Classic Film Review: Was “Caligula” (1976, ’79, 2024) as bad as we remember?
- Caligula's reputation as a controversial film is rooted in the divergence between Gore Vidal's original script, which aimed for a complex historical drama, and the explicit content added by producer Bob Guccione, resulting in a mix of artistic ambition and prurience.
- The film explores the theme of absolute power's corrupting influence but is criticized for its gratuitous nudity and violence, overshadowing its historical drama despite an impressive cast and lavish production.
- The 2023 'Ultimate Cut' re-release attempts to align more with Vidal's vision, receiving mixed reviews; though improved, it remains a significant and polarizing part of cinematic history, maintaining a cult following for its unique blend of artistic and explicit elements.
Culture every morning
Always be up-to-date. Get the freshest on culture, every morning to your inbox.
Caligula, the infamous 1979 film directed by Tinto Brass, has long been a subject of controversy and debate. From its initial release to its recent re-edition, "Caligula: The Ultimate Cut," the film's reputation has been both maligned and revered. But how does it stand up to contemporary standards? Let's delve into the history, themes, and reception of this provocative epic to determine if it was as bad as we remember.
The Historical Context of Caligula
To understand the enduring fascination with "Caligula," it's essential to grasp its historical context. The film is based on the life of Caligula, a Roman Emperor infamous for his erratic and tyrannical behavior. The original screenplay was written by Gore Vidal, who envisioned a complex and nuanced portrayal of Caligula's rise to power and his subsequent descent into madness. However, the final product diverged significantly from Vidal's original vision due to the significant changes made by financier and producer Bob Guccione, founder of Penthouse magazine (see).
Guccione's involvement introduced explicit content that was not part of Vidal's script. This dichotomy between artistic ambition and prurient interest has contributed to the film's notorious status. Critics at the time were scathing, labeling it "sickening, utterly worthless, shameful trash" (see). Despite this negative reception, "Caligula" became a commercial success, albeit more due to its notoriety than its artistic merit.
Themes and Artistic Merit
One of the primary themes of "Caligula" is the corrupting influence of absolute power. This theme is encapsulated in the film's opening lines, which quote Mark 8:36: "What shall it profit a man if he should gain the whole world and lose his own soul?" (see). However, the execution of this theme was met with criticism. Vidal's original script portrayed Caligula as a decent man driven to madness by his power, while Brass's later version saw him as a born monster (see).
The film's artistic merit is a subject of debate. While it boasts an impressive cast, including Malcolm McDowell, Helen Mirren, and Peter O'Toole, the addition of explicit content detracts from its historical drama. The cinematic value is undeniable, with lavish sets and elaborate sequences that capture the excessiveness of a despotic Roman court. The film's use of nudity and violence is gratuitous, yet it serves to highlight the decay of moral standards under Caligula's rule.
The "Ultimate Cut" Re-Release
In 2023, a new edition of "Caligula" was released, dubbed "The Ultimate Cut." This version incorporates new footage and restores elements from Vidal's original script, aiming to showcase a more faithful representation of his vision (see). The restoration was met with mixed reviews. Some critics praised the new cut for its ability to provide a more coherent narrative and for its portrayal of the film's original themes without the gratuitous content (see). Others noted that while it is an improvement, the fundamental problems baked into the film remain, including its indecisive direction and unresolved thematic issues (see).
Reception and Legacy
Despite its notoriety, "Caligula" has developed a cult following over the years. It has become a staple in discussions about filmmaking's darker corners and the intersection of art and prurience. The film's enduring popularity can be attributed to its outrageous content and the morbid fascination it inspires. However, it is crucial to separate the artistic merit from the gratuitous elements. Helen Mirren, who appeared in the original cut for only about 20 minutes, has her role significantly expanded in the "Ultimate Cut," providing one of the film's best performances and embodying its artistic ambitions (see).
Critique of Caligula
While it is clear that "Caligula" is not for everyone, it does present an intriguing case study in filmmaking history. Here are some key points to consider:
-
Artistic Ambition vs. Prurience: The film's struggle between artistic ambition and prurient interest is central to its controversy. The original script aimed to tell a complex historical drama, but the addition of explicit content altered its tone and style (see).
-
Cult Following: Despite its negative reception, "Caligula" has developed a cult following. This is largely due to its bizarre confluence of artistic ambitions and pornographic content (see).
-
Historical Significance: The film's historical significance lies in its portrayal of Caligula's reign. It captures the excesses and decadence of a Roman court under a tyrannical ruler, providing a glimpse into the darker aspects of history (see).
-
Cinematic Value: The film's production value is impressive, with lavish sets and elaborate sequences that showcase the opulence of a Roman court. However, this is often overshadowed by its explicit content (see).
Conclusion
"Caligula" is a film that defies easy categorization. It is a complex historical drama marred by gratuitous content, yet it also presents an intriguing case study in the intersection of art and prurience. The "Ultimate Cut" re-release provides a more faithful representation of Vidal's original vision, but it does not fundamentally change the film's core problems. Whether or not "Caligula" is as bad as we remember is subjective. However, one thing is clear: it remains a significant part of cinematic history, provoking discussions about decency, power, and the human condition.
Ultimately, "Caligula" is a film that demands attention not for its artistic merit alone but for its place in the annals of filmmaking history. It is a reminder that once a movie is finished and preserved for all time, there's always a chance of reevaluation and newfound appreciation. Despite its controversies, "Caligula" continues to captivate audiences with its seedy absurdity and shameful opulence.
References:
- https://www.imdb.com/title/tt29703523/reviews/
- https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/caligula-the-ultimate-cut-film-review-2024
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caligula_(film)
- https://www.theguardian.com/film/article/2024/aug/07/caligula-the-ultimate-cut-review-ambitious-1979-shocker-minus-the-spurious-porn