Review of Caligula (1979) by Bjorn O — 29 Jun 2008

(note: I saw the unedited version, but unedited doesn't appear in Flixster's listing).

I can see by other reviews that this movie is very polarizing. People either love it or hate it, and probably for the same reasons. First, it needs to be said that there's zero possibility a movie like this could be made today. To have big name actors appear in a movie that's half "legitmate filmmaking" and half "hardcore pornography" is just crazy-talk in today's world. But it appears to have been made in the same era where "porno chic" was the thing.. Deep Throat had been in theaters a few years before and porn was almost acceptable. What you get here is a historical drama of a bit better quality (film-making-wise) than things like Sparticus interspersed with some VERY explicit sexual scenes. The people who are going to be offended by the sex, aren't going to see it in a "film making" context. Yes, it did and DIDN'T add to the movie as "art".. it was there partially to portray Caligula's infamous carnal appetite and general debauchery of his reign, but on the other hand, it's probably more explicit than it needs to be to get the point across. I don't know if it's the 70's porn style or the fact that it's mixed in with a "real movie", but to me the sex became more apropos since it related to the story and less of a blatant display (although, it was certainly that too). It's impossible to defend this film against people who it's going to turn away immediately (although they watched the whole thing, didn't they?). For people who can have an objective mind and judge a work of art on it's whole intent and presentation and era in which it was made.. you'll probably enjoy the movie. For people easily offended or who don't like 70's grade move making, don't bother even starting to watch it. Turn on Care Bears or something.