The Name of the Rose (1986)

The Worst Film Ever

It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

I am going to check this movie as a movie. The book doesn't count. yeah, it is based on a big novel, but a movie most stand by itself.What do you get from an ambitious director, ambitious screenwriters and a really giant project? You either get a really great movie or whatever the hell the last airbender is.Everything in this movie is great: From the medieval era locations to the photography, to the casting, to the dialog, to the scenography, to the acting. The ending feels rushed: you've been building this movie into a climax that just shine for a second and then dies. Then the ending comes promptly. Sure, everything in the end is solved, but it leaves you unsatisfied none the less.Great movie from a really hard to read novel. Watch it and bring the popcorn.

Continuing my plan to watch every Sean Connery movie in order, I come to Name Of The Rose (1986)Plot In A Paragraph: William of Baskerville (Connery) an intellectually nonconformist friar investigates a series of mysterious deaths in an isolated abbey.After a three year break, this was a much different Sean Connery who returned to cinema's. Reinventing himself as the older, wiser mentor. In the first of 3 great performances in a row, Connery delivers an absolutely wonderful performance. Imagine if Sherlock Holmes was an old monk, and you get William of Baskerville.Sean Connery's career was at such a low point away from Bond, then he was asked to read for the role, which he did, and then Columbia Pictures refused to finance the movie when director Jean-Jacques Annaud cast him as the deemed him box office poison.What we have here is the premise of a great movie. Sadly it's filmed in such a way, that at times it's so dark, it's hard to see what is actually going on. The screenplay is lacking at times too. There are so many good things in this movie, most of the performances, the reconstruction of the period, the over-all feeling of medieval times, that if the story had been able to really involve us, this would have been a brilliant movie. As it is, it falls short, but is still a really good movie. Ron Pearlman is heartbreakingly good in his supporting role, as is F Murray Abraham and Bond Villain Michael Lonsdale. However based on this performance, I would never have guessed that Christian Slater would still have an acting career 32 years later. Columbia Pictures fears proved to be founded as Name Of The Rose only grossed $7 million at the domestic box office. However it was a decent sized hit internationally adding $70 million to its total.

It was the most realistic movie I have watched about medieval times' church and its administrations. Make ups, costumes and the character choices were just right. The places, the castle the atmosphere can make you believe that there used to be cameras at that time. Other than that the gist was very clear and on the point. No explanation needed about that I am sure. And is also a bit too easy to catch that pro-viewers might not like the movie that much. BUT I really believe that there are plenty of people that has to see/understand and deduce things from this movie. For most of them this movie had to be easily perceivable. My favorite subject and my favorite era, definitely loved the movie. But only thing missing was it making me "woo" that's why it is not a 10/10.

Basically, it's a mix of Sherlock Holmes in a 14th century monastery and science vs. religion.Fantastic film, everything about it is excellent: Production, acting, writing, cinematography, score, makeup. Great directing with excellent atmosphere, but realistic and surreal. Each and everyone in the cast is great, with an honorary mention to Ron Perlman and F. Murray Abraham.A great bunch of weird people in the cast (I recall watching the "behind the scenes" and the director(?) said that he wanted unusual-looking people).It's hard to believe that this movie wasn't nominated even for one academy award.