Review of Caligula (1979) by Adam C — 12 May 2012

Leave it to Penthouse to produce a movie about Caligula, one of history's most evil men. They dumped money into the project to turn ancient history into a boring, sickening, and vile sexploitation porn film. It is pitiful how an important time period was used to sell audiences disgusting filth. On top of that, the movie manipulated some of the finest actors of our time and embarrasses them on screen. I do not tell people to go see or avoid movies because they have a choice of their own that is beyond my grasp. I only tell them what I saw and what I thought of it. So prepare for my assault on "Caligula".

Caligula was the Emperor of Rome from 37 to 41 AD. He is considered one of the most tyrannical rulers to have ever lived. He was notorious for being a sexually perverted, sadistic, lunatic who enjoyed torture and humiliation. The film covered the man's reign and some facts about his life but it did not take the history seriously.

The film had an Italian production with the aide of Penthouse founder, Bob Guccione. It was ultimately Guccione who called the shots for the hardcore sex scenes and other footage. Guccione stated on the trailer that he wanted to change the "viewing habits of the theater-going public" by making a controversial film like "Caligula". Some movies had their share of controversy but became classics; "Caligula" was not among them because it deliberately set out to offend, disgust, and sicken. When a person makes a movie, he or she shouldn't pursue controversy but try to go with what they feel is right for their project and be prepared for any form of backlash.

As I watched "Caligula", I became confused, bored, offended, and disgusted towards the material. All my eyes beheld were fully naked bodies, pointless close-ups of genitalia, acts of oral sex, orgies, hardcore sex scenes, mutilation, self-mutilation, urination, some form of necrophilia, castration, rape, and senseless violence and torture (sometimes sexually). I do not feel proud telling anybody what I saw in "Caligula". It is true that the real Caligula committed such senseless acts but I felt most of these sights were completely unnecessary and only used to deviate from history only to be controversial. They simply had no real purpose or sense.

If that's not sick enough for you, there were actors and actresses who pleasured themselves as they saw people tortured or killed. Was it a way to depict the sadistic atmosphere of Rome? I know there are much classier ways to reflect the horrible society of the Roman Empire. I simply watch "Spartacus: Blood and Sand". Yes, there was an extreme amount of blood, sex, and brutality but there were also great stories with emotions and feelings that kept the series' heart beating. "Spartacus" reflected both ugliness and beauty but "Caligula" could only show me ugliness.

Speaking of ugliness, I will share a couple of examples in "Caligula". In one scene, Emperor Caligula raped a newly-wed couple in a kitchen as a "wedding gift." First, he had intercourse with the virgin bride and then he (be prepared) stuck his fist up the groom's rectum. Why on God's good green earth did I have to see it?! What's even worse is that the movie gave us no emotion out of the travesty, not even an emotional flurry of music to give me a cathartic chill. They cried and withered in pain but we weren't allowed to feel it because the movie didn't sympathize with the victims of Caligula. It merely gave us the opportunity to feel emotional about the deaths of the wicked characters.

The other scene was one of the torture sequences. Caligula tortured a guard by slashing him to death and a couple of random girls sexually urinated on his corpse. Seriously, this was garbage and it's my duty to inform you of it. But that didn't stop there. No, the guard's genitals were cut off and fed to dogs. This is referenced in Eli Roth's "Hostel Part II" but the big difference is that Roth did it to shock and horrify people (maybe get a few girls cheering, that is if you have seen that movie). "Caligula" did it just to get some attention because it wanted to be the most controversial movie ever. And they polished a nuclear bomb to reach that target by going with the orgy of the senators' wives. It was a waste of time and utterly disgusting. The scene was so repulsive it convinced Roger Ebert to walk out of the theater, a rare moment. I was almost tempted to stop watching as well but I didn't allow myself to be beaten. I needed to hang on by a thin thread so I could note more blunders.

Even the production of the movie was a catastrophe. Too many of the props were phallic objects that were utilized so uncontrollably it was hilarious and annoying. The editing was extremely lazy and inconsiderate. How long should it take for a man to vomit in slow-motion? Why show a man vomiting in slow-motion at all? I did not like the music except for the ending sequence perhaps. It did not engage me in the movie whatsoever. A common theme promotes the emotion a movie aims to trigger in an audience and "Caligula" failed to provide one. It is as if nobody really cared what kind of direction "Caligula" was taking. I do not think the actors took this project seriously either.

As I look back at his role of Alex DeLarge, I could see Malcolm McDowell as Caligula but he was in the wrong production at the wrong time. The man himself said he hated the movie. Overall, his performance was satisfying yet it had terrible moments. When McDowell acted paranoid or screamed, I was disappointed how unconvincing he was. Helen Mirren had the role of Caesonia, the wife of Caligula, and she did a decent job but I was devastated to see her wearing a leash around her neck like a subservient dog. She deserved more respect than that. Giancarlo Badessi portrayed the uncle of Caligula, Claudius, and he annoyed me. He made Claudius look like an overweight, idiotic buffoon; according to history, the real Claudius did not have such attributes. It was unfathomable how Peter O'Toole could be involved in "Caligula" as the Emperor Tiberius and be below-average in the role as well. All O'Toole did was awkwardly pronounce sentences and burst out exclamations as if he had Tourette's syndrome. But I must confess, the final look on his face was priceless and I could not stop myself from laughing. O'Toole and his co-star John Gielgud claim they never knew hardcore sex scenes were being filmed. How could they not?! I saw O'Toole caressing fully nude girls, kissing their bodies while sitting next to fully nude men in the movie! I suppose he was in denial.

There were scraps of the movie I did admire. Some of the dialogue worked well in the movie and I enjoyed some of McDowell's comedic parts. Some important moments of Caligula's reign were covered but not enough to outweigh the ugliness in the rest of the film. The ending was the only scene I liked in the movie even though it is shot and executed sluggishly. The movie needed to end the way it did, no matter how horrible it looked.

"Caligula" is an ugly, boring porn film which aims to exploit history in favor of cheap hardcore sex footage and gross-out shots. If there is any sort of reason to view it, see it to understand how I felt. As I stated before, I only share my thoughts to people and the decision to see a movie lies with them. For those who are brave enough to sit through "Caligula", I commend you all for your courage.

My Rating: 2/10.