Rating: 
Summary: Historically, not that accurate, but a good movie!
Review: I first learned of Gentileschi my senior year in high school. I spent a semester doing a huge report on her in my english composition class. I have to say, this movie, although not completely accurate, does shed light on what life was like for the artist. She was not only a great painter, but a strong woman. This movie doesn't show this very well, and I have to say, that's disappointing. It's a good flick though. And if you can put the inaccuratcies (sp?) aside, then you should definately consider watching this.
Rating: 
Summary: Much less than I expected
Review: I have to agree with many of the other reviewers that the film's inaccuracies hurt it's credibility. I also found the overall film quality ( art direction, costumes, etc. ) to be good but not great. However, I enjoyed the depiction of the tools and techniques employed by painters of that era. But perhaps the most offensive aspect of this film is the way in which it demeans woman artists. As someone who graduated from art school in the 1970's, I can attest to the the almost total neglect paid to the accomplishments of woman artists prior to the 1960's. One of the few exceptions that comes to mind is Mary Cassatt; and what credit she has been afforded is unfairly stigmatized by her " woman's " subject matter. I bought this DVD because I'm a painter, and I had incorrectly assumed that this was going to be a more accurate telling of her remarkable life story. Frankly, I wish I had seen it first; I would have spent my money elsewhere.
Rating: 
Summary: Not a true story
Review: I knew going in that this was not the true story of Artemisia Gentileschi, but I had to see it for myself. I can see why it was changed. The studio probably wanted a tragic love story to feed to a mass audience and didn't think they could handle the true story (which I think would have been just as tragic and more effective). I wouldn't waste a dime on this movie. Catch it on cable if you can (I saw it on a channel called 'True Stories', go figure). Changing the facts of the story do Artemisia's life and work a huge disservice. If you're reading this review, do a little research into what really happened, then watch the movie to see just how laughable it is.
Rating:
Summary: Beautiful But Flawed
Review: I love Artemisia Gentileschi's work. I've painted her self-portrait in my art class. She and Frida Kahlo are among my favorite painters. So when I learned there was a movie about her life, I rented it. Yes, the cinematography is lush. But no, the story is not true. To treat the rape of a young lady with a cavalier attitude does this great woman and artist a terrible injustice. Artemisia painted the horrific and powerful "Judith Slaying Holofernes" as an angry reaction to her rape. We don't see this anger in the movie as she paints this vicious canvas. And that, at least in this sense, deprives Artemisia of her power. No, sadly this could have been a fine film. While I liked some parts of it, I found it too focused on her sexual daillances with Agostino. Lovely cinematography and music do not a movie make. Where was the depth of characterization? And, most importantly, where was the whole truth? But until another and better Artemisia movie is filmed, I suggest the book "Artemisia Gentileschi" by Mary Garrard. It contains the complete transcript of the rape trial. And it is far more detailed than what the movie showed.
Rating:
Summary: That certain je ne sais quoi
Review: I rented this one from our library, and it worth exactly what I paid for it. The scenery and costumes (and lack thereof) are stunning and obviously meticulously researched. Why only three stars? The film seems to be, like a gallery of Renaissance paintings, a succession of beautiful images that have no real connection or overarching storyline. We see Artemisia's story as a series of the actress' pouting lips and desperately emoting eyebrows, but have no real sense of her history or of her personality. A beautiful film to watch, and not a waste of time, but certainly nothing to inspire much thought afterwards.
Rating:
Summary: Awful
Review: I've always had a passion for foreign movies. I'm also an artist, so I thought this movie would be perfect for me. I must say I'm really disappointed. The plot is totally weak, the characters are portrayed as superficial and the actors are not good at all. I must say I haven't seen such a bad movie in a long time.
Rating:
Summary: Historical accuracy set aside for theatrical drama
Review: If you are looking for a seventeenth-century period piece (full stop), this movie will satisfy your wishes. However, if you're looking for an accurate biography of "one of the first great women artists" (which is NOT necessarily the case--there were other notable female artists prior to this Baroque painter), DO NOT rely on this movie. Most frustrating is the portrayal of Gentileschi as a nearly mute pubescent girl in a constant state of sexual awakening (the rather steamy beach scene near the beginning of the movie is almost unbearable). Gentileschi's near silent portrayal is equally upsetting during the tumultuous events at the end of movie. While this reviewer does not want to give the plot away (although any recent art history book on Baroque painting can fill you in on the ups and downs of her life and career), Artemisia's silent demeanor was, according to historical records, NOT the actual situation (in other words, she did speak up for herself!). Interest in Gentileschi has peaked during the past few decades, with the rising interest in women's issues/feminist topics/etc. However, I am not sure whether this movie will help or hinder the average movie goer's understanding of this seventeenth-century artist. Keep this in mind, viewers!
Rating:
Summary: Offensively inaccurate
Review: In the words of Gentileschi biographer Mary Garrard and cultural commentator Gloria Steinem, "In the fully documented trial of 1612, Agostino Tassi was charged with and convicted of the rape of Artemisia Gentileschi. He never confessed to the crime, and on the contrary, tried to accuse Artemisia's father of having deflowered her, and to insist she had also written love letters to other men -- though she could barely write at the time. Artemisia testified repeatedly under oath and torture that she had been [raped] by Tassi. She described the event in explicit and graphic detail, and her own resistance to the point of wounding him with a knife." I give the film two stars for being beautifully made, but the falsehood of the movie undermines the few good elements.
Rating: 
Summary: TALK ABOUT REWRITING HISTORY!!!
Review: Maybe this is how someone thought the story should have been but anyone who has read anything about Artemisia Gentileschi knows that this was bogus work of fiction. However, it was a beautiful movie. It captured the spirit of a girl who probably had a soul akin to the artist, however this story was not the story of Artemisia. I think it is so strange that they even put her name as the title. This is the kind of thing that history professors create to trap all of the slackers who refuse to read thier history books and try to take the easy way out by renting the video. WARNING: READ YOUR HISTORY BEFORE YOU TAKE THE TEST- but enjoy the movie.
Rating:
Summary: TALK ABOUT REWRITING HISTORY!!!
Review: Maybe this is how someone thought the story should have been but anyone who has read anything about Artemisia Gentileschi knows that this was bogus work of fiction. However, it was a beautiful movie. It captured the spirit of a girl who probably had a soul akin to the artist, however this story was not the story of Artemisia. I think it is so strange that they even put her name as the title. This is the kind of thing that history professors create to trap all of the slackers who refuse to read thier history books and try to take the easy way out by renting the video. WARNING: READ YOUR HISTORY BEFORE YOU TAKE THE TEST- but enjoy the movie.
|
