Caravaggio (1986)

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

What we know of Caravaggio suggests a strutting brawler with a healthy sense of entitlement who lived amongst whores and thieves and hustlers and put them on canvas. His works' themes were sex, death, redemption, above all, finding the sacred within the profane. He lived at a time where homosexuality carried a death sentence and political intrigue normally involved fatalities in a society defined by the maxim "strangling the boy for the purity of his scream".You can't fault Derek Jarman for his cinematography, nor his recreations of Caravaggio's paintings and you certainly can't accuse the man of shying away from the homosexuality. But frankly, Jarman never strays beyond 80s caricature. Italian patronage becomes the 80s London art scene complete with pretty waiters and calculators. Sean Bean is a sexy bit of Northern rough oiling his motorbike. Tilda Swinton performs a transformation worthy of a Mills and Boons ("Why, Miss Lena, without that gypsy headscarf, you're beautiful..."). Jarman provides Caravaggio with a particularly trite motive for the murder which left him exiled.This could have been a visually stunning treatment of a man whose life was dangerous, exciting, violent and decadent but who nonetheless elevated the lives of ordinary people to the status of Renaissance masterpieces, looked on by Emperors and Kings. Instead, what you get is Pierre et Gilles do Italy. The pretty bodies of young boys are shown to perfection, but never the men who inhabit them. Jarman appears to satirise the London art scene, showing it shallow and pretentious. To use Caravaggio and Renaissance Italy to make the point is to use a silk purse to make a pig's ear. In fairness, this film remains visually stunning, but ultimately as two dimensional as the paintings it describes.

Derek Jarman has crafted a beautiful and unique work of art in "Caravaggio". Perhaps the fact that I have a great love for the work of the real Michelangelo Caravaggio, influences my judgment just a bit; It was quite enjoyable to see the paintings come to life, and to witness how they might have actually been created. In fact, much of Jarmans poetic film has the look of a lush, living painting. There is much to admire here besides the aesthetics; the talented and beautiful cast, led by Nigel Terry, the intense-looking Sean Bean, as Ranuccio, and the elegant Tilda Swinton, as Lena; the woman loved by two very passionate, and tormented men. The acting is all around excellent, but Nigel Terry as Michelangelo really stands out. He is great to watch, and brings life to a man the world knows not so much about. Also actor Dexter Fletcher was quite funny and likable in his portrayal of the younger Caravaggio. More than a historical, biographical account of the painter, this is more the study of a classic love triangle. Caravaggio's models were mostly street people, many of them also criminals, and it seemed that he often became personally involved with his subjects. His love for 'Lena' seems to be as strong, if not stronger, than his love for 'Ranuccio'. And this divided love has tragic consequences, for all involved. I didn't find "Caravaggio" an overly gay film, as the subject wasn't focused on obsessively, like other films of this nature tend to do. The love affair between Lena and Michelangelo was given as much attention as the relationship between him and Ranuccio. Therefore those who might feel a little uncomfortable with the subject matter, need not be, as it is actually quite accessible. Recommended, especially for admirers of the painter Caravaggio. As mentioned earlier, there are scenes that are modeled exactly on the paintings. To see these come alive is really something to behold. There is a new region 2 DVD from Germany that features the most beautiful transfer I have ever seen of any film. It comes close to "High Definition" quality, I recommend this as well.

One explanation for the anachronisms in this movie can be a way to stop the viewer from falling into a pure passive state of mind and forcing the mind to think "What's happening?" raising awareness ... and Jarman was a supporter of early TOPY (Temple Ov Psychic Youth) that created Coum Language with this goal. Derek Jarman does an amazing visual transformation with Lena (Tilda Swinton) that really stunned me, it's one of the most beautiful portrays on movies. In my mind the question remains why did Caravaggio killed Ranuccio Thomasoni? Carvaggio's broken heart from what? Was he beginning to love or did he just felt betrayed enough to kill Ranuccio? Maybe Caravaggio did fell in love with Lena's image (that was mostly is own creation).

It's been long since Caravaggio along with Wittgenstein created a new level in my personal movie picture register. I was fifteen and excited over any kind of ideas which has a lot to do with "another"; strange or at least different scope on reality. No surprise that I liked Caravaggio. Eventually Greenaway (Drowning by numbers and later Prospero's Books) has also found his place in that same box. And very slowly my love towards Jarman's movies receded.Is it a good movie? Scoopy has no answer to that question. Actually that question can't be answered. Caravaggio has stubbornly flat structure - it should not be a movie in the first place. And another question appears: can you be sure in Caravaggio - in Jarman's case, of any intention to make a good movie?As much as I can put aside artistic inclinations in all Jarman movies - i cannot forget the fact that regardless the time they were made, all look, talk, feel and smell the same. It is clear that articulating the scheme of the artist is of great importance. Esthetics comes first.That fact I see today as a big malfunction.