 |
| An alluring, brooding poster for Tinto Brass's Caligula |
QUICK REVIEW:
The subject of the film: Caligula, who was a Roman emperor approximately 100 years A.C., as well as a sex-crazed maniac.
The film in itself is only worth 3 ♥'s, however, the place it has carved out for itself in film history, (along with the not irrelevant fact that it didn't spin an intolerable avalanche of accompanying epic, swords-and-sandal-art-porns in its vein), contributes to Caligula's growth beyond its own potential.
In a way it is refreshing to see an epic costume drama like this that suddenly both entails fisting and cumshots, and yet still ... Caligula, produced by Penthouse magazine, (it's only film to date), is a complete 70's freak-show.
The ending SPOILER with the appointment of the new emperor and the mooing-scene are spot-on, and the execution-scene impresses, but the film is generally wildly stagy, uncinematic and technically poor.
It was directed by Italian Tinto Brass (Salon Kitty (1976)) with additional footage, - more accurately all of the pornographic material in the film (spurting cocks etc.), - directed by the film's producer Bob Guccione (Lowball (1996)), who insterted the footage against Brass's wishes. The film is based on a script by Gore Vidal (Myra Breckinridge (1970)), which had way too many homosexual sex scenes in it (to suit the Penthouse taste) and was therefore rewritten by Brass. Both Brass and Vidal later disowned the film, which became a success fueled by the free press it got from the courts around America that actually (sensationally) tried to ban the film, but without luck; it was repeatedly deemed 'not obscene'. - It was, however, banned in Australia, where the uncut version has been banned at least into 2011!
That is the version this review is based on, which runs 156 minutes.
Watch an original trailer here
Cost: 17.5 mil. $
Box office: 23 mil. $
= Minor hit
What do you think of Caligula?
No comments:
Post a Comment