. He can speculate a bit from his own cushy studio, make a couple phonecalls, but yeah. he's pretty dead to it, imo. He speculates, he doesn't act.

That speculation, like in the short story its based off of, allows for the scenario to change numerous times. Its because the viewer never actually intercedes that "fact" or a fixed story ever manifests. It just keeps changing in the mind of the third party viewer (in this case Thomas).

I also think it changes for us, because we see the photo enlargements, and even the couple involved, always through the eyes (and lens) of Thomas.



Hahaha! I love the mimes. They're so charismatic. What do you think of their includion? About when Thomas picks up their tennis ball and tosses it back to them? About how the camera rolls along the grass where the tennis ball should be, and we hear the sound of the ball being hit back and forth at the end? I think that's one of, if not the most important scene in the entire movie, and it completely reinforms everything that came before it.

edit***BTW, Antonioni, Pasolini, and Wertmuller were always the three toughest directors for me to sit through. They can be very rewarding, but equally as frustrating at times.

Soooo? Where'd everyone who already said they had their films in their laps go? I want to hear what you thought of Fellini, Bellucci, and love letter writing.

Dolce, I'm taking "Italian neo-cinema" next semester. "Post-World War II period of the Italian cinema, with emphasis on the work of Antonioni, Visconti, Pasolini, Fellini, And Rossellini." Just thought I'd mention it. :O

I HAD my hands on Amarcord. And I watched about 15 minutes. Then life intervened, and I didn't get to finish it. It'll probably be a few days until I can get it again.

That's not really enough time to draw any conlusions about it, but I must say how breathtaking the cinematography and, especially, Nino Rota's score were. What are your thoughts on Amarcord, dolce?

Also, I'm sitting on a wealth of Fellini, but don't know how much time I actually have to watch them...so for someone like me, whose only exposure is La Strada, what one do you recommend above all others?

And on a humorous note, I have a brother who is taking a 'cinema appreciation' (HAH!) course at his university. He gave them a brief history of world cinema, even stopping to focus on Italian Neo-Realism....and talking briefly about the key films, including "Roberto Rossellini's The Bicycle Thief." Ahem.

Unless I don't know as much as I think I do, that's an awfully big mistake.

Be warry of asking me a Fellini question.

If you really liked La Strada, go with Nights of Cabiria. If you're going for his highest technical achievement, 8 1/2 (his biggest contribution to film, though not the story that resonates with me the most). For the most iconic (think Anita in the fountain) La Dolce Vita. Those are the biggest three, imo, outside of his breakthrough La Strada.

I just realized that I have never seen an Italian film.

Unless you count that episode of I Love Lucy where she stomps the grapes to prepare for a part in an Italian movie.