gavin6942 A series of disjointed mythical tales set in first century Rome.I have seen a handful of Fellini's work, certainly the better-known ones. And while I have not seen them all, I will go on record as of now (2015) and say this was his best work. The costumes, the use of color, the strange, exotic world of Rome where actors use flatulence for humor.This is unlike anything you have even seen. Not as colorful or exotics as "Donkeyskin" and not as depraved as "Caligula", this is still a Rome where debauchery reigns. Impressively, although homosexual acts and relationships play a central part, there is practically nothing explicit (male or female) in the film, and can easily pass as PG.

ath_steph_3000 Although this is clearly not one of Fellini's best rated movies, "Satyricon" is a fantastic modern science-fiction drama that is certainly worth seeing. It is true that the story lacks a red line, a plot that clearly interconnects each scene or scenario. However, if one watches it carefully enough and with an open mind, there is a story-line and character development in it. It is the life passage of a young man (Encolpius) and his friend and antagonist (Ascyltus), former gladiators who were taken to a foreign island and undergo diverse colorful, partly erotic adventures in dream-like sequences and images. You will find action in each scene but, more than that, Fellini is probably the only director who has managed, with this film, to create an understanding of what life in ancient Rome MAY have been like for the lower and middle-class ordinary civilians. Far from the bombastic installations as we know them from DeMille's monumental films, this is an abstract piece of art that deserves to be called a masterpiece that leaves room for interpretation and speculation about Petronius' ancient novel.

david-sarkies I really don't know what to make of this film because in one way it seems to be incredibly disjointed, pointless, and apparently going nowhere, but in another way the scenes are beautiful, intense, and clearly the work of a master film maker. It has been suggested that some people rate this film highly simply because it was made by Fellini, and as such is carried through simply by the name of the director. I would have to disagree with that suggestion because people who make this suggestion clearly do not understand what it being done in this film. In fact, I have to admit that I really do not understand this film either, but a part of my wants to watch it again in an attempt to do so, however I feel that I will need to read the book that it is based upon first.The interesting thing about this film (with the exception that my DVD had the film in Italian, French, German, and Spanish, but for some incredibly bizarre reason, not in English) is that the book that it is based upon is not extant. What I mean is that the Satyricon is an Ancient Roman novel in which half of the book simply did not survive, which results in a story that is basically disjointed and incomplete. It is not that the book ends half way through either, it is that we simply only have sections of the book so if you were to read it you would find yourself jumping constantly and pretty quickly getting lost.Fellini, in making this film, decided that he would pretty much follow the book in that way, and not actually try to fill in the missing pieces. When I watched the film initially I didn't actually realise that he had done that, and found myself quite baffled at what was going on, and when I discovered that he had decided that he would actually not attempt to fill in the gaps, the theory behind the film actually made a lot more sense.I have noticed that some Christian commentators have pointed at this film as an example of how we as a race (that is Western Europeans) have lost touch with the spiritual realm and have found ourselves in a society that is based purely on the physical and as such have discovered that society is in fact disjointed, pointless, and meaningless. If that is the case, then Fellini has made a brilliant piece of filmography that pretty much captures the sense of our society and our modern mindset.The two parts of the film that stand out is the feast and the slave ship, and I liked those parts simply for the way those scenes were put together. However what is interesting is that on the slave ship there is a wedding between the captain of the ship, and the protagonist of the piece (both of them being male). What we have in that scene is a sense that society has simply become completely inverted. Okay, with the debate regarding gay marriage running around society it is not something that stands out to us now, but back when the film was made it would have – in a sense what we are seeing is a society that has not so much collapsed, but rather lost its identity as it travels through history grasping at straws and finding that it is forever failing in the task of seeking out its new identity.

bbrooks94 I'm a fan of Fellini and usually can accept his indulgence and laziness, but this is a step too far. There are some positives to what is essentially an episodic, fantastical and depraved journey across imperial Rome. For example, it looks fantastic and there are genuine moments of beauty, particularly during the opening scenes within Fellini's hellish, claustrophobic, labyrinthine Rome. However, it is ultimately incredibly boring. Appalling characterisation, acting woeful (and embarrassing dubbing throughout) and the storyline nonsensical. With La Dolce Vita, or La Strada, there is enough brilliance to gloss over Fellini's self indulgence. Here, however, it is in the open. The traditional manic laughing characters and overall melodrama become annoying beyond belief, whereas usually I find them charming. Technically, it also has flaws. The editing only adds more confusion to the film's hectic narrative. It's a vision of a nightmare and somewhere in this mess there lies a haunting masterpiece.