8½

BFI Film Classics

by D.A. Miller

Federico Fellini’s masterpiece 8 1/2 (Otto e mezzo) shocked audiences around the world when it was released in 1963 by its sheer auteurist gall. The hero, a film director named Guido Anselmi, seemed to be Fellini’s mirror image, and the story to reflect the making of 8 1/2 itself.  Whether attacked for self-indulgence or extolled for self-consciousness, 8 1/2 became the paradigm of personal filmmaking, and numerous directors, including Martin Scorsese, Woody Allen and Bruce LaBruce, paid homage to it in their own work.

Now that 8 1/2’s conceit is less shocking, D.A. Miller argues, we can see more clearly how tentative, even timid, Fellini’s ground-breaking incarnation always was.  Guido is a perfect blank, or is trying his best to seem one.  By his own admission he doesn’t even have an artistic or social statement to offer: “I have nothing to say, but I want to say it anyway.”  8 1/2’s deepest commitment is not to this man (who is never quite ‘all there’) or to his message (which is lacking entirely) but to its own flamboyant manner.  The enduring timeliness of  8 1/2 lies, Miller suggests, in its aggressive shirking of the shame that falls on the man – and the artist – who fails his appointed social responsibilities.

Genres: Film, Nonfiction, Essays

122 pages, Paperback

First published July 15, 2008

Reviews

[Eric · Rating 3 out of 5]

I read this immediately after watching the movie for the first time to help understand the more subtle aspects of 81/2. A lot of what's in here is helpful and insightful, but the overly-academic style is grating and, frankly, some of the points made are a bit far-fetched and smack of a college English essay making grandiose leaps and speculations.

[Tonymess · Rating 3 out of 5]

Unlike many of the BFI Film Classics series this one borders on an unreadable wankfest. Whilst there are moment of illumination, the use of “coda”, “thesis” etc make you feel as though you’re wading through some student’s submission where they think they’re smarter than they really are. The most disappointing of the series to date & fir a film I adore!!!

[Patrick McCoy · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have come to appreciate the films of Frederico Fellini very much and 8 1/2 is considered one of his masterworks. In this volume D.A. Miller takes a closer look at one of the auteur's signature films in BFI: 8 1/2 (2008). The book is divided in to three sections: 1. From No One to Someone, 2. From Auteur to Person, 3. From Substance to Style. Throughout the book Miller analyzes the film with great detail and makes some interesting points. for example he addresses the narcissism of a director having writer's block and indulging in personal fantasies. As well as how the film in essence is an exercise in style where substance is secondary. He also discusses Fellini's relationships with the church, women, marriage and other obsessions. It's another worthy addition to the BFI series.

[Ryan Chapman · Rating 1 out of 5]

Miller's essays are all filler, flitting from one idea to another and not bothering to cohere to any logical argument. This book was interesting at the beginning and highly frustrating by the end. To be honest, I felt somewhat condescended to, as if the reader should blindlingly accept whatever ad hoc observations the critic makes about the film. (There are pages and pages on the quote "I have nothing to say... but I will say it anyway," which Miller treats as a black hole, swallowing up all his knee-jerk theories. Many of which are contradictory.)

[Diane · Rating 5 out of 5]

I’ve read about two dozen of the BFI Film Classics books, and this was by far the best. Fun to read (the writing is excellent), provocative, and incredibly dense - in a good way - with information and ideas. No pages wasted on boring stuff. I’m sure I would have to re-read it (and re-watch the film) several times to unpack everything that’s here.

[Ryan · Rating 1 out of 5]

Miller's thesis, that 8 1/2 has no significant message in it's core, seems like a reasonable one to argue. However this essay is so rambling and disjointed that I had difficulty understanding both the structure and the validity of his argument. Not to mention that inappropriate analogies and word choice (e.g. Miller goes on at length of the role of the "ass" in the film) make this a fairly unpleasant read. Disappointing.