I think as film majors or “art examiners”, we’re so focused at how the story has been told and how many “rules” have been broken – how unusual is the telling of the story – and from that alone we’re impressed. However, before that, we should ask ourselves is this story worth telling. For what reason is it being put out there? Unfortunately we’re too quickly amazed by how unusual the telling is that we forget what is being told and isn’t that the basic point of art, it’s portal for stories to reach those who need it. “Art should comfort the disturbed, and disturb the comfortable.”
My amazement with a film like Fellini’s Eight and a Half is Guido, the character himself and who he represents which happens to be Fredrico Fellini. It’s fascinating how a man like that willingly opens himself up for the whole word to see, admitting his flaws sometimes with or without explanation. A film like this should not be watched with artistic freedom of expression in mind. This right away eliminates the possibility of any stimulating thought. And we sit there catatonic and passive to what we perceive, only amazed by the surface of it all – how it’s made. We are instantly forgiving and therefore not asking ourselves why, which is the most important question if we are here to understand human behaviour.