Caligula (Unrated Version)

Rating:
Summary: I need a shower
Review: What a horrid, disgusting little movie "Caligula" is. If anyone knows much about history, then thay know that Caligula was an insane Roman Emperor who had most inappropriate relationship with a lot of women (including a prostitute and his sister), played sick games with gladiators and political opponents, and was too self absorbed for the Imperial Senate to let rule. That story would be very interesting to tell, and to film. But this is not that movie. I guess I should have known better than to go watch a Bob Guccione movie (for those of you who are unaware of who Mr. Guccione is, he is editor in cheif of "Penthouse" magazine). But I like Malcolm McDowell, and it was about one of my favorite historical periods, so I took the chance. The plot of the movie is as I had stated above. We are introduced to Caligula while he is commiting the moral crime of incest. He is then summoned by the current Roman Emperor (played by Peter O'Toole), and sees (and approves of) the perversions and corruption of the current throan. After O'Toole's death, Caligula is appointed Emperor, and then brings the Empire through the most depraved and perverted era of human existance. The violence in the movie is done with such a combination of malice and nonchalance that it was hard to take, even for me. The many (many) sex scenes are handled much the same way, with all the sensitivity that an ape would have. "Caligula" has to be the most unpleasent movie I have ever set through and watched. There was absolutly no redeeming value to this move what so ever. The spirit of the movie is so mean that it is almost like the directors (well Guccione anyway) is daring you to like it. I have a feeling it will appeal to only the most hardcore members of the S&M lifestyle. I usually don't have a problem with some sex and violence in a movie for gratuitous sake only (look at my reveiws for the "Friday the 13th" movies); but this was too over the top, completly and pointlessly sleezy. I just couldn't stomach it. The cast is an odd assortment. Like I said, Peter O'Toole is present, which really sort of shocked me; I would have thought he would have been above such junk as this. Malcolm McDowell I can imagine in a movie like this; his Caligula is like Alex from "A Clockwork Orange" if Alex had remained unchecked. Helen Mirren looked totally lost here, and indeed she probably was. And the rest of the cast was filled out by "Penthouse" centerfolds who are subject to humiliations innumerable. I would like to see a movie that takes the material about Ancient Rome and the Emporer Caligula seriously. But not this piece of junk; not by a long shot.

Rating:
Summary: I am a GOD!!
Review: Caligula is classic. The whole movie os one perversion after another. The only thing that separates the sex scenes is the violence and the buffoonery. If you have that special girl that hates or won't watch porn movies with you, give this a try. It's basiclly the most high budget porno ever made. After it's over you can strip down naked, march around with your arm strecthed out with the thumbs up, and see what happens.

By far the best scene is the Roman orgy with the senator's wives. Holy moly for only 5 gold coins you could do whatever you wanted to them.

The 'wedding gift' from the emporer is also pure lunacy. To not only have your new bride, but you yourself lose your virginity to the emporer is a night you'd never forget. I just hope he washed his ring when he was done.

All in all this movie is insane. Not for the timid hearted and definately not for prudes. If you enjoy historic films, maybe this will have some interest for you. If you're just a perve, this should be one of your all time favorites.

Rating:
Summary: Pretty good. Generally, historically accurate.
Review: This movie was very shocking the first time I watched it, and I could not come to any conclusions. I think that it requires a second viewing to adjust to the naked brutality which is present in almost the entire film, but it will be worth it.

On second viewing, I found it to be a very realistic approach to potraying Ceasar-Era Rome. It wasn't civilized; it wasn't Athens. It was Rome, filled with political intrigue, deceit and Emperors with near dictatorial power. I've read Suetonius' The Twelve Caesars, and the potrayals of both Tiberius and Gaius Caligula are accurate. Tiberius did keep a harem of young boys and girls to indulge his perverse sexual fantasies, he did have a building full of copulating couples, this was all accurate in the film, and I think the gritty way it was made in the film is correct; you are meant to be shocked and perhaps outraged at his behavior.

The same goes for the Title character, Caligula. If Tiberius was bad, Caligula was worse. From killing Tiberius to violating bride and groom at a wedding to having people killed at his whim, he was certainly outrageous. His over-the-top performance in this film was truly...fun...to watch, and the same goes with the rest of the cast, the acting is simply superb.

One gripe is that the sex scenes added post-production by the new financier, Bob Guccione, are gratuitous and seem slightly out of place. Overall though, the movie is a enjoyable romp through the seedy underbelly of the live of Rome's most infamous Caesar.

Rating:
Summary: Historically accurate pornography
Review: Don't get me wrong, this film is not a porn flick. However, take out all the history and what you have is a porn flick in togas (mostly out of togas, actually). This is Rome in all its disgustingness; for anyone, like me, who is interested in Imperial Rome, this is a must-see. Underneath all its grandeur, this was the Roman Empire, and this was the reign of Caligula.
The problem with this film, being produced by Penthouse, is that it fails to look closely at Caligula's mind and motives, focusing instead on the ample opportunities his reign afforded for X-rated, rock-hardcore pornographic sequences. The incredibly gratuitous lesbian tryst while Caligula, his sister, and his wife engage in a threesome is completely unnecessary and has nothing to do with the story; at least the orgies, uncomfortable as they are to watch, are instigated by the Emperor and illustrate his moral decadence and show his decline. The scenes are unashamedly graphic and repugnant, but as I said before, this is historically accurate pornography; it really happened in Rome, and sugarcoating it won't help anything. The extreme violence will also make some squeamish, especially at the end (I assume we all know how Caligula's brief reign ended).
I think McDowell does a fine job as Caligula, but he is better in A Clockwork Orange.
The problem with this film is that the producer messed with it in order to make it worthy of the name Penthouse Productions, against the wishes of the screenwriter and director. Is it worth owning? That's a matter of opinion; for me, one viewing was quite enough. But, as I have said above, if you want to know the [...] side of Rome (which grew larger as the Empire declined), this is the best example you will ever find.

Rating:
Summary: True Rome
Review: This movie is at first shocking. Be prepared for realistic adult scenes. The first time I saw the movie I was disgusted with it's content. The second time I watched it (being prepared for the shocking scenes) I learned to appreciate the movie. It defenitley is a movie like no other. It got me interested in the pre-christitan rome era. The people behind this movie did their homework. Ancient Rome was realy this messed up (as far as values go). Everything that Caligula says and does in the movie is pretty much what is documented in the text books. His immature passwords, his joy for emabarrasing the senetors as well as their wives, his want of slow deaths so his victoms can feel the pain of dying,even his strolls in the dark alleys of the city were Caligula realy did end up in a jail for fighting. That happened many times in real life. This movie not only gives you the real Caligula, but also the real Rome. Watching this movie is like being a fly on the wall in ancient Rome. Although the DVD claims to be unedited I beleive there is still more scenes as well as extended scenes. I heard that Caligula rams not just his fist but rather half of his arm up the senators/victoms rectum. Also on the making-of-feature they show a scene were Caligula is about to sacrifice an ox with a giant hammer and misses on purpose smashing it over a gaurds head instead. The music is superb, both errie and triumphant. The background sets are incredibly realistic. Tiberius is disgustingly scary/freaky. However the camerawork is BAD. With the camera man zooming in and out and moving from side to side, it looks as though it was practice footage, like screening footage. Thankfully only a few camera scenes are 3rd rate. I recommend this movie for anyone who is interseted in real-life Rome, Caligula, or both. Again be prepared for some shocking adult scenes.

Rating:
Summary: An unintended joke?
Review: This movie sits right up there with "Showgirls" as one of the most outrageously BAAAAAAAAD films ever made---the script, direction, acting, camera work, production values...are just unbelievably cheesy.

About the only half-OK parts of the film are the sex and nudity, a few of which are really twisted and difficult to watch (e.g. Caligula's intrusion into a wedding party during which he violates both bride and groom).

Many people have panned Guccione's sad attempt at high art as "pornography"---I certainly agree in that most porno films, you constantly find yourself fast forwarding to all the sex scenes.

Sad, when considering what a true cinematic genius like Stanley Kubrick could've done with this material.

Rating:
Summary: it's simply the worst
Review: No contest, this is the worst film I have ever seen, an abomination with absolutely no redeeming features. With horrendous editing, an inept, awkward and inane script by the very overrated Gore Vidal, and amateurish performances by all, this one is only for laughs, and would have been a terrific entry for a porno Mystery Science Theater episode.
It has little relevance to the history of the time, which I was hoping to see, and is a nightmare of gaudy plastic and plaster sets, and when clothed, garish costuming.

It's astounding that actors like John Gielgud would sully their careers with a trashy project like this; Peter O'Toole looks like a decomposing corpse as Tiberius Caesar, as he frolics in a pool with his naked "fishies", and Malcolm McDowell is perhaps the worst of all. His Caligula is played like an evil drag queen (this is one of those films where nasty and nelly are equated) and since he is on screen for a large portion of the film, it gets really tiresome.
As for eroticism, it is lifeless and pathetic...titillating perhaps for the Bob Guccione (who produced this rotting garbage) types of the world.
Since my only option is to give it 1 star, it goes to the fleeting moments when excerpts of Prokofiev's "Romeo and Juliet" and Khatchaturian's "Spartacus" are played in an otherwise unmemorable soundtrack.
Imagine a really bad low budget porno flick, in which people with no taste or talent have thrown millions of dollars at to make it into a Big Epic Production. That is "Caligula".


Rating:
Summary: It was hot "back in the day" at theatres...but not anymore
Review: I saw the first run of this strange film back in 1980 I think...and my date and I both thought it was a hot film...except for the gory parts that weren't as interesting as some of the sex scenes. But a few years ago I bought the DVD and watched in amazement at how badly this film comes off today. Its as if its an "R" movie trying to be an "X" movie. Nothing shocking in the sex department...and hey...what else matters in this type of film? We are not "freaky" if we just want to watch Star Wars or something....the film was produced by the man who owns Penthouse Magazine...and he was a freak...back in the day...but time has made this film look cheap and less than interesting now...Capt. Freaky says "save your money on this one"!

Rating:
Summary: Yes, it's true...
Review: When people refer to this movie as "pornographic", they are 110% correct. Many people refer to late night Cinemax, Showtime, and HBO as "pornography"...Therefor, when someone is told this movie is porn, they just don't realize that it really is graphic hardcore porn. Yes, graphically hardcore.
None of the following are simulated; they are the real thing:

-close up penatration
-oral sex (extremely graphic)
-homosexual oral sex (male and female)
-ejaculations, including one orally
-urination (male and female)

I am honestly surprised that this item is available on Amazon.
It is 110% graphic hardcore porn, with horrible acting within the brief periods between the sex scenes.

If you are looking for an educational film on ancient Rome, this is not for you.
If you enjoy X-rated films, this one may be for you.

Rating:
Summary: Mirabilis, Caelestis, et Diabolicus.
Review: Lesser ecstasy, the way of all flesh, this is Caligula. Perverse, almost religious. Pretentious production overblowing the proportions of its intent, the result could have been far more meritorious and grandiose. Gore Vidal, Bob Guccione, and Tinto Brass, gathered for the ultimate erotic film ever shown in common Theaters, the result as a cinematographic triumph, not happening, but it is still shocking. The only real statement of Caligula is to have dared shown the pre-Christian Roman Empire in its entire decadent life of rotten flesh, unlimited sex, clean, filthy, orgiastic parties of special magnificence, and cut-throat acts of bestial and deprave human willing, it is great and beautiful.
Caligula stands somewhere in the dominions of the erotic and the graphic of pornography. Tinto Brass narrates the lousy story of Emperor Gaius Germanicus Caesar, better know as Caligula, a script by Oscar Winner writer Gore Vidal, whose intentions to tell the fall from sanity and common sense into the Necromancies of power and the corruption of its touch, corrupted by the crown and its seasons, where frustrated by Director Tinto Brass, this project was to much for him, lacking the necessary vision and talent for an accurate direction, the other layer of bad sense was indeed its producer, Bob Guccione, at least Guccione had the daring eye to show the explicit even more explicit, but also lacking the talent for a better understanding of the story, it was about sex for him since the beginning. About the Historic Caligula, the main ancient reference to the megalomaniac character (besides the vague anecdotal writings), is: Suet. Gaius; Dio 59; Philo In Flaccum and Legatio ad Gaium; Jos. AJ 19.1-211. Tacitus's account of the reign is lost. However, he makes occasional references to Gaius in the extant portions of his works, as does Seneca. The later sources inherited a tradition about Gaius that can be shown to be biased and exaggerated. Besides these literary sources, inscriptions and coins also offer some information. So you can't be factually loyal to the Historic truth, and that gives you license to do pretty much anything you want, in this matter, the film can't be criticized concerning the story of its protagonist. Tinto Brass direction is un-personal and cold, a succession of images that moves schematically towards a much predictable ending. The first 30 minutes are composed in an inappropriate Theater style, which is un-intentionally enhanced by the Theatrical production design of the settings, it seems that Tinto Brass caught a better sense of pace and composition after shooting those scenes, and some how manage a more dynamic narration, even so, without any real soul. Bob Guccione shoot additional material to be added in the sex scenes, but the mediocre editing felt short inserting those scenes in a more imperceptible way.
Over the years I heard a lot of stories about the graphic and out daring ways of Caligula's sex scenes, so I expected to see real hard core images, stories that went from vast orgies, to a woman having sex with a horse, a man having intercourse with a duck, and a very long etc of perversities. So the movie didn't really shock me as I expected. Of course, if you are a very conservative or repressed person, the film will not only shock you, it will insult your moral values, Pastors, loyal Christians, and of course, Republicans, will also be severely insulted by the sex scenes, any way, the movie comes anticipated with an infamous fame, you can't make no mistakes, if you buy or rent it, don't blame the film for its controversial content, blame your self for being naive.
Caligula's sex content is way out dare from any previous movie that calls it self an erotic film, the difference is that Caligula does have pornographic inserts on it (plain shots of both sex's genitalia, oral sex, copulations, masturbation, etc). But the film can't be categorized as a porn flick. Pornographic movies intention is to show continuous explicit sex scenes without any real plot, always pushing for as many sex scenes as possible, Caligula doesn't have this, even though the story is poor, the sex is very well inserted in the life of the Roman Empire, expanding its plot with its main characters concerning the madness and greed for power, there is not a continuous pushing for exposure of hard core sex all over the film (at least not in the way of porn flicks), here lies the charm of the film, the sex taken in the social environment of the Roman Empire is an splendid depict of the period, every shot of sex intercourse is for free, but to be honest, I wouldn't have it any other way.
The performances of the Cast are both poor and flat. Malcolm McDowell wasn't enough for the role, his malignant looks felt short, an opportunity much dismissed. The Great Peter O'toole is barely O.K. but without any resembles to his masterful and classical performances. Helen Mirren and John Gielgud are completely wasted, the rest aren't really actors to be considered so.
The Woman are just beautiful, Teresa Ann Savoy (Julia Drusilla), Helen Mirren (in her younger years), as Caesonia, the Penthouse Pets are breathtaking, a real feast for the eye.
The photography is awful, boring colors and easy lighting, a mayor waste if you take into consideration the significant budget of the film. A good score does some goods for the film (including music by Sergei Prokofiev). Bad costume design and pretentious setting design surely captures the mood of the Roman Empire, but a fake Roman Empire. Caligula was released in 1980, at the very end of the 70's sex freedom, and just before Ronald Regan's repressed republican policies of censorship. Right now Caligula could not be shown in common Theaters in the U.S.A in its un-rated version. If it where a high pack action thriller full of blood, there will be no problem at all.
The DVD is O.K., the transferring can't be called bad, but a better work could have been attained, the 5.1 Dolby Digital is good, but with a poor distribution of the sounds. The Making Of Documentary is excellent and very complete (also un-rated).
So, even with all the bad elements in it, Caligula is brave and highly entertaining, and Cinema always needs brave and different projects to sustain it self. You can call it a piece of sh..., or a masterpiece, it doesn't matter, Caligula, Fellini Satyricon (oviously emulated by the producers of Caligula), and Gladiator are the only Roman films I'll see during Holy Weekend.