Rating: 
Summary: The best film adaptation to date.
Review: Although this film has obvious historical flaws and interesting casting (i.e., Rourke as Francis) it is the best film adaptation of Francis' life to date. It is a massive improvement of the "Flower Child" era Brother Sun Sister Moon. Offering a Francis a bit more graspable and human. In general this film is perfect for Francis enthusiasts.
Rating: 
Summary: 'STIGMATA' for believers!
Review: Casting Mickey Rourke as St. Francis of Assisi makes as much sense as giving Doris Day the role of Medea! I mean, the guy looks old, flabby and tatooed; not at all your average "Poverello"!But maybe that's just the point director Liliana Cavani is trying to make: that someone as crass as Rourke can become an extraordinary saint but by the Grace of God. And if so, the movie works to perfection, avoiding the don't-worry-be-happy, life-is-a-bowl-of-cherries attitude of 'Brother Sun, Sister Moon'. This St. Francis suffers, has doubts and pays a heavy price for the life he seeks. It is perhaps too gloomy at times but certainly more accurate, and -I think- complements the Zeffirelli classic by showing the other side of this amazing man's persona. I bought this film because a cousin of mine who works at the Vatican recommended it to me. She told me the Pope was very distraught after seeing it, and that he even cried at the end. You may believe this or not (I do), but the movie is surely far more intense and thought-provoking that whatever the cretinous Mr. Maltin may say about it.
Rating:
Summary: 'STIGMATA' for believers!
Review: Casting Mickey Rourke as St. Francis of Assisi makes as much sense as giving Doris Day the role of Medea! I mean, the guy looks old, flabby and tatooed; not at all your average "Poverello"! But maybe that's just the point director Liliana Cavani is trying to make: that someone as crass as Rourke can become an extraordinary saint but by the Grace of God. And if so, the movie works to perfection, avoiding the don't-worry-be-happy, life-is-a-bowl-of-cherries attitude of 'Brother Sun, Sister Moon'. This St. Francis suffers, has doubts and pays a heavy price for the life he seeks. It is perhaps too gloomy at times but certainly more accurate, and -I think- complements the Zeffirelli classic by showing the other side of this amazing man's persona. I bought this film because a cousin of mine who works at the Vatican recommended it to me. She told me the Pope was very distraught after seeing it, and that he even cried at the end. You may believe this or not (I do), but the movie is surely far more intense and thought-provoking that whatever the cretinous Mr. Maltin may say about it.
Rating:
Summary: If you Love God and Spiritual Truth, Watch this Movie
Review: i looked at the other reviews, and they seemed to come from unenlightened beings. How can any one who hasn't seen the light comment on anything to do with spiritual truth. This movie is extraordinarily well done and highly inspirational. Anyone on anykind of spiritual path should see this. i have a new found love for the Christian tradition because of this movie.
Rating:
Summary: If you Love God and Spiritual Truth, Watch this Movie
Review: i looked at the other reviews, and they seemed to come from unenlightened beings. How can any one who hasn't seen the light comment on anything to do with spiritual truth. This movie is extraordinarily well done and highly inspirational. Anyone on anykind of spiritual path should see this. i have a new found love for the Christian tradition because of this movie.
Rating:
Summary: Inspiring, thoughtful, beautiful film
Review: I picked up this film while researching the life of St. Francis of Assisi. Of the several films I've seen on his life, this is the best by far. I was not familiar with Mickey Rourke or his career, but it didn't take me long to realize that he is a very gifted actor. His portrayal of St. Francis was sensitive, contolled, subtle, but when the moment called for action, he was prepared and delivered. The film as a whole was magnificent -a true example of ensemble acting at its finest. One really got the nitty-gritty feeling of life in the 12th century, just as Europe was coming out of the Dark Ages and there was an explosion of change. G. K. Chesterton's book on the saint covers this in more detail. St. Francis and his little band of followers never intended to begin a world-wide movement of a monastic order, and his confusion, disappointment, and frustration at the response to his "rule" was palpable and heartbreaking. Each of the young men in the original group were as diverse as could be, yet they were all brought together under the loving care and friendship of Francis. The humor and antics balanced their rather grim existence and made them all the more human. There were moments of intense sadness, but also joy. Chiara's enigmatic smile at the end I will leave to your own interpretation. It was a superb touch to the ending of a stunning film.
Rating:
Summary: Inspiring, thoughtful, beautiful film
Review: I strongly believe that this is one of the top ten films of the 1980s. People tend to malign it for one of the following reasons: 1) they hate Mickey Rourke 2) they don't like the Christian themes 3) they like the Christian themes but are upset by the nudity 4) they don't like the way the film ends. Regarding the Rourke haters, I feel they simply have no class. Mickey Rourke's career followed much the same path as Errol Flynn's, which is reason to malign him personally but not his work. Rourke in his heyday had a charisma and screen personality that rivaled Valentino, Flynn, or Bogart. Regarding the anti-Christians, you don't have to be a believer to enjoy the story of a remarkable man. As for the prudists, the nudity is brief and natural, nothing tasteless. Finally, as for the ending, in real life people who later were "sainted" (like Francesco d'Asisi) or "deified" (like Jesus) did not get carried away by angels. They experienced failures and then they died, often miserably and alone, just like everyone else. This film presented that cold reality much like it probably happened; that is precisely what makes it so poignant and relevant. As for Rourke's performance, I thought it was brilliant, especially in the latter scenes. And Helena Bonham Carter is a first rate actress, of that there can be no serious discussion. The fact that Mickey Rourke later went on to drink away his career and take stupid roles is no fair reason to malign this film. Would you also malign Sir Laurence Olivier's Henry V because he later played Zeus in the awful Harry Hamlin feature, Clash of the Titans? Let him who hath never sinned cast the first stone against this film! (and let's get a reprint fired up...)
Rating:
Summary: A Much Maligned Masterpiece
Review: I strongly believe that this is one of the top ten films of the 1980s. People tend to malign it for one of the following reasons: 1) they hate Mickey Rourke 2) they don't like the Christian themes 3) they like the Christian themes but are upset by the nudity 4) they don't like the way the film ends. Regarding the Rourke haters, I feel they simply have no class. Mickey Rourke's career followed much the same path as Errol Flynn's, which is reason to malign him personally but not his work. Rourke in his heyday had a charisma and screen personality that rivaled Valentino, Flynn, or Bogart. Regarding the anti-Christians, you don't have to be a believer to enjoy the story of a remarkable man. As for the prudists, the nudity is brief and natural, nothing tasteless. Finally, as for the ending, in real life people who later were "sainted" (like Francesco d'Asisi) or "deified" (like Jesus) did not get carried away by angels. They experienced failures and then they died, often miserably and alone, just like everyone else. This film presented that cold reality much like it probably happened; that is precisely what makes it so poignant and relevant. As for Rourke's performance, I thought it was brilliant, especially in the latter scenes. And Helena Bonham Carter is a first rate actress, of that there can be no serious discussion. The fact that Mickey Rourke later went on to drink away his career and take stupid roles is no fair reason to malign this film. Would you also malign Sir Laurence Olivier's Henry V because he later played Zeus in the awful Harry Hamlin feature, Clash of the Titans? Let him who hath never sinned cast the first stone against this film! (and let's get a reprint fired up...)
Rating:
Summary: Rourke is Good?!
Review: I thought this would be terrible, with the infamous Rourke as St. Francis. I was pleasantly surprised. Although this becomes a little disjointed toward the conclusion, I found this careful film intimate and fascinating. The male nudity probably will drive kids and prudes from the room, but even saints had to change clothes once in a while.
Rating:
Summary: Rourke is Good?!
Review: I thought this would be terrible, with the infamous Rourke as St. Francis. I was pleasantly surprised. Although this becomes a little disjointed toward the conclusion, I found this careful film intimate and fascinating. The male nudity probably will drive kids and prudes from the room, but even saints had to change clothes once in a while.
| 
