[Quick Summary: A series of adventures involving two youths in 1st century Rome.]
FOUR THINGS TO KNOW:
1) AN ODD SUBJECT MATTER. Only fragments of the source material, Satyricon (written by Petronius, (? - 66 A.D.)), exist. Someone wrote that the only things you needed to know are that:
a) it's supposedly the first recorded novel, and
b) it's very, very dirty.
2) FELLINI IS CHALLENGING THE AUDIENCE. Some films have a minimal plot and simply want you to experience and feel. These tend to be experimental films and not for everyone. I think this is one of them.
3) FELLINI IS CHALLENGING HIMSELF AS DIRECTOR. Though he got an Oscar nomination for best director, it didn't seem like a fun process for Fellini:
"I'm saturated with fatigue. This Satyricon is a massacre...and from the psychological point of view too: nothing wears me out more than this detachment I've imposed on myself. My temperament always tends toward identification with the characters. Here there's only a secret identification, an aesthetic one. This side-stepping I'm obliged to do all the time is an unhealthy operation, at least for the spirit. On one hand I have to have a total openness, which doesn't admit any structural, archeological conditioning; on the other I must bring all my professional skills to bear on the subject in a lucid, rational and above all detached manner. To integrate these two approaches demands a balance which I fear I haven't succeeded in finding yet. I feel like the chameleon, which always has to harmonize its coat with the colours surrounding it." - Fellini (my underline)
3) FELLINI IS AIMING FOR "INDECIPHERABLE CLARITY OF DREAMS". Film critic Roger Ebert wrote that this film is about excess and decay.*
If Ebert was right, I found it interesting HOW Fellini was trying to pull it off by creating a dream state:
...."Satyricon should have the enigmatic transparency, the indecipherable clarity of dreams. The greatest effort that this film has demanded of me has been to make two parallel and completely opposite operations coincide. In the film everything is invented: faces, gestures, situations, surroundings, objects. To obtain this result I have entrusted myself to the inflamed and impassioned dimension of imagination. but then I have had to objectify the fruit of that imaginative operation and detach myself entirely from it in order to be able to explore it afresh from a disquieting viewpoint, to find it afresh both intact and unrecognizable. The same thing happens with dreams. They contain things that belong to us deeply, through which we express ourselves, but in the light of day the only cognitive relationship we can have with them is of an intellectual, conceptual kind. That is why dreams seem to our conscious selves so fugitive, alien, and incomprehensible. So in order to give the film this feeling of alienation, I have adopted a dream language, a figurative cipher which will have the allusiveness and inevitability of a dream." - Fellini (my underline)
An example of the "clarity of dream" state is in the scene below:
- A rich man, Trimalichio, is hosting a party.
- At the party, a Male Prostitute amuses the guests with a story about a soldier who is supposed to guard a man hanging on the gallows.
- The soldier sees a widow nearby weeping at the tomb of her husband.
- He goes to comfort her and they have sex.
- Afterwards, he goes back to the gallows, but the body is gone. The man's family has taken him off the gallows.
- The soldier is in a cold sweat now.
- Note how the prostitute is telling this story to amuse the dinner guests (sort of dreamy situation), but the story itself has a clarity about it, a neat solution to both the widow's and the soldier's problems.
Scene 23 Tomb of Ephesus (In the Male Prostitute's Story). Interior. Night.
474
The widow of Ephesus is happy and serene, and looks more beautiful and less pale. She is combing her hair with calm and a certain satisfaction.
475
She turns at the soldier's entrance.
The soldier is very upset; he can't find words to speak at first.
Finally he speaks.
SOLDIER: They've stolen a body.
The widow goes to him, looks at him with the air of not understanding, worried.
SOLDIER: Yes, while I was with you, the thief's relations carried his body off.
476
The soldier is even more gloomy. He mutters to himself.
SOLDIER: I know the penalty the law provides...a lingering death...Useless to wait; I'll do it myself...with my own hands.
The soldier takes out a short wide sword. Stares at it, unable to decide to kill himself...
477
...but the widow takes his arm, and smiles tenderly at him.
WIDOW: No, my dear. To lose the two men in my life, one after the other, would be too much.
The widow kisses the soldier, who still hasn't understood what she's getting at.
478
Then the widow indicates the body of her husband; with a gentle and sweet smile she says:
WIDOW: We can substitute this for the missing corpse...
479
The soldier smiles with gratitude. The lady adds:
WIDOW: I'd rather hang a dead husband than lose a living lover!
At these last words we hear a chorus of laughter echoing, as if these were an invisible audience; it's the laughter of Trimalichio's guests who have been listening to the Male Prostitute's tale.
WHAT I'VE LEARNED: I heard someone recently say that it's the power of ideas that make a story work. Trying for "the indecipherable clarity of dreams" is so unlike any other writer out there and I think it makes Fellini's work special.
Fellini's Satyricon (1969)**
by Federico Fellini & Bernardino Zapponi & Brunello Rondi
Based on the novel by Petronius
* Film critic Roger Ebert actually visited Fellini's set while this film was being shot! He wrote two varying reviews: in 1970 and 2001. I especially liked how he summed it up in 2001:
What is the sum of all this effort? A film that deals in visual excess like no other, showing a world of amorality, cruelty, self-loathing and passion. Did Fellini see his “Satyricon” as a warning to modern viewers, an object lesson? Not at all, in my opinion. He found an instinctive connection between Petronius and himself–two artists fascinated by deviance and excess–and in the heady days of the late 1960s saw no reason to compromise. “Fellini Satyricon” is always described as a film about ancient Rome, but it may be one of the best films about the Summer of Love–not celebrating it, but displaying the process of its collapse. What is fun for a summer can be hard work for a lifetime. (my underline)
** For writers seeking more about this film, the published version of the screenplay has a lot of in-depth material, including:
- Two essays
- An interview with Fellini
- The treatment, with preface by Fellini
- The screenplay, which is broken into 10 sections