Plot:
Caligula takes place during the Pagan Era of Rome. During this time, the current emperor of Rome, Tiberius, is murdered and his grandson, Caligula, takes his throne. Almost immediately after becoming emperor, Caligula begins his own demise. He murders anyone who displeases him, marries a courtesan, and forces the senators' wives to serve as prostitutes. Caligula even sleeps with sister Drusilla. One by one, Caligula overturns every orderly law in Rome and eventually humiliates the foundations of the once great nation. The Senate soon decides that Caligula must be overthrown and they murder both him and his family at the end of the film.
The Story Behind the Story:
The story behind Caligula stems way back into preproduction. The idea for the film was conceived by Penthouse publisher (yes, Penthouse the porno mag) Bob Guccione. Guccione wanted to make an adult film with “high art aspirations. Now he did not want to make a pornographic film because he considered porn to be “bad art.” Instead, Caligula would be good art which made a serious statement.
And the film certainly had potential to be good art. The script was written by best-selling author Gore Vidal and the film’s talented cast included Peter O’Toole (Lawrence of Arabia), Malcolm McDowell (A Clockwork Orange), and Helen Mirren (The Queen). However Guccione’s lack of good taste turned Caligula into the shit show that it is today.
Here’s what happened. After director Tinto Brass shot the film, Guccione was dissatisfied with Brass’ work. So even though principal photography was completed, Guccione and Giancarlo Lui shot additional scenes containing hardcore sex and inserted them into the already finished Caligula.
This is where the drama begins. Soon everyone involved with Caligula was either fighting for artistic control over the film or disassociating themselves from it. The original title of the movie was Gore Vidal’s Caligula, but the author quickly removed his name from the title in exchange for 10% of the profits. Even Brass removed his name as the film’s director and credited himself for “Principal Photography” instead. Malcolm McDowell regretted doing the film as well, stating “I was glad when the whole shamble was over...it was probably the most expensive amateur film ever made.” The actor also described Guccione’s additional scenes as unprecedented betrayal.
Guccione did not remain silent. He soon participated in the mudslinging and called Brass a megalomaniac, McDowell a shallow and stingy individual, and O’Toole a drunkard.
Caligula did in fact open on February 1, 1980 in New York, but without a press screening. The New York Times labeled the film as “the most expensive pornographic film ever made.” Variety called the film “a moral holocaust.” The overwhelming negative reviews did not bother Guccione. Instead, he retaliated by calling specific film critics failed artists, parasites, and remote observers.
Caligula eventually made its debut in Italy and was shown in six theatres. Shortly after its release, Rome’s district attorney Giancarlo Amati confiscated the film and had Caligula’s producer and Italian distributed tried in court. The ban was upheld and both men were sentence to prison for four months.
Back in the U.S., a print in the Saxton Theatre located in Boston, MA was seized by the Boston Police Department after breaking box office records for four days. This attracted the attention of Morality in Media, who quickly moved their banning campaign to Boston. Saxton Theatre, Penthouse, and Newsconcorp (which leased the theatre) were tried in court and were eventually found not guilty. When Caligula reopened in Boston, the theatre marquees’ read “Almost Banned in Boston.”
Over the next 21 months, Caligula grossed $13.5 million. Wanting to expand the film’s market, Guccione removed 6 minutes of hardcore footage and obtained an R-rating. Including video sales, Caligula grossed a total of $30 million.
According to Guccione’s vision, Caligula was to be the first film of a trilogy (all of which would exemplify the concept that “absolute power corrupts absolutely.”) In December 1980, Guccione announced that there would be a second film with a budget of $25 – 30 million. Furthermore, the film would revolve around the life of Catherine the Great. According to philosophy, Catherine the Great died while having intercourse with her stallion. Thankfully, the film stalled during the planning stage.
Caligula takes place during the Pagan Era of Rome. During this time, the current emperor of Rome, Tiberius, is murdered and his grandson, Caligula, takes his throne. Almost immediately after becoming emperor, Caligula begins his own demise. He murders anyone who displeases him, marries a courtesan, and forces the senators' wives to serve as prostitutes. Caligula even sleeps with sister Drusilla. One by one, Caligula overturns every orderly law in Rome and eventually humiliates the foundations of the once great nation. The Senate soon decides that Caligula must be overthrown and they murder both him and his family at the end of the film.
The Story Behind the Story:
The story behind Caligula stems way back into preproduction. The idea for the film was conceived by Penthouse publisher (yes, Penthouse the porno mag) Bob Guccione. Guccione wanted to make an adult film with “high art aspirations. Now he did not want to make a pornographic film because he considered porn to be “bad art.” Instead, Caligula would be good art which made a serious statement.
And the film certainly had potential to be good art. The script was written by best-selling author Gore Vidal and the film’s talented cast included Peter O’Toole (Lawrence of Arabia), Malcolm McDowell (A Clockwork Orange), and Helen Mirren (The Queen). However Guccione’s lack of good taste turned Caligula into the shit show that it is today.
Here’s what happened. After director Tinto Brass shot the film, Guccione was dissatisfied with Brass’ work. So even though principal photography was completed, Guccione and Giancarlo Lui shot additional scenes containing hardcore sex and inserted them into the already finished Caligula.
This is where the drama begins. Soon everyone involved with Caligula was either fighting for artistic control over the film or disassociating themselves from it. The original title of the movie was Gore Vidal’s Caligula, but the author quickly removed his name from the title in exchange for 10% of the profits. Even Brass removed his name as the film’s director and credited himself for “Principal Photography” instead. Malcolm McDowell regretted doing the film as well, stating “I was glad when the whole shamble was over...it was probably the most expensive amateur film ever made.” The actor also described Guccione’s additional scenes as unprecedented betrayal.
Guccione did not remain silent. He soon participated in the mudslinging and called Brass a megalomaniac, McDowell a shallow and stingy individual, and O’Toole a drunkard.
Caligula did in fact open on February 1, 1980 in New York, but without a press screening. The New York Times labeled the film as “the most expensive pornographic film ever made.” Variety called the film “a moral holocaust.” The overwhelming negative reviews did not bother Guccione. Instead, he retaliated by calling specific film critics failed artists, parasites, and remote observers.
Caligula eventually made its debut in Italy and was shown in six theatres. Shortly after its release, Rome’s district attorney Giancarlo Amati confiscated the film and had Caligula’s producer and Italian distributed tried in court. The ban was upheld and both men were sentence to prison for four months.
Back in the U.S., a print in the Saxton Theatre located in Boston, MA was seized by the Boston Police Department after breaking box office records for four days. This attracted the attention of Morality in Media, who quickly moved their banning campaign to Boston. Saxton Theatre, Penthouse, and Newsconcorp (which leased the theatre) were tried in court and were eventually found not guilty. When Caligula reopened in Boston, the theatre marquees’ read “Almost Banned in Boston.”
Over the next 21 months, Caligula grossed $13.5 million. Wanting to expand the film’s market, Guccione removed 6 minutes of hardcore footage and obtained an R-rating. Including video sales, Caligula grossed a total of $30 million.
According to Guccione’s vision, Caligula was to be the first film of a trilogy (all of which would exemplify the concept that “absolute power corrupts absolutely.”) In December 1980, Guccione announced that there would be a second film with a budget of $25 – 30 million. Furthermore, the film would revolve around the life of Catherine the Great. According to philosophy, Catherine the Great died while having intercourse with her stallion. Thankfully, the film stalled during the planning stage.
Today, Caligula is banned in Belarus and Canada (except for Quebec) and there are over ten different versions of the film.
Intensity Rating and Why (on a scale from 1 - 10; 1 being a film containing no blood, gore, or objectionable content whatsoever and 10 being completely unwatchable):
4 because the violence really isn't all that bad. In fact, it's often hokey and blatantly unrealistic. There was one scene involving sexual torture which made me squirm a little bit and another scene where Caligula's daughter is smashed on a marble staircase. There’s another scene where a man is castrated and his genitals are eaten by dogs (if I had a nickel for every penis that was gobbled up by a dog in the movies...). Now there are numerous scenes within Caligula which contain explicit sex (most of which occurs in background orgies). In addition, the film implies incest, bestiality, necrophilia, and rape, but never shows it. There's also a scene where Caligula rapes two newly weds and fists the groom. However all of the sex scenes within Caligula are either too outrageous or too out of place to take seriously. Most of the time, I was shaking my head, asking myself, "what the fuck," instead of being shocked. So for that reason alone, the sex scenes aren't that intense, they're just senseless.
Discussion:
Make no mistake about it, Caligula sucks (yes, that could be used as a double-entendre). But seriously, this movie is god fucking awful. And it's not bad in that "so bad it's good" way. No, this movie just blows and should be avoided at all costs.
The worst part about it is that Caligula is incredibly boring. It reminds me of that low budget Shakespeare shit your tenth grade English teacher used to make you watch because she didn't feel like explaining what the hell was going on in Hamlet. And you never complained because no matter how bad the VHS was, it was still better than having the bitch lecture you for 45 minutes. But Caligula lasts way more than 45 minutes. In fact the total running time of the unrated version clocks in at 2 and a half hours.
There is no reason to watch this film, except for maybe Malcolm McDowell. He's like a piece of corn in a big heaping pile of shit (no matter how gross the turd is, it's always kind of entertaining to see a yellow kernel stuck right dab in the middle of it). Other than that, this movie is a complete waste of talent. The direction is awful, the acting is cheesy, the story is dull, and the credits couldn't come soon enough.
Caligula does bring up one important question though- when should sex in the movies be considered art and when should it be considered porn? The creators of Caligula tried to convert porn into "good art" through the conventions of film and ultimately failed. So who decides when film sex is art? I think the answer lies in its purpose. If sex is employed for a logical reason (rather than to simply attract attention) then it's art. For example, sex can be used to advance a story line and therefore should be considered appropriate within the film's context. Unfortunately this hardly ever happens. Most sex scenes within today's movies, both big budget and independent, are inappropriate and meaningless. They serve no higher purpose rather than to arouse the viewer and draw attention to the film as a whole. Shit, some films are even marketed solely on their sex scenes (Havoc anyone?). Now remember I'm not debating whether or not porn is art, but rather if films which contain sex can be classified as art. Anyways, here's my final verdict on the matter. If you want pointless sex in your movies, then go watch porn. But if you're going to try to disguise porn as art then it better serve a purpose because any shit head can tell the difference between purpose and sensationalism. And that whole "absolute power corrupts absolutely" cover up is nonsense. The statement is better conveyed in this blog than it is through Caligula.
I’m going to end this entry with a quote from Roger Ebert. In his review of Caligula, he states, “Caligula is sickening, utterly worthless, shameful trash. If it is not the worst film I have ever seen, that makes it all the more shameful: People with talent allowed themselves to participate in this travesty. Disgusted and unspeakably depressed, I walked out of the film after two hours of its 170-minute length. That was on Saturday night, as a line of hundreds of people stretched down Lincoln Ave., waiting to pay $7.50 apiece to become eyewitnesses to shame.”
Grade:
Acting: D-
Lighting and Sound: D
Directing: D-
Story and Dialogue: E
Overall: D-
(P.S. I don’t go lower than an E)
Intensity Rating and Why (on a scale from 1 - 10; 1 being a film containing no blood, gore, or objectionable content whatsoever and 10 being completely unwatchable):
4 because the violence really isn't all that bad. In fact, it's often hokey and blatantly unrealistic. There was one scene involving sexual torture which made me squirm a little bit and another scene where Caligula's daughter is smashed on a marble staircase. There’s another scene where a man is castrated and his genitals are eaten by dogs (if I had a nickel for every penis that was gobbled up by a dog in the movies...). Now there are numerous scenes within Caligula which contain explicit sex (most of which occurs in background orgies). In addition, the film implies incest, bestiality, necrophilia, and rape, but never shows it. There's also a scene where Caligula rapes two newly weds and fists the groom. However all of the sex scenes within Caligula are either too outrageous or too out of place to take seriously. Most of the time, I was shaking my head, asking myself, "what the fuck," instead of being shocked. So for that reason alone, the sex scenes aren't that intense, they're just senseless.
Discussion:
Make no mistake about it, Caligula sucks (yes, that could be used as a double-entendre). But seriously, this movie is god fucking awful. And it's not bad in that "so bad it's good" way. No, this movie just blows and should be avoided at all costs.
The worst part about it is that Caligula is incredibly boring. It reminds me of that low budget Shakespeare shit your tenth grade English teacher used to make you watch because she didn't feel like explaining what the hell was going on in Hamlet. And you never complained because no matter how bad the VHS was, it was still better than having the bitch lecture you for 45 minutes. But Caligula lasts way more than 45 minutes. In fact the total running time of the unrated version clocks in at 2 and a half hours.
There is no reason to watch this film, except for maybe Malcolm McDowell. He's like a piece of corn in a big heaping pile of shit (no matter how gross the turd is, it's always kind of entertaining to see a yellow kernel stuck right dab in the middle of it). Other than that, this movie is a complete waste of talent. The direction is awful, the acting is cheesy, the story is dull, and the credits couldn't come soon enough.
Caligula does bring up one important question though- when should sex in the movies be considered art and when should it be considered porn? The creators of Caligula tried to convert porn into "good art" through the conventions of film and ultimately failed. So who decides when film sex is art? I think the answer lies in its purpose. If sex is employed for a logical reason (rather than to simply attract attention) then it's art. For example, sex can be used to advance a story line and therefore should be considered appropriate within the film's context. Unfortunately this hardly ever happens. Most sex scenes within today's movies, both big budget and independent, are inappropriate and meaningless. They serve no higher purpose rather than to arouse the viewer and draw attention to the film as a whole. Shit, some films are even marketed solely on their sex scenes (Havoc anyone?). Now remember I'm not debating whether or not porn is art, but rather if films which contain sex can be classified as art. Anyways, here's my final verdict on the matter. If you want pointless sex in your movies, then go watch porn. But if you're going to try to disguise porn as art then it better serve a purpose because any shit head can tell the difference between purpose and sensationalism. And that whole "absolute power corrupts absolutely" cover up is nonsense. The statement is better conveyed in this blog than it is through Caligula.
I’m going to end this entry with a quote from Roger Ebert. In his review of Caligula, he states, “Caligula is sickening, utterly worthless, shameful trash. If it is not the worst film I have ever seen, that makes it all the more shameful: People with talent allowed themselves to participate in this travesty. Disgusted and unspeakably depressed, I walked out of the film after two hours of its 170-minute length. That was on Saturday night, as a line of hundreds of people stretched down Lincoln Ave., waiting to pay $7.50 apiece to become eyewitnesses to shame.”
Grade:
Acting: D-
Lighting and Sound: D
Directing: D-
Story and Dialogue: E
Overall: D-
(P.S. I don’t go lower than an E)
Fun Fact:
Most of the penises in Caligula are circumcised. However, circumcision was not practiced in Rome at the time. Just saying...
No comments:
Post a Comment