Caravaggio1986
Recognition
What makes this film worth watching?
3 members like this review
Curiously, I wasn't all that impressed when I first watched this. I thought it was strange, different, somewhat interesting, but not powerful. But recently I've found that it swims around in my mind and has left a mark on me, especially images and certain feelings. Though originally I gave the film only 3 stars, I came back to give it 4. There is something more to this for me, I just haven't exactly uncovered it.
Starring
- Noam Almaz - Boy Caravaggio
- Sean Bean - Ranuccio
- Jack Birkett - Pope Paul V
- Robbie Coltrane - Scipione Borghese
- Sadie Corré - Princess Collona
- Nigel Davenport - Giustiniani
- Dexter Fletcher - Young Caravaggio
- Michael Gough - Francesco Maria Del Monte
- Jonathan Hyde - Baglione
- Spencer Leigh - Jerusaleme
- Cindy Oswin - Lady Elizabeth
- Zohra Sehgal - Jerualeme's Grandmother
- Tilda Swinton - Lena
- Nigel Terry - Caravaggio
- Simon Fisher Turner - Fra Fillipo
Directed By
Executive Produced By
Produced By
Cinematography
Edited By
Written By
Story By
Music By
Poster & Images
Member Reviews (37)
I watched Sebastiane a decade ago and again last nite. Tonite I watched Carravaggio. I'm starting to get Jarman. Never mind coherent story lines, Jarman "tells" poetic imagery on a theme while keeping to the essential story.
In Caravaggio I couldn't figure out why some of the scenes were even there, perhaps only to show us the rich colors of the cultural times, and the juxtaposition of modern technology in the film was intriguing tho I don't get the rationale for it.
I was struck by the resemblance of his cute young assistant to Justin Timberlake.
Curiously, I wasn't all that impressed when I first watched this. I thought it was strange, different, somewhat interesting, but not powerful. But recently I've found that it swims around in my mind and has left a mark on me, especially images and certain feelings. Though originally I gave the film only 3 stars, I came back to give it 4. There is something more to this for me, I just haven't exactly uncovered it.
Though difficult to track, the film is a feast for the senses. The lighting is superb and the depth of the colors is wonderful. Very good job from the cast as well. Reading a brief biography of the artist on-line should help eliminate come possible confusion while watching the film. Definitely worth a watch….
great
I have had a very few favorite directors--Paradjanov, Jodorowsky, Svankmajer, and such. And now, I'm adding another director to my very favorite. This is similar to Paradjanov's Color of Pommegranites. I'll watch this one more than once, as there are so many layers, and facets of action, different interlocking time periods. I love the fictional scenes in the mind, something I've never seen before.
This is meta-fiction in multiple levels, reminding of the depth each moment can bring if we fully engage with it, including with artistic genius.
I was more enamored by the videography, or set design, the visual appearance moment by moment, than the paintings within, which seem sadly lacking in comparison. The richness of the lighting, costumes, and background colors is astounding.
The actor who plays Carvaggio has the charisma to drive the plot, a man to fall in love with.
And I've never seen Tilda anywhere near as fetching as this mistier role.
Each scene is beautiful almost beyond bearing.
excellent! This creation in progress
Tilda is always ..at her best .. and here in Caravaggio is no exception.
Beautifully staged, the lighting and color is beautiful. However, it's long. And drawn out. After a while.
The usual Derek Jarman narrative incoherence but with many striking images illustrating the art of Caravaggio. Anachronistic items popping up in various scenes did nothing to clarify the filmmaker's intent. However seeing the young Tilda Swinton was more than worth the time.
moving, poetic, brilliant and smokey. Loved it
Very dark, but true to the look, feel and spirit of Caravaggio's art. The cinamatography is striking, and has very close resemblance to the style of Caravaggio's paintings. What is discordant are the numerous anachronisms, sounds and details simply out of place. The film requires you to have some knowledge of Caravaggio's life history, or you will feel in the middle looking to find where and why you are there looking on.
As is usual for Jarman, something of an indulgence. But some of the best art direction ever. And Tilda Swinton is great in her debut.
Style, style, style over substance. But it's very visually appealing and sensual, if that's enough for you.
Agreed with another reviewer: "Jarman "tells" poetic imagery on a theme while keeping to the essential story ... I couldn't figure out why some of the scenes were even there ..." -- a big YES on the poetic imagery; and agreed the "interludes" were annoying, but mercifully each was brief. The juxtaposition of modern technology -- the calculator, the old car, the typewriter were intriguing for the wtf? quality ... are you paying attention?! lol
I paused early in the film to look up the typically obtuse and overly detailed Wikipaedia entry ON Carravaggio for some context and it was useful also to have seen the paintings in advance of their debut in the film as tableaux, as canvases and as paintings.
Criticism: Too much modern macho man in the painter's aggressive pacing and posturing while eyeballing the models/tableaux and in his stabbing brushstrokes.
His art transcends time like consciousness does. The sounds and style make no difference to me because man has not changed lest for technology
I thoroughly enjoyed Jarman's treatment of the artist, playing with timeframes to show, perhaps, how timely he was and how he was treated. Historically, artists have been admired and revered and often considered dangerous as well as noble. He gives us an artist who was truly a genius and ambiguous about his sexuality as it simply didn't seem to matter.
Hmmmmm. Slow on story, but beautiful scenes...
Visually excellent especially as it was filmed entirely on a soundstage.. Glad I knew Caravaggio's story before I saw the film or I would not have known what was going on.
Didn't like the awkward filmmaking.
interestingly different
Was OK. Kind of lost a bit of through line as it went along. Not one of my favorite films.
Beautifully shot, compellingly told.
I liked this movie very much.
Stunning imagery and sensuality. I'd heard of this film but have just seen it. How fortunate I am.
Odd. Halfway through, one of these Renaissance characters suddenly has an electronic calculator.
Didn't really work for me.
Tis drama started off well, but than became bizzare and morbid The rambling prose lost the essence of the story.
meh
not good
I'd like to watch it all again... very poetic and slightly disturbing with tension.. strange and poignant !
AMAZING...GOOD ACTING...EXCELLENT
As to be expected from a Jarman film, it is strange yet compelling. I admit to having problems with anachronisms, though I suppose they make the point that this is not merely history but most relevant to our time and world as well. The acting is excellent. A poweful and moving, even jarring, film.
Beautiful, strange, excellent.
As a teenager I was first exposed to images of Caravaggio's painting. I was always aroused and intrigued by the male images, rough, sexy, beautiful with undertones of violence. Jarman captures those aspects in his characters.
LOVED IT...amazing and gorgeous
Interesting
Hypnotic
No subtitles! :(
GREAT LOOKING ACTORS