The Name of the Rose

Rating:
Summary: medieval mystery
Review: "In the Name of the Rose" has noble monk William of Baskerville (Sean Connery) dispatched to a Italian monestary to check out a series of murders. He and his novice, young Adso (a very young Christian Slater), begin to investigate the crimes with scientific method and theory that the regulor church considers borderline heresy. In the middle of the investigation William's old Inquisition master Bernardo Gui (F. Murray Abraham) arrives to begin a witch trial, and to directly contradict William's suspicion that the monks are hiding a vast secret stash of forbidden books. A lot of people really didn't like the movie; they said that it was too hard to figure out, that they weren't too sure exactly what was going on. Well, to a degree they are right. You must pay attention or the clues are going to be meaningless later on. I really liked the film's message that books are very important; you do not really see that in movies a whole lot (granted, this was based on Umberto Eco's bestselling novel). It also has a message that was learned during the Nazi regime; that books should be read and then evaluated, not just destroyed out right. Sean Connery plays William as a fore runner to Sherlock Holms, a man who uses deductive reasoning and a kind of Middle Ages version of "CSI" to catch the killer. His dark mirror is Gui, who uses torture and threats of ex-communication with the Church to extract a confession out his victims. Christian Slater is dose a good job of playing the Dr. Watson to Connery's Holms. Adso is also smart, quick, and resourcful on his own, most of the time; that is until he meets and sleeps with a peasent girl. The movie is about the changing of the times; when the Dark Ages of Europe were comiong to an end. Peasents were tired of being subjected to the whims of currupt Church officials, where science was replacing religion, and books were beginning to be feared for what they might be right about. I really think this movie is for anyone who wants to really think about what they are watching, instead of having it spoon fed to them.

Rating:
Summary: A Darkly Atmospheric Murder Mystery
Review: This adaptation of Umberto Eco's complex novel of the same name captures the essential mystery and mood while tossing aside many of Eco's defining examinations of history and philosophical thought. Director Jean-Jacques Annaud evokes the gloomy, primitive, wood-fire atmosphere of medieval times as Brother William of Baskerville (Sean Connery) and his apprentice Adso (Christian Slater) arrive at an abbey to investigate a mysterious death. As deformed characters slip in and out of the shadows and information is uncovered, a possible conspiracy emerges that hints of not only physical danger but of spiritual and intellectual oppression.

The major disappointment of this film was inevitable: it misses the intricate story development that made Eco's novel so compelling. The result is occasional confusion and chaos as motivations and characterizations are glossed over too quickly to give pivotal scenes resonance. Despite this, the film is much better than I expected, with a fine performance by Sean Connery and an over-the-top one by F. Murray Abraham who plays the nastily controlling cardinal Bernardo Gui. The whodunit plot is engrossing despite a relatively slow pace, and it builds well toward the end.

If you are a Sean Connery fan, you can't miss this film. Even if you aren't, this film entertains with its evocation of medieval times and a murder mystery that has implications beyond the walls of the abbey.

Rating:
Summary: ...stat rosa pristina nomine, nomina nuda tenemus...
Review: Viewers may arrive to Jean-Jacques Annaud's film from different directions, and, consequently, have various opinions. For those who Umberto Eco's book was so good that they couldn't get enough of it, Annaud may be a little disappointing--it may be argued indeed that the film conceded too much to the movie-goer's taste and deviated from the book. Let's save this polemic for other fora...

For those viewers who like at least one of the following: (1) a good 'whodunnit' movie; (2) a credible transposition of the medieval church environment (i.e. Western European / Catholic) in film; (3) an intriguingly good film that captivates an open mind, regardless of educated props and such, this film is indeed an event. To the first point, suffice it to say this film keeps the plot the same as in the book--and a lot has been written about the latter. In support of the other points, I should say Annaud's film is an audio-visual delight that strives for authenticity and manages to achieve it quite well. The monastic environment where everything takes place is elaborately recreated with means such as the wonderful chorals performed by the actors themselves, medieval-styled clothing (make and fabric), lighting, replicas of medieval books, and so much more. Plenty of food for imagination!

There is one exception one may take from the approach in which the film's author decided to cast the characters. Despite their having distinct physiognomies, one may say, they are distinctively ugly. A matter of taste or maybe commerce? The two overlooked (indirect) advantages of such casting are well worth mentioning. Most actors were far away from mainstream, and they speak in an English accented by their own tongues. What a suggestive allusion to an environment in which Latin was spoken with accents!

The added benefit of this DVD, relative to the tape versions, comes with the inclusion of an interview with the director and details about how the film was made. One's appreciation of this film can only increase upon learning the details that went into making the film. I found only one aspect lacking: the quality of the digital image shows the film's date by missing digital remastering. Most probably, the producer of this version was tentative about its success--I hope they will reconsider and put more resources into it. Given its list-price, this DVD is well worth the money though!

...the rose of yesterday remains [only] through its name...


Rating:
Summary: great movie moments
Review: i liked sean connery in this movie he acts like father-son relation with christian slater.movie handles the policy of church in middle ages.soundtrack of the movie fits perfectly to
the scenes,great movie,great sountrack

Rating:
Summary: more than just an excellent medieval thriller
Review: At last this great film has been released on dvd.

A medieval monastery may not sound like a setting for a thriller, yet this is what Arnaud achieves. In the film (and in the book on which the film is based, sometimes losely) Brother William of Baskerville (played by Sean Connery), a Franciscan monk, is asked by the abbot of an abbey in North Italy early in the 14th century to investigate a suspicious death. During William's stay in the abbey, more suspicious deaths happen, which all seem to be connected. Although the monks seem inclined to blame the devil or other supernatural forces, William is the prototype of a rational person putting the pieces of the puzzle together. Thus William finds that the deaths have something to do with one or more books which are being copied by monks in the library of the monastery. But he is not allowed to see the books in question.

This is where this film starts to transcend being merely a very good thriller. The action happens early in the 1300s at a time when there is no printing yet and all manuscripts have to be laboriously copied, a process which can take years and obviously limits the distribution of books to extremely few (it was not untypical for a royal library in the Middle Ages to have only 10 books...). The typical place where books where copied was in monasteries.

Yet here comes the rub : from the 13th century onwards a number of writings by Greek philosophers, in particular Aristoteles (repeatedly referred to in the film), are being rediscovered in Europe (often via muslim scholars in Spain) after having been lost for more than a thousand years. Aristoteles had advocated that there is a rational anwer to everything. Aristoteles' main philosophical opponent (although he was a pupil) was Plato who argued that the human soul was separate from reality. Saint Augustine (354 - 386 A.D.), who probably shaped Christian beliefs more in the first millennium than anyone, had relied heavily on Plato to emphasise that what mattered was the soul, that trying to give a rational explanation to events was tantamount to denying that God created the World. The result was a Christianity which for more than a thousand years was averse to rational scientific discovery. Until Thomas Acquinas (1225 - 1274 A.D, - who is mentioned directly and indirectly in the film) wrote possibly the most influential book of the second millennium in the Western world, the Summa Theologica. The book, soon endorsed by the pope (who was a family member...) argued that there was nothing wrong with rationality, because the more we research the more we would find out how well God made the world and as a result we would be even more in awe of the Creation (it only took a few centuries for the Church and science to clash anyway, but by then the genie was out of the bottle).

The film The Name of the Rose depicts this most crucial of all times in Western civilisation when knowledge about rational Greek philosophies started to seep through where books were copied - in monasteries and other centers of knowledge - but was kept unknown or was fought in a futile rearguard action. This is where the latent conflict resides : the Church initially believed it had nothing to gain from rationality, a philosophy which would seek its own answers instead of accepting as gospel the Church teachings. William of Baskerville has clearly already been converted to rationality and is the prototype of the new rational Western man, but the authorities of the abbey, who have locked away copies of manuscripts by Aristoteles in a secret tower in the abbey, are resolutely hostile to its dissemination. William stands for science, rationality and fairness, while the old guard stands for superstition (belief in witches, that burning cleanses the soul etc...), inquisition etc...

If you want to know how and why the dark middle ages evolved into renaissance, this film, apart from being a damn good thriller and also probably the most authentic depiction of medieval life (Arnaud apparently went as far as extracting tooth filling from some actors to make them look more real medieval...), will give you the best introduction.

A must