E LA NAVE … certainly deserves a place of honor is the master's creation—as the most eerie, genuinely Goyesque and intriguing rune, a surrealist and twisted vision using profuse intuitions and ambiguous understatements. That's why few movies can match this one. It does not require maybe that much expertise to acknowledge what a thoughtful movie this is, and, beyond being thoughtful, from what depths of genuine intuition it does proceed.E LA NAVE … is one of the buff's exams—the master has long ago already passed his exams, and now the buff faces this one—what will he/ or she, fair reader, make of this bizarre, strikingly funny, surrealist _capriccio ,once its very visionary nature is acknowledged and brought to full admission? Me, I'm a man aged in such Fellinianisms. I recognize quickly the artifacts of the surrealism contrived and forced; I can testify for the authenticity of the Fellinian creative intuition in E LA NAVE …;it's a fever of the Fellini—beyond—Fellini, at a stage without sentimental-isms and heartache; a coherent world-view, a satire and a bitter comedy. Maybe, just maybe, a surrealist cosmogony as well.Already in Fellini's time, cinema was long ago validated as art. There was no word of acknowledging or validating it as art; Fellini already comes after some giants. Nowadays as in Fellini's own time, some people, less discerning, seem eager to recognize DAUGHTER OF HORROR (which I comment on this site) as genuine surrealism—but to a lesser degree E LA NAVE …; now that's awkward. Because here Fellini the wizard went beyond ambitions and achieved this part—Goyesque part satirical take on a world long ago abolished and drowned; and some of those who know at least some of the important Italian cinema of the '70s and '80s (things like the Ottaviani brothers, the Avatti, and the master Fellini himself) will not fail to recognize rather promptly this blend and also this special flavor of temerity and decadence.Now of course most do not even need this; yet I would insist of taking by the hand the unconvinced few and dip them a little in this—what shall we call it—in this primordial soup, in this _cosmographic sketch. I bet you do not know many other musical sequences in the cinema as good as the glasses session in the ship's kitchen. They are good, are they not? You had some fun. Or the countless jokes issued by the master's inventiveness—beginning of course with the silent scene right at the beginning, before the color shift.The final Fellini was somehow the mellower; understandable. Do not be fooled by the down-talkers. They ignore the trade. Maybe those used with the first Fellini—or with the first Fellinis, should one say—failed to adapt and change. But for me, after the '60s Fellini only got better—if such a thing were possible. In E LA NAVE … there's nothing phony or fake; on the contrary, it's creepily genuine.Enjoy the style, the movement, the atmosphere, the approach! I have mentioned the scene of the glass concerto; there, the cinematographic phrase itself dances. What Fellini delivers here are not a few gimmicks and tricks but an original take. Here at least some schmucks who pretend to direct movies could learn at least some of the externals.

"And the Ship Sails On" is perhaps the only post-"Amarcord" Fellini film truly worthy of extravagant praise. The film is Fellini through and through. No other director or writer could do anything that feels quite like this. A wonderful, surreal absurdity, the film features a diverse cast of bizarrely engaging characters (including a lovesick Rhinoceros). Always engaging, completely unique, and rather special, this film is probably among my favorite Fellini efforts. It's not perfect (Fellini is such an auteur that he has a sense of humor that few others can fully appreciate all the time, and sometimes it's a little trying), but it's an excellent movie.8/10

Everyone seemed to expect something special from Fellini later in life, as if all that had gone before was just preparation for a master oeuvre that would make us fall to our knees. In that sense, he kept disappointing, and with this film probably more than most. There's nothing here but quaintness and nostalgia, with a gentle, almost Tati-esquire humour – intellectually, he was going backwards, if anything. Twenty-odd years later, Fellini is now fully in context and it is easier to accept. This is what Fellini did – like it or not - the simple observation of harmless caricatures, which is actually engaging, enjoyable, even a little intriguing. Nobody is intrinsically good or bad; everyone is a set of circumstances, more or less fortunate or unfortunate; nobody harbours grudges – even here – especially here, on the eve of World War I, the end of a golden era of genteel innocence.The first time I watched this I took against Freddie Jones' MC character. This time I liked him, or rather sympathised with him – mainly on account of the fact that since then I used to live in the next village to him in Oxfordshire where he was a well-known and amiable local character. Still regrettable though that he was clearly directed here to copy Giuletta Masina's gestures and mannerisms as closely as possible. As a journalist following events, he introduces us to the passengers on a luxury liner taking a group of opera singers, impresarios and dignitaries – including the Austrian Grand Duke – to the funeral-at-sea of a beloved diva. All of them are eccentric or charming in their own way and a succession of quaint scenes ensues as the voyage progresses – including a hypnotised chicken, a sickly rhinoceros, and a memorable scene in which the singers perform for the stokers high above the boiler room (quite a bit of this was clearly parasitised by Tornatore in "The Legend of 1900").It all has a deliberate artificiality about it. The sea, rising and falling serenely behind the windows, is, on closer examination, made of plastic sheet. At the end, the camera pulls back to display the set and the crew – a simple indication that we are all part of some grander machination, that we are all a bunch of fools on a sinking ship, and if we all took life a little less seriously, we might enjoy it a good deal more. Once you've got in the right frame of mind, this is highly enjoyable.

That's totally true, Adam. Fellini says in few minutes what directors and writers wanted (do they really want?...) to say in many ignorant movies, like Spielberg's or Cameron's movies. Pay attention that "ignorant" is not an injury, it's simply an adjective for those kind of movies that just don't promote the intellect. But, hey, we are talking about show business, not "art business" or "show art", but "show" and "business". But I really think it's a waste of time to do a movie just for people laugh or cry and do it mentally ill. So then it's not correct to call people like Spielberg and CIA. as "artists", because they have the same job as the magicians in children parties. Fellini is an artist, he makes real art, not just for making businesses or a great stupid show to people be delighted with the illusion of the happy endings.