Although I have recently watched some of Fellini's most famous films, after seeing this one, I drew a conclusion that CITY OF WOMEN can hardly be compared to any other movie from the Italian director. Since hardly any of Fellini's works leads us so intensely into the director's surreal world, into a tunnel of his erotic fantasies and lustful desires. At hardly any other moment, Fellini appeared to create such a satire on society, on decadence, on contradictions as well as on the established order like "the institution of the family." Moreover, Fellini seldom got as erotic as here, and strangely as critical of women. Yet, despite all the diverse characteristics of the movie, can CITY OF WOMEN be called a valuable work? <br /><br />Most importantly, it is necessary to say that if you feel ready to see it, please keep in mind one fact: CITY OF WOMEN is not for everyone. Because of its ambiguous nature, this film is for the minority of movie buffs and, moreover, it does not appeal to all Fellini buffs. On the one hand, the movie is a witty, hilarious satire with moments that make you split your sides. On the other hand, it is a sort of "clothed pornography" or "pornography with hardly any nakedness". Everything appears to be around sex and lust executed in more or less "tasteful" excesses. Let me analyze that in more details.<br /><br />Humans (both men and women) are reduced to the carnal aspect of existence. Feminists want to create a world without male dominance, detest penetration and highly criticize "fellocracy". Marijuana-induced generation of teenage girls aim at good fun and fast driving in trance. But not all characters are female characters since, according to an alleged proverb "these are men whose minds are absorbed by sex." There are two men in CITY OF WOMEN: the main character Snaporaz (Marcello Mastroianni) and his opposite counterpart Katzone (Ettore Manni). The former one is rather decent, still "normal" and "appropriate" male who searches the ideal woman. His "city of women" is idealistic and exists in his inner self, in his mind the climax of which is the ideal woman. The latter one is a true "conqueror", a male with excesses, with a number of women he has conquered by flesh. His "city of women" is more materialistic. It appears to be his villa of vibration, of fantasy, of decadence which is, at the same time, a tribute to lust and his marvelous vitality. He calls himself "Sanctus Crosfallus." <br /><br />Therefore, CITY OF WOMEN does not have much to do with LA STRADA where Fellini showed us a moving story, 8 1/2 or GIULIETTA DEGLI SPIRITI where he supplied us with an insight into a psyche, a person's struggles, fears and memories or even with LA DOLCE VITA where Fellini, despite all this immorality of sweet life, drew our attention to contradictory freshness. Here, there isn't much to say about the content and character development except for one thing: what their sexual life is...<br /><br />However, that superiority of depravity in CITY OF WOMEN does not mean that there are no similarities with other Fellini movies. After all, it is still Fellini in CITY OF WOMEN. The similarity has to do with three aspects: characters, Felliniesque nature combined with symbols and the unpredictable content.<br /><br />There are characters that resemble the ones from Fellini's earlier films. It is, first of all, Snaporaz who, like Guido in 8 1/2 (in both Marcello Mastroianni) copes with the madness of the world that surrounds him and tries to figure out his inner self. Katzone, though a male character, reminds me of Suzy in GIULIETTA DEGLI SPIRITI (memorably portrayed by Sandra Milo) with the weirdest ideas filled with erotic fantasies. Elena, Snaporaz' wife/mistress through her words "I am neither your nanny nor your mum" reminds me of Emma in LA DOLCE VITA who wanted to be a mother and a whore. The feminists remind me of the group of people visiting Giulietta and girls driving cars in trance of Marcello's friends in LA DOLCE VITA.<br /><br />Felliniesque nature of the movie is resembled in a reality blended with a fantasy. All occurs to be a dream, yet it is so powerful to feel this. Memories come at any moment and affect our subconscious sphere. This has to do with symbols. Police appears to represent the established order which is contrasted with Katzone, his house, his party as a symbol of sexual anarchy. A ladder that Snaporaz climbs symbolizes effort to achieve, effort to climb the bounds of reality. Storm appears to me as unstable desires and temporal nature of lust. Finally, train occurs to be a monotonous journey of life.<br /><br />Unpredictable action is revealed particularly at the end but also throughout the movie where we do not know constantly what is ahead of us, like it is the case with the future. That is something Fellini could do very well and he does not reject it in CITY OF WOMEN.<br /><br />Yet, at the end of my comment, let me come back to the question I asked at the beginning: is CITY OF WOMEN a valuable film, something you watch and are bound to remember? Unfortunately, I don't think so. It is rather a harmful and confusing movie which does not have much to offer, something even Fellini buffs criticize. If you overdo with something, you are bound to fail. And that is what defines the director's fault in this case. CITY OF WOMEN overdoes with the alleged belief that humans are only carnal creatures. Fellini shouldn't have skipped the spiritual sphere of mankind. <br /><br />Yes, CITY OF WOMEN indeed leads us into the tunnel of lustful fantasies. But tunnel is darkness and art is not there to lead us to darkness but rather out of it, to the spiritual horizons of light and beauty. Unfortunately, Fellini in his later years, totally forgot about that significant truth. 4/10