Reviews (11)

Uneven Avant-Garde Production
This low budget movie retains Shakespeare's language and some startling as well as disturbing interpretations of his play. Prospero's cave is a gothic mansion. Ariel is a deadpan, rather grim butler ala Joel Grey in Cabaret. Caliban resembles an escaped lunatic complete with maniacal laughter. Nevertheless all the characters despite their departure from more traditional depictions are well acted and worth watching. Miranda in particular has more brains and pluck in this production than the simpering waif she is often portrayed to be. The play drags on where Jarmon cut a lot of the poetry in favor of more scenes of the characters traipsing about the mansion. Such scenes become monotonous about halfway through the movie. Film is unrated but contains several scenes of full frontal nudity as well as a particularly disturbing vision of an adult Caliban suckling a nude, obese Sycorax. As a teacher of English, seleced scenes were worth showing to my ninth grade class but the film was too monotonous, and contained too much perversity to show in its entirety.

captivating imagery, mediocre acting
Seeing Shakespeare adapted to film always thrills me, as long as the scriptwriter preserves Shakespeare's unmatchable linguistic phrasing. Jarman does preserve Shakespeare's words, though not always their order or their speaker. I have no problem granting liberal artistic license to most literary adaptations but, since Shakespeare leaves so few guidelines in the form of stage directions I have some trouble understanding why his adaptors wouldn't want to stick faithfully to Shakespeare's conception of his plays, which allows for so much individual interpretation as it stands. Jarman makes some cuts that I don't understand, such as that of the very funny scene in which Trinulco drunkenly mistakes Stephano and Caliban huddled together as a two-headed monster, and some cuts of which I approve, such as that of the nearly unintelligable "wedding" scene. He also elongates and adds emphasis to the scene in which Stephano, Caliban, and Trinulco steal from Prospero, which I think adds his signature to the film more than any other scene in its homoerotic interpretation of acting. The most enjoyable of Jarman's interpretations, I found to be his visual representation of Prospero's magic with a beautiful and captivating array of white candles, mystical crystals, and white chalk scribblings of strange symbols and geometric patterns. The acting is overall rather mediocre, as most of the actors speak every line with weighty ponderance, as if all of Shakespeare is meant to be taken in stiff seriousness. The only truly convincing performance is that of Alonso, King of Naples, who talks of the son he presumes dead with heavy sadness but of sleeping with a tone that conveys the mundanity of such lines. Ferdinand, however, seems equally distant and dejected when he speaks of Prospero's cruelty and of Miranda's beauty. Overall, this is well worth watching for fans of the Bard or of Jarman's cinematic style.

Art for art's sake
Derek Jarman's vision of The Tempest is a strange but artistic one. Although at times it can be too weird to really take seriously, Jarman's film deserves to be seen by those who love Shakespeare and those who love movies. In The Tempest, Jarman combines elements of traditional Shakespeare, Stanley Kubrick, and the Rocky Horror Picture Show to create an extraordinary vision of the classic play. Baz Luhrmann owes a lot to this movie for his adaptation of Romeo and Juliet, as evidenced by the combination of genres, the bizarre imagery, and especially Elisabeth Welch's performance as a Josephine Baker-inspired chanteuse, which mirrors Desiree's incarnation as Billie Holiday in Luhrmann's film. It is worth noting that those who were not open-minded enough to appreciate Luhrmann's film should probably not see this one.

Despite all of these innovations, however, The Tempest moves too slowly to keep up with its own progressive style. The movie would have greatly benefited from being shortened by about half an hour. The one reason to sit through the tedious moments is to watch Karl Johnson, who, as a nervous Ariel, gives by far the most interesting performance.

A cozy dream for exiled dreamers
Ken Russell's designer on The Devils and Savage Messiah, the late Derek Jarman, made one of my favorite movies out of Shakespeare's most fanciful, yet most forgiving, play. Jarman makes a virtue of his tiny budget, having learned much from his former director about how to stretch one: the shadows, fireplaces, dust and antique clutter of Stoneleigh Abbey make a cozy and believable home in exile for Prospero, for whom "my library was dukedom enough," and for his fond daughter Miranda, who dances and play-acts around the vast, shabby manor like any imaginative child who hasn't known anything else, nor any reason to be ashamed of it. The mood is intimate and vespertine (in the Bjork sense); and for once, clutter is not the symptom of a lowlife or a loser, but the habit of a wistful, brilliant man absorbed in his studies and contemplation. For this alone, I recommend the film to anyone who ever felt like an innocent exile, a misunderstood artist or dreamer.

I also recommend it if you enjoy radical approaches to Shakespeare. Jarman's vision succeeds nearly everywhere, aided by superb casting. Hippie-hairy Heathcote Williams and the pleasantly zaftig Toyah Willcox are a warm and very appealing father and daughter, the ectomorphic Karl Johnson an Ariel with his own dreams to dream when not subduing resentment at his slavery to Prospero, and the bald, lisping, leering Jack Birkett nearly stealing the movie as an alarming, grotesque Caliban whose own wide-eyed pleasure in the "thousand twangling instruments" of the isle, with its "sounds and sweet airs that give delight and hurt not" is as strangely winning as his hostility and vulgarity have been repulsive. Jarman's customary homoerotic elements work well and add another dimension to the play, as he contrasts Caliban's baseness not with Ariel's loftier sensibilities but with Miranda's moral innocence; while Miranda's *sexual* innocence is contrasted with Ariel's resignation to postponing his own desires, shown when he enchants and sings over the totally naked Ferdinand but otherwise leaves him alone. Stephano and Trinculo are flamboyantly queer, donning masks and costumed frippery not, like other characters, to symbolize dissembling in a straight society, but in drunken frolic as they plot to overthrow Caliban's master. (This is how Jarman delivers what an earlier reviewer here felt was missing, the "alternative realities.") Jarman's tone of melancholy lifting culminates in musical comedy star Elisabeth Welch's rendition of "Stormy Weather". It works.

The play is heavily cut, but could have benefited from more cutting, as Caliban is not made to look in any way fishlike, but Stephano and Trinculo still talk as though he is; Prospero looks forward to going home, where "every third thought shall be my grave" even though the actor was only 38; and Miranda's exclamation "O brave new world, that has such people in it!" sounds ridiculous when referring to the underrehearsed chorus line of rather fey sailors doing a silly dance that goes on too long. Representing Prospero's servant spirits with dwarves works fine, except Jarman's technique is not skillful enough to convey the menace of their assault on Alonso, Antonio and Sebastian. Jarman's technique would fully mature in his film of Edward II.

Although it was praised by English critics, The Tempest is an obscure little foreign art film, and has not been remastered in any way. The "extras" include the original presskit text, plus three short films that look like static landscape shots in Super8mm, and are of no interest except to Jarman scholars.

Boy, Am I Sorry I Bought This !
I was hoping that this production would introduce me to Shakespeare's "Tempest." Before I bought this DVD, I wish I knew that it is filled with ..., silly giggling, needless nudity, and superficialities that fail to convey anything of Shakespeare's insight and wit. Shakespeare seems to be the pretext for much joyless prancing and mugging in front of the camera. Truly aweful. ... Read more

Description

A lyrical, controversial recreation of the story of The Passion, which examines the role of the Church in the persecution of homosexuality. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

Tribute to Jarman
"The Garden" is the only (but not last) film I saw by the late gay British director Derek Jarman. I was impressed. Sex and religion, so I've read, seem to be a recurrent theme in Jarman's work. I'm not gonna brag to much about the "daring" portrayal of homosexuality, although this film clearly sought to make a (subtle) statement. To me it was refreshing, sensual, and at some point quite erotic. I myself am not gay, but Jarman's experimental touch poses a unabashed alternative to the recent "gay movies" coming out of Hollywood. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

the angelic conversation
I just saw it after buying it used. i hated it. there is no dialogue except for a woman reading a poem and strange music. i only watched half the film and turned it off. i won't say what i really thought of this. maybe to someone it would be good but i didn't like it at all. i am sorry i bought it. i only bought it because it had a guy in it that i saw in another movie and loved.

-- TEA AND SODOMY --
I wanted to see this film because I'd owned the soundtrack for some time; COIL is one of my favorite bands. Frankly,I was a surprised by my viewing experience (surprised, because I had only ever seen one Jarman film prior to this one-- WITTGENSTEIN, a film with an comparably linear narrative structure). My impression of THE ANGELIC CONVERSATION is that it was a good idea on paper, and probably very cheap to produce, and someone owed Jarman a favor, and it was really a nice weekend to go for a bit of jaunt on the Isle of Wight (or whatever remote Britannic locale supplied the uncertain backdrop of the film), etc.. If your idea of a good time is watching a bunch of men dressed in bed sheets dragging logs through a stream in slow motion, while listening to Dame Judi Dench gnomically intone some of Shakespeare's sonnets, you're in for a treat. If this isn't enough to crisp your biscuits, there are, alternately, several segments (one can't really call these free-floating images 'scenes') that take place in a cave, wherein several young men seem to be annointing another young man sitting on a throne. The symbolism is implicitly homoerotic, as is the entire subject matter of the film (most of Shakespeare's sonnets are presumed to have been written from the elder man to his young lover, Harry Wriothsley, Duke of Southampton). But what exactly all this men-bathing-men business is supposed to mean, other than a vague ocular parallel to orally articulated material, is a mystery to me. My advice is to drop some acid before viewing this film, and follow it up with Ken Russel's SALOME'S LAST DANCE. ... Read more

Amazon.com

This omnibus directors fest brings together 10 different filmmakers making 10 different films based on operatic arias. Jean-Luc Godard is stylistically the boldest, Robert Altman possibly the most imaginative, Franc Roddam celebrates American glitz, and Bruce Beresford is the most sentimental. Nearly all the other filmmakers involved--including Nicolas Roeg, Ken Russell, Julien Temple, Charles Sturridge, Derek Jarman, and Bill Bryden--are (or were, in the case of the late Jarman) world-class talents, but you wouldn't know that from their murky participation here. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Liz Hurley's first important role in a movie
This movie provided Liz Hurley with her big break. Soon after this, Dennis Potter snapped her up for the lead role in the BBC adaptation of Christabel Bielenberg's 'The Past is Myself'. She became Hugh Grant's girlfriend and the rest is history. She transformed herself physically during her twenties, which is why some viewers have had problems identifying the occasionally nude actress that appears here as the very slim Liz Hurley they now know.

For me, 'Aria' was the classical music community's response to the rise of MTV and the pop video. Directors like Ken Russell and Nick Roeg wanted to show us that opera could be equally colourful and sexy, even if you couldn't dance to it. And they proved their case, to my mind.

But like a pop video, you wouldn't want to watch this too often. There's no substantive connection between each of the videos, so you end up feeling much the same as you would after a 90-minute immersion in MTV.

A Visual and audial smorgasbord
I have loved this movie for years. Granted, it may be for deep film buffs, but it is powerful.

Each vignette offers a top director's interpretation of a provocative aria. Opera lovers know how emotionally provocative the music can be; and that raw emotion is shown by each director.

The love story is one of the most romantic and tragic stories I have ever seen--the images are still in my mind 10 years after first seeing it. I had enjoyed a light introduction to opera before this movie, but after feeling the raw emotions this film created in me, I bought a few opera CDs based simply on first hearing the arias in this movie. There is even some VERY funny stuff is one scene.

So, in summary, the music, images, and emotions from this movies were all so intense, they've stayed with me for years. If you can take the intensity, do not miss out on this powerful movie that can be both sublime and intense at the same time.

The movie that started me on opera
I first saw Aria in the theater back in high school (about 3 million years ago) and only because I wanted to impress a girl way more artistic than myself.

It worked, but not in a way I'd expected. The movie, a series of vignettes, runs the whole emotional spectrum. In my younger days, we were blown away by the Wagner/Roddam piece starring a young Fonda, so loving and jarring at the same time. These days I find all the music beautiful, but one or two of the vignettes boring. The entire movie is beautifully shot and all deserves to be watched at least once.

After having done that you'll find continual enjoyment watching Sturridge, Beresford, Roddam, Jarman, and Bryden's interpretations.

Who knows, you might fall in love with opera too.

Great the first time, tends average, not for everyone
This movie was great the first time, on the big screen. The music and the images shock you, and make you squirm and react to this movie. It's an artistic roller coaster ride.

I've found since, however, that this shocking quality doesn't preserve especially well. My favorite way of watching this movie these days, is to turn the music on, while I'm doing stuff around the house, occassionally looking at the images.

It's artistry, it doesn't hold up under critical thinking.

Who will like this movie? Despite (or perhaps because of) the billing of mature content, I think that this is a good film for teenage viewers with a liking for art films. One must be able to appreciate both the variety and intensity of the images, and be able to forgive the story. Not a problem in an action movie, but for an "art film", it shows it's high concept roots.

Maybe a gift for an opera lover, or an "art film" buff.

A Most Incredible Experience
Aria is 90 minutes of pure wonderment -- I'm not certain what demographic this project was aimed at, but I definitely fall into it. You have to love opera style music yet not be so attached to the operas themselves that the re-presentation of the music offends. You have to enjoy video that your average couch potato won't get, no matter how many mind altering drugs he takes.

To really enjoy Aria, you have to check your expectations at the door and accept it for what it is -- a set of brilliant visual explorations fueled by some of the most incredible music ever written. With any other attitude, you're far more likely to find this a miserable experience. Too vulgar, too highbrow, too bizarre, too surreal, too whatever.

Some pieces tell a solid story, ranging from humorous to tragic. Others lack story line and speak to a different level of consciousness. Pathos. Humor. Death. Life. Celebration. Brilliance. Aria cleanses windows of perception, like a good wine between courses of a meal. On the other hand, it's a main course, in and of itself.

This is not fodder for young children, and most teens won't have the patience for it either. If you thought "Dude, Where's My Car?" was a brilliant movie, perhaps you'd better pass on this one as well. I only wish that more Wagner had been included ... perhaps an Aria II consisting solely of Wagner arias?

(If you'd like to discuss this movie or review in more depth, click on the "about me" link above and drop me an email. Thanks!) ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Love It
This is a cool movie with a lot of cool people in it. Adam Ant, Toyah Wilcox, Jordan (punk goddess), Little Nell, Richard O' Brien........lots. Sure, its weird. Yes, there is a lot of nudity. If that is offensive to you, then you shouldn't buy this movie.

If you want to see some of the people that were a part of the "punk scene" when it first started then buy this movie. And Plastic Surgery (which is a real Adam and the Ants song that Adam wrote and was performing with his band at the time....Deuchester Girls is in it too, but you hardly hear it) is a greeeaat song. And he looks HOT singing it. Heck, he looks hot through the whole thing. This movie was 3 years after Rocky Horror Picture Show and it is cool to see Little Nell and Richard O'Brien in another movie together.

Anyway- what I am trying to say is.....BUY THIS MOVIE. Even if you don't like it personally, people will think you are a hip guy just for owning it.

And it is cheaper here then at the movie store. Trust me.

An essential for any early punk fans
This is a highly unusual and artisticly revealing cinematic pleasure. If anyone has seen director Derek Jarman's films before, you probably know that he doesn't follow the conventions of film narrative. For punk fans it offers a view of the wasteland fantasy world that isn't too far off from the truth. Early glimpses of Adam Ant(the soon to be Mtv poster boy looking very young), Little Nell (Rocky Horror Picture Show), and Ian Charleson (Chariots of Fire). For any fan of the Sex Pistols' movie, "THe Great ROck and ROll Swindle"- this movie is perfect for you. IT contains lots of nudity- both male and female and has alot of questionable acts of violence. Not recommended for everyone- but definitely a rare treat.

not at all what i expected
i had a lot of trouble watching this, partly because it made no sense and partly because it wasn't interesting at all. a coherent storyline isn't really that essential for me, i enjoy david lynch. even though lynch rarely makes much sense his films are beautiful and hold your attention. technically jubilee was fair, visually it was okay. i ususally trust the criterion company with their releases but this is one of the few that i recommend against.

I would rather sleep
This movie is about as boring as a thanksgiving parade, i wouldnt really call this art either, its just basically a punk movie with punk influence. If you want a real art/punk film check out sid and nancy, its 5 stars better than this movie.

Anarchy & Beauty
Jubilee is a wildly beautiful - and entertaining - film which strikes a precarious, and compelling, balance between sheer anarchy and genuine beauty. I was so struck by it that I watched it three times in one week. Yet it remains an elusive work, constantly tantalizing with new connections and still more layers of meaning. The outstanding Criterion Collection DVD offers a wealth of supplemental features, making it an excellent introduction to both the film and director Derek Jarman.

The basic plot of this experimental fantasy is simple: Queen Elizabeth I has the historical alchemist John Dee summon the spirit Ariel and transport all of them 400 years into the future, where they find London a post-apocalyptic wasteland. The talented Jenny Runacre plays both Queen Elizabeth and the anarchic latter-day "queen" Bod, who leads an all-female biker gang.

Made in 1977, at the height of the Punk movement, Jubilee has misleadingly been called a "Punk movie." Despite its trappings (from clothing to casting several well-known singers), ultimately it seems more about Punk than of it. How Jarman uses then-rising star Adam Ant is revealing. With his sweetly boyish persona - made just a bit wild by the black leather and painted-on lower sideburns - Adam Ant as "Kid" is undeniably appealing. But throughout he is as passive offstage as he is frenzied onstage. And Kid, unable to connect with anyone, will do anything for his career. He signs with the grotesque Borgia Ginz, the multinational mogul who controls the entire planet's media - hence political, even religious - power structure. Ginz immediately rechristens Kid as "Scum. That's commercial. It's all [the audience] deserves." One of the film's most haunting images is of Kid lasciviously kissing his own image on a TV. How's that for a postmodern twist on the myth of Narcissus?

Beyond the Punk movement, Jarman turned to many diverse sources to flesh out his vision for Jubilee. It's powerful on its own terms, without any need for "footnoting," but the wide-ranging references create a fascinating texture. He uses film (notably Cocteau's Blood of a Poet, Godard's La Chinoise, Pasolini's Oedipus Rex, and Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange), literature (Huxley's Brave New World, Orwell's 1984; also his pastiche Elizabethan dialogue is beautiful: "I cast for Ariel, pearl of fire, my only star...."), history and myth (suggested by character names, from the historical female ruler of ancient Britain, Bodicea - i.e., "Bod" - and the Borgias to mythical figures like Sphinx and Angel), and even dance club culture (characters named Amyl Nitrate and Crabs). He is also one of the most creatively playful of modern filmmakers, and that schoolboyish "let's put on a show" energy keeps his films, even with their density of themes, buoyant and wonderfully entertaining.

Jarman also brings great emotional resonance through his characters (most of whom he cast from friends and lovers). I was often surprised by how much I cared about these eccentric, and sometimes lethal, allegorical people. Although each viewer will bond with different characters, I was most moved by the "triangle" between the two teasingly incestuous brothers, Sphinx and Angel (who utters the classic line, "I didn't know I was dead till I was 15"), and the artist Viv (whom Jarman described, affectionately, as a "butch dyke"). Their tangled connections, although genuinely caring, never reach true equality: The two men, on one level, can be seen as using the woman as a way of enhancing their own (masculine, even incestuous) relationship. Still, they become all the more affecting at the film's climax (which I will not divulge).

There is so much more to Jubilee than I can suggest in the brief space here: It is visually gorgeous (Jarman is a master of composition and lighting; he began as a painter, and stage and film designer), makes fascinating use of music (from Punk to classical) and sound effects, offers a provocative series of ideas about history (as Amyl says, "History still fascinates me. It's so intangible. You can weave facts anywhere you like. Good guys can swap places with bad guys"), media manipulation and artistic narcissism and audience passivity, and, ultimately, the duality of beauty and anarchy, which are perhaps two sides of the same double mirror. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

Wittgenstein - hard explain as good to see.
There is interesting point in this movie, focus on the people not on a space. I'm a set designer, and always during my research in the movies, I collect my videos, as specialise on a oridinary ideas, and this is one is one of those. I thing, so no one can show better that things, like Derek Jarman. Because, his is special. And I find this work as the best from him. His indicate people with light and color, like a Caravagio painter. They come from anywere and go to anywere Like nothing is so important, have this people around him.

I love this crazy movie!
Wittgenstein was not only a philosophical giant, but also a facinating personality. He was: gay, but conflicted and ashamed of his sexuality; rich, but he gave away his vast fortune and worked as a laborer; brilliant and vain, but always embarrased by his writings; the darling of academia, even though he rejected the entire philosophical tradition; jewish, but a devout christian convert; brave in war, but lacked the courage to face himself or openly support jewish causes during the war.

These strange contradictions are captured in this visually beautiful and surreal film (take a gander at the cover--that's supposed to be Wittgenstein as a boy--Bizzare!). Amid the beautiful lighting, wild colors, and elegant music, the philosophy is somewhat put on the back burner. But that's to be expected, and, if you watch it two or three times, you can pick up what some of Wittgenstein's major arguments were. Even if you don't it's still great fun--sort of philosophical drama with some off beat comedy thrown in. Watch slowly with an open mind and you're sure to enjoy it!

Very accurate snapshot of this quirky Austrian philosopher
This film, which I saw on the big-screen at the Museum of Fine Arts Houston cinema venue in 1994, was my first introduction to Austrian linguistic Philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein. In 1994 I was also beginning my graduate studies in German at Rice University. I was immediately turned on to Wittgenstein by the film (scripted by noted British marxist literary critic Terry Eagleton; --I have come to like Eagleton a great deal also) and have been reading about him and his philosophy ever since. From what I have read in Biographies and commentaries by those that knew L.Wittgenstein personally, the actor(s) protraying this reclusive, quirky Austrian intellectual do an excellent job in conveying Wittgensteins life, personality, and yes, even some of his philosophy, to an English speaking audience. Definite "High Brow" entertainment, especially for students of Philsophy and the German Language.

A view of a Genius
Very interesting movie of one of the brightest minds in the 20th Century. It is not a traditional one, the sets are often very surrealistic. All we have is some "imprints" or scenes with an interpretation of the life of this extraordinary thinker. ... Read more

Description

In the sixteenth century, the king of England jeopardizes his reign when he ignores his wife and openly carries on an affair with his male lover. ... Read more

Reviews (9)

14th Century Gay-Bashing á la Derek Jarmam
Definitely Derek Jarman's most refined film. That said, refined for Jarman is bizarre for most.

Based VERY loosely on Christopher Marlowe's play from 1592, however, should be viewed in its own light / right. Whereas it does tend to capture the wonderful Marlow language, this is no "Shakespeare" here! It's a brilliantly acted ensemble piece, set in Jarman's abstract vision of the world, with a core message that is as valid today as it must have been shocking then.

Jarman "paints" his film - as he always did - not in any logical manner or order, but like a mosaic of images, creating a whole and a statement - a strong statement about intolerance in this case.

This one might even be palatable for non-Jarman fans.

Give in to the senses, forget common sense
First off, I have to say that this movie should not be viewed as a rendition of the Marlowe play, but as its own creation. If you are expecting a faithful adaptation, you will be disappointed. However, if you come to it without prejudice, it is an impressive cinematic work of scope and vision.

Jarman's directing style is not for everyone--plot continuity or story structure is not very important to him--but he crafts each scene of the film with such care and skill that the sensuousnes of the cinematography becomes the central point. The film is presented as a gallery of images: every shot is a painting. Everything is subordinated for the effect of these images: the narrative is presented in a series of symbols and allegories, switching between times, places, reality and fantasy, until it all blends together in a wonderful cascade of pure visual exhiliration. This movie is first and foremost an aesthetic experience: watch it for the sake of watching it, enjoy first and alalyze later.

Should you wish to analyze it after all, you will find that the seemingly aimless or irrelevant images are actually an integral part of the story, carefully distributed throughout. There is meaning in everything that is presented in the film, from the extraneous vision of an Apollo with a golden snake, to the huddle of Rugby players Edward's son stumbles upon during his midnight forays. It is telling that the final scene has the Queen and Mortimer sitting inside a cage, caked in flour, while the son (wearing a suit and his mother's earrings and listening to a walkman) dances on top. Jarman goes with the maxim "a picture is worth a thousand words," and prefers to tell his story through abstract yet meaning-laden images.

Another approach that Jarman has to the play is taking literally the figurative language of it. Many of the images come from the words the characters say, adding new dimensions to the language. Thus, when in the play, Edward's actions are compared to that of a butcher, during those scenes in the film, he is literally a butcher: coat, knife and all.

There are also elements that are outside the play, such as the gay rights protests that form a background but necessary part of the movie. Injecting new interpretations to the text, Jarman's work is a comment on boith the modern and the ancient problems that intolerance causes. Substance is something this film has a-plenty, convention is something that it does not. Don't expect logic or an easily (if at all) understandable story, but do expect an aesthetic experience that you will remember.

Simply amazing
I came across this film by chance, and it was on a German channel - yes, overdubbed. Even if my first watching was robbed of its original language, I was completely won by the director's mastery in creating such rich images unsing practically no 'background' at all. This simplicity puts characters forward and also makes the film look like a dream, a story --- as they should be told, leaving enough space to listeners/ viewers to imagine their own settings for the plot & its protagonists. It's at the same time thrilling and sad, sensual and merciless - a fantastic experience in all.

Painfully Boring....
...That's pretty much the best way to describe it. Not only was I 'sleeping' through the entire thing, just waiting for something to develope. but I can't even tell you what the whole point to the plot was. Even if I was in gradeschool again, I could not give a single summary on this thing. It went way too fast, the characters underdeveloped as were the relationships, (there was no sense of what was driving them). Overall it lacked depth and familiarity. The 'english' prose couldn't even help out this one!

Gay Bash
This film is very good at catching Marlowe's wordplay and the actors here are all well known and great at their craft. The problem I had with this was Jarman's use of contemporary issues to illuminate the story of England's openly gay monarch. Better correlations could have been drawn from then to now, not putting pro-gay protestors in the background. Show us how Edward II's treatment by his family and subjects contributed to the kind of gay bashing that still goes on today, hundreds of years afterward. I slightly recommend this film. ... Read more

Reviews (13)

Extraordinary, complex, deeply-felt
In Sebastiane (1976), British writer/directors Derek Jarman (this was his first feature) and Paul Humfress created a remarkable historical film and a landmark of gay cinema. It depicts the martyred fourth century Roman soldier, who was later both canonized as Saint Sebastian and revered as an enduring gay icon. The film strikingly balances a cinéma vérité depiction of the everyday life of common soldiers and a visionary exploration of one man's defiant growth in faith, even as it subtly questions the nature of that experience. Despite its microscopic budget, it is a remarkably well designed, shot, edited, scored (Brian Eno's first film music), and acted picture. The Kino DVD transfer is very good, especially considering that the picture was originally shot in 16mm, then blown up to 35mm.

The film takes some liberties with the historical/legendary Sebastian, who was never exiled to a remote outpost, and incredibly who was supposed not to have died from the arrows with which he was famously shot - how Emperor Diocletian ordered him killed, and how the film ends - but rather from a second execution when he was clubbed to death. Although the film works brilliantly on many levels - cinematic, psychological, spiritual, aesthetic, even political - what may strike you first is the vividness and authenticity of the ancient world it depicts. Despite an over-the-top prologue at the glitteringly decadent court of Diocletian, and its strategic use of famous Renaissance paintings of St. Sebastian (by Mantegna, Reni, etc.) in the final scene, this film feels like lived experience.

Shot on location in Sardinia, every well-worn costume and dusty prop seems genuine. The dialogue is in the rough "street Latin" of its day (with English subtitles), but rather than feeling gimmicky it helps capture the texture of these nine banished soldiers' daily life. Its realism is in striking contrast to big-budget "sword and sandal" epics, from the Silent Era to the recent Gladiator, which always look too manufactured. In fact, its stylistic roots are more in the hyper-real mythic films of Pasolini, like Oedipus Rex and Medea.

From stills, you might think that the cast was chosen for their sculpted bodies. But each of these actors, even those in supporting roles, fully inhabits their characters and brings them to life. In particular, Leonardo Treviglio (seen most recently in Julie Taymor's film Titus) gives an intensely restrained, brilliantly nuanced performance in the title role. The constant ribbing and roughhousing among these nine men provides not only verisimilitude, but energy and unpretentiousness.

That is especially important, because the film deals with some dauntingly complex themes, as important now as 1,700 years ago, including the meaning of spirituality, the place of sexuality in life, and the contradictory nature of reality. The film's wild streak of humor, and its breathtaking visual design, help to keep this profoundly serious work from overdosing on "heaviosity."

The thematic core, as expected in a work about a man on the road to sainthood, is spirituality; and few films, including self-styled "religious movies," let one feel so deeply the growing importance of faith to an individual. Even some of the translated dialogue is beautiful, as when Sebastian, gazing at his and the sky's reflection in a pool of water, says that divinity is "That beauty that made all colors different.... The heavens and earth are united in gold." But while that vision of faith is powerful, it also has many layers, some of which are provocatively ambiguous. For some viewers, a central question will be: Is Sebastian a true Christian or is he a syncretist grafting his personal version of the new religion onto much older, Greco-Roman roots? The film offers different possible answers, not as a dodge, but because the film realizes how multi-faceted religious experience is, growing out of social, personal, and spiritual contexts.

It is also a landmark in the history of gay-themed films. Not only is this an authentic-seeming depiction of the ancient world, it is one in which a person's sexual orientation is not at all an issue. The guys jibe each other equally about their interest in Vestal Virgins, famous female prostitutes, and other men. In addition to this still-refreshing "backgrounding" of sexual orientation, the film depicts some of the most genuinely sweet and loving moments of any gay-themed film up to that time, especially in the budding relationship of the minor characters Adrian (whom the men tease about being a virgin) and Anthony.

And Sebastian's sadistically lovelorn nemesis, Captain Severus, is much more than a traditional "homosexual heavy," like the diabolical Claggart in Billy Budd. Severus (played by Barney James) has psychological depth, and seems to be equally divided between raw lust and genuine love for Sebastian. The film also takes a complex approach to him. For instance, the most visually beautiful and tender images of men are entirely from Severus's POV. And during the pivotal seduction scene near the end, Severus is shown as both monstrously brutal and beautiful, his hair ringed with golden light. That is exactly how Sebastian describes his vision of God, earlier in the film.

This is an exceptional film, deeply-felt, beautiful, and complex.

An early Jarman film
With this DVD, KINO presents Derek Jarman's debut feature loosely based on the story of Sebastiane, son of a wealthy Roman family during the days of emperor Diocletian. However, those expecting a historical story of Christian faith should better look elsewhere. Recommented for Jarman completists (an early indication of the filmmaker's later work) but virtually no one else with serious interest in film.

Sebastiane converted to Christianity early on and even as commander of the Praetorian Guard and a personal favorite of the emperor, he did not hide his beliefs, actively renouncing persecutions of Christians, helping prisoners and proselytizing Romans to Christianity. This led Diocletian to order his execution. Roman soldiers shot him with arrows but he survived. A second execution was arranged and he was clubbed to death(288 AD).

However, viewing this film with the expectation of seeing a historical epic or a story of martyrdom, will inevitably lead to desappointment. Historical facts are only a backdrop, serving the filmmakers' intention of presenting the other well known aspect of Sebastiane's claim to fame: his link to homoeroticism and sadomasochism. How this relation came about historically is unclear. Some stories have it that Sebastiane was homosexual himself. Others that he had to refuse the emperor's advances on the grounds of his Christian faith. Whatever the case, it is most likely his repeated depiction in painting ( Procaccini, Pollaiulo, Botticelli, Reni, Bazzi etc) scantily clad and pierced with arows reinforced the associations. In Jarman's film, the Christinity angle seems more of an afterthought, an excuse to add some pretentious sounding monologues that set Sebastiane apart from those around him. The film's opening scene introduces the depravity and decadence of Roman life. In a scene that clearly points the artistic tendencies Jarman's carreer would later follow in an over the top fashion that is not at all concerned with subtlety. The major themes of the film are introduced: Roman life, the persecution of Christians, algolagnic extremities and Sebastiane's homosexuality and opposition to torture and violence. The film has him stripped of rank and exiled to a remote outpost. From then on, Sebastiane does everything in his power to accentuate his differences from his fellow soldiers (basically they are portrayed as a bunch of sadistic, degraded halfwits so to differ must have been easy for an educated, wealthy Roman with spiritual longing). The film consists of a series of algolagnic torture scenes mixed with a good measure of frustrated "boredom" scenes, which unfortunately mirrors the most likely state of its viewers. There is nothing of narrative cinsequence to speak of (save the first scene, the long middle and the ending). Plot is certainly secondary to the films thematic explorations. The performances are uniformly poor and the Latin "dialogue" sounds way too ridiculous in the actors' accents for a film that takes itself seriously, adding to the impression the film leaves as a low budget feature. Moreover, the characters are utterly unconvincing as Roman soldiers. They instead seem as convenient marrionettes in the films attempt to introduce its and convey its preoccupations.

The scenery is certainly one of the strong points of the film. But whereas the barren landscapes emphasize the complete isolation and give context to the soldiers' ennui, the film seems at times more like an excuse for copious amounts of male nudity. There are plenty of ways to enrich a story of utter boredom and debasement but the film sticks to one and drives in the point over and over again, in a sadly repetitive, narcissistic way that reminds more of cheap excuses for sexuality in softcore S&M porn than a story of profound spirituality and psychological torment (I am guessing the spirituality and sexuality/lust are supposed to be conflicted or even paralleled but repetitiveness spoils this).

Overall, the film fails to convey any sort of spiritual longing, significance and verismilitude. Best approaced as an experimental, low budget study of homoerotic sexuality than as a film with narrative and characters.

The DVD has no extras, the image is grainy(perhaps shooting on 16mm and later expanding to 35mm doesnt help) but passable. Rent if you have to see...

Expression is only the vehicle for content ...
I felt deeply disappointed by the film, which is empty, irrelevant and self-indulgent.
A lot of scenes in the movie were well arranged, sometimes sensual, defiant or narcissistic. However those images are static, hardly fluid and unsuitable for the media of motion picture. The sentiment, so, maybe too, beautifully portrayed in one split second, died quickly into the next, because of director's incapability to let those images or characters evolve and grow. Above all there is no coherent message or even an idea in the movie, except the director's own erratic obsession of beauty, moments or desire. His self-centeredness is hardly engaging to me.
I can accept paintings to stress forms while defying meaning. But motion picture has one more dimension than paintings. Such waste of its expressiveness is a crime. After all, ideas are the most powerful and exciting, but not an idea of emptiness.

sebastiane
My copy of the Kino DVD is full screen and not letterboxed as advertised. Several seconds have been deleted from the perhaps too long slow motion sequence with frolicking bathers - but these seconds are important and Jarman captured a natural and realistic event knowing full well what he was doing . I acquired the DVD to replace my old VHS version and while it is superior in many ways, I will keep the video as the true version and the one I saw originally on the movie screen.

Format
Why the heck did they letterbox this? They cut off Sebastian's anatomy. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

An amazing work from a picture that conveys so many feelings
This movey describes the feelings of an indivitual about the place he lives in ,his relationsheep with his inviroment and brings out the concept of personal and collective memory. It presents an illusive sense of our life , the moments that have past and meanwhile gives us a piece of the most private moments in Jarman's life. The most intensive experience is seeing the images and sounds and just try to feel and understand something you cannot grasp with the written word.

Poetry in the form of the moving image...
I can not say enough how incredible and perfectly poetic this film, Jarman's prose depicting modern England, dares to be. Buy it now or remain uninlightened. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Beautiful
There's nothing else in the world of cinema like this beautiful brilliant movie, this Blue. From Jubilee to Blue is an amazing arc indeed, and this, Derek Jarman's last film, is a marvel of music and color and poetry. To be with Jarman's film from the opening "O Blue come forth" to the final "I place a delphineum, blue, upon your grave" is to be in the presence of genius. He is deeply missed.

Untitled Blues
"I fall into a blue funk..." says the narrator about 10 minutes into this film. An understatement by far. Blue is a brooding spoken-word epic that traces the mind of a person (Jarman himself) who is in the advanced stages of AIDs. Jarman died from AIDs-related causes in 1994. The text, excerpted from Jarman's sublime book about color, CHROMA, riffs on the nature of the color blue--literally and metaphorically. These are melancholy, but not necessarily sad, meditations on the various "blues" the speaker has experienced throughout his life in general and his sickness in particular. True to the visionary nature of many of Jarman's films (The Last of England and Jubilee, for instance), Blue is a lush, experimental tour-de-force: there are no images accompanying the dialogue in this film, only an empty, glowing, aqua-marine blue screen that overwhelms the potential sadness of this film with a Tabula-Rasa like radiance. Aesthetically, this is a beautiful, but radical choice; viewers of this film will have to focus entirely on the fragmentary dialogue, without the help of images to keep distractions at bay. Politically, this choice sums up Jarman's artistic modus operandi: he is interested in work that leaves plenty of space for the viewer's imagination to fill in the narrative blanks. Jarman's empty blue screen shows the director working to not pin-down the experience of sickness and death too firmly. My only criticism of this films is that sometimes the dialogue becomes too melodramatic, undermining the understated visual component, All in all, however, Blue is an intoxicatingly morose film that, in spite of the lack of images, manages to engage the viewer throughout its duration. ... Read more

Reviews (10)

Love It
This is a cool movie with a lot of cool people in it. Adam Ant, Toyah Wilcox, Jordan (punk goddess), Little Nell, Richard O' Brien........lots. Sure, its weird. Yes, there is a lot of nudity. If that is offensive to you, then you shouldn't buy this movie.

If you want to see some of the people that were a part of the "punk scene" when it first started then buy this movie. And Plastic Surgery (which is a real Adam and the Ants song that Adam wrote and was performing with his band at the time....Deuchester Girls is in it too, but you hardly hear it) is a greeeaat song. And he looks HOT singing it. Heck, he looks hot through the whole thing. This movie was 3 years after Rocky Horror Picture Show and it is cool to see Little Nell and Richard O'Brien in another movie together.

Anyway- what I am trying to say is.....BUY THIS MOVIE. Even if you don't like it personally, people will think you are a hip guy just for owning it.

And it is cheaper here then at the movie store. Trust me.

An essential for any early punk fans
This is a highly unusual and artisticly revealing cinematic pleasure. If anyone has seen director Derek Jarman's films before, you probably know that he doesn't follow the conventions of film narrative. For punk fans it offers a view of the wasteland fantasy world that isn't too far off from the truth. Early glimpses of Adam Ant(the soon to be Mtv poster boy looking very young), Little Nell (Rocky Horror Picture Show), and Ian Charleson (Chariots of Fire). For any fan of the Sex Pistols' movie, "THe Great ROck and ROll Swindle"- this movie is perfect for you. IT contains lots of nudity- both male and female and has alot of questionable acts of violence. Not recommended for everyone- but definitely a rare treat.

not at all what i expected
i had a lot of trouble watching this, partly because it made no sense and partly because it wasn't interesting at all. a coherent storyline isn't really that essential for me, i enjoy david lynch. even though lynch rarely makes much sense his films are beautiful and hold your attention. technically jubilee was fair, visually it was okay. i ususally trust the criterion company with their releases but this is one of the few that i recommend against.

I would rather sleep
This movie is about as boring as a thanksgiving parade, i wouldnt really call this art either, its just basically a punk movie with punk influence. If you want a real art/punk film check out sid and nancy, its 5 stars better than this movie.

Anarchy & Beauty
Jubilee is a wildly beautiful - and entertaining - film which strikes a precarious, and compelling, balance between sheer anarchy and genuine beauty. I was so struck by it that I watched it three times in one week. Yet it remains an elusive work, constantly tantalizing with new connections and still more layers of meaning. The outstanding Criterion Collection DVD offers a wealth of supplemental features, making it an excellent introduction to both the film and director Derek Jarman.

The basic plot of this experimental fantasy is simple: Queen Elizabeth I has the historical alchemist John Dee summon the spirit Ariel and transport all of them 400 years into the future, where they find London a post-apocalyptic wasteland. The talented Jenny Runacre plays both Queen Elizabeth and the anarchic latter-day "queen" Bod, who leads an all-female biker gang.

Made in 1977, at the height of the Punk movement, Jubilee has misleadingly been called a "Punk movie." Despite its trappings (from clothing to casting several well-known singers), ultimately it seems more about Punk than of it. How Jarman uses then-rising star Adam Ant is revealing. With his sweetly boyish persona - made just a bit wild by the black leather and painted-on lower sideburns - Adam Ant as "Kid" is undeniably appealing. But throughout he is as passive offstage as he is frenzied onstage. And Kid, unable to connect with anyone, will do anything for his career. He signs with the grotesque Borgia Ginz, the multinational mogul who controls the entire planet's media - hence political, even religious - power structure. Ginz immediately rechristens Kid as "Scum. That's commercial. It's all [the audience] deserves." One of the film's most haunting images is of Kid lasciviously kissing his own image on a TV. How's that for a postmodern twist on the myth of Narcissus?

Beyond the Punk movement, Jarman turned to many diverse sources to flesh out his vision for Jubilee. It's powerful on its own terms, without any need for "footnoting," but the wide-ranging references create a fascinating texture. He uses film (notably Cocteau's Blood of a Poet, Godard's La Chinoise, Pasolini's Oedipus Rex, and Kubrick's A Clockwork Orange), literature (Huxley's Brave New World, Orwell's 1984; also his pastiche Elizabethan dialogue is beautiful: "I cast for Ariel, pearl of fire, my only star...."), history and myth (suggested by character names, from the historical female ruler of ancient Britain, Bodicea - i.e., "Bod" - and the Borgias to mythical figures like Sphinx and Angel), and even dance club culture (characters named Amyl Nitrate and Crabs). He is also one of the most creatively playful of modern filmmakers, and that schoolboyish "let's put on a show" energy keeps his films, even with their density of themes, buoyant and wonderfully entertaining.

Jarman also brings great emotional resonance through his characters (most of whom he cast from friends and lovers). I was often surprised by how much I cared about these eccentric, and sometimes lethal, allegorical people. Although each viewer will bond with different characters, I was most moved by the "triangle" between the two teasingly incestuous brothers, Sphinx and Angel (who utters the classic line, "I didn't know I was dead till I was 15"), and the artist Viv (whom Jarman described, affectionately, as a "butch dyke"). Their tangled connections, although genuinely caring, never reach true equality: The two men, on one level, can be seen as using the woman as a way of enhancing their own (masculine, even incestuous) relationship. Still, they become all the more affecting at the film's climax (which I will not divulge).

There is so much more to Jubilee than I can suggest in the brief space here: It is visually gorgeous (Jarman is a master of composition and lighting; he began as a painter, and stage and film designer), makes fascinating use of music (from Punk to classical) and sound effects, offers a provocative series of ideas about history (as Amyl says, "History still fascinates me. It's so intangible. You can weave facts anywhere you like. Good guys can swap places with bad guys"), media manipulation and artistic narcissism and audience passivity, and, ultimately, the duality of beauty and anarchy, which are perhaps two sides of the same double mirror. ... Read more

Reviews (13)

Extraordinary, complex, deeply-felt
In Sebastiane (1976), British writer/directors Derek Jarman (this was his first feature) and Paul Humfress created a remarkable historical film and a landmark of gay cinema. It depicts the martyred fourth century Roman soldier, who was later both canonized as Saint Sebastian and revered as an enduring gay icon. The film strikingly balances a cinéma vérité depiction of the everyday life of common soldiers and a visionary exploration of one man's defiant growth in faith, even as it subtly questions the nature of that experience. Despite its microscopic budget, it is a remarkably well designed, shot, edited, scored (Brian Eno's first film music), and acted picture. The Kino DVD transfer is very good, especially considering that the picture was originally shot in 16mm, then blown up to 35mm.

The film takes some liberties with the historical/legendary Sebastian, who was never exiled to a remote outpost, and incredibly who was supposed not to have died from the arrows with which he was famously shot - how Emperor Diocletian ordered him killed, and how the film ends - but rather from a second execution when he was clubbed to death. Although the film works brilliantly on many levels - cinematic, psychological, spiritual, aesthetic, even political - what may strike you first is the vividness and authenticity of the ancient world it depicts. Despite an over-the-top prologue at the glitteringly decadent court of Diocletian, and its strategic use of famous Renaissance paintings of St. Sebastian (by Mantegna, Reni, etc.) in the final scene, this film feels like lived experience.

Shot on location in Sardinia, every well-worn costume and dusty prop seems genuine. The dialogue is in the rough "street Latin" of its day (with English subtitles), but rather than feeling gimmicky it helps capture the texture of these nine banished soldiers' daily life. Its realism is in striking contrast to big-budget "sword and sandal" epics, from the Silent Era to the recent Gladiator, which always look too manufactured. In fact, its stylistic roots are more in the hyper-real mythic films of Pasolini, like Oedipus Rex and Medea.

From stills, you might think that the cast was chosen for their sculpted bodies. But each of these actors, even those in supporting roles, fully inhabits their characters and brings them to life. In particular, Leonardo Treviglio (seen most recently in Julie Taymor's film Titus) gives an intensely restrained, brilliantly nuanced performance in the title role. The constant ribbing and roughhousing among these nine men provides not only verisimilitude, but energy and unpretentiousness.

That is especially important, because the film deals with some dauntingly complex themes, as important now as 1,700 years ago, including the meaning of spirituality, the place of sexuality in life, and the contradictory nature of reality. The film's wild streak of humor, and its breathtaking visual design, help to keep this profoundly serious work from overdosing on "heaviosity."

The thematic core, as expected in a work about a man on the road to sainthood, is spirituality; and few films, including self-styled "religious movies," let one feel so deeply the growing importance of faith to an individual. Even some of the translated dialogue is beautiful, as when Sebastian, gazing at his and the sky's reflection in a pool of water, says that divinity is "That beauty that made all colors different.... The heavens and earth are united in gold." But while that vision of faith is powerful, it also has many layers, some of which are provocatively ambiguous. For some viewers, a central question will be: Is Sebastian a true Christian or is he a syncretist grafting his personal version of the new religion onto much older, Greco-Roman roots? The film offers different possible answers, not as a dodge, but because the film realizes how multi-faceted religious experience is, growing out of social, personal, and spiritual contexts.

It is also a landmark in the history of gay-themed films. Not only is this an authentic-seeming depiction of the ancient world, it is one in which a person's sexual orientation is not at all an issue. The guys jibe each other equally about their interest in Vestal Virgins, famous female prostitutes, and other men. In addition to this still-refreshing "backgrounding" of sexual orientation, the film depicts some of the most genuinely sweet and loving moments of any gay-themed film up to that time, especially in the budding relationship of the minor characters Adrian (whom the men tease about being a virgin) and Anthony.

And Sebastian's sadistically lovelorn nemesis, Captain Severus, is much more than a traditional "homosexual heavy," like the diabolical Claggart in Billy Budd. Severus (played by Barney James) has psychological depth, and seems to be equally divided between raw lust and genuine love for Sebastian. The film also takes a complex approach to him. For instance, the most visually beautiful and tender images of men are entirely from Severus's POV. And during the pivotal seduction scene near the end, Severus is shown as both monstrously brutal and beautiful, his hair ringed with golden light. That is exactly how Sebastian describes his vision of God, earlier in the film.

This is an exceptional film, deeply-felt, beautiful, and complex.

An early Jarman film
With this DVD, KINO presents Derek Jarman's debut feature loosely based on the story of Sebastiane, son of a wealthy Roman family during the days of emperor Diocletian. However, those expecting a historical story of Christian faith should better look elsewhere. Recommented for Jarman completists (an early indication of the filmmaker's later work) but virtually no one else with serious interest in film.

Sebastiane converted to Christianity early on and even as commander of the Praetorian Guard and a personal favorite of the emperor, he did not hide his beliefs, actively renouncing persecutions of Christians, helping prisoners and proselytizing Romans to Christianity. This led Diocletian to order his execution. Roman soldiers shot him with arrows but he survived. A second execution was arranged and he was clubbed to death(288 AD).

However, viewing this film with the expectation of seeing a historical epic or a story of martyrdom, will inevitably lead to desappointment. Historical facts are only a backdrop, serving the filmmakers' intention of presenting the other well known aspect of Sebastiane's claim to fame: his link to homoeroticism and sadomasochism. How this relation came about historically is unclear. Some stories have it that Sebastiane was homosexual himself. Others that he had to refuse the emperor's advances on the grounds of his Christian faith. Whatever the case, it is most likely his repeated depiction in painting ( Procaccini, Pollaiulo, Botticelli, Reni, Bazzi etc) scantily clad and pierced with arows reinforced the associations. In Jarman's film, the Christinity angle seems more of an afterthought, an excuse to add some pretentious sounding monologues that set Sebastiane apart from those around him. The film's opening scene introduces the depravity and decadence of Roman life. In a scene that clearly points the artistic tendencies Jarman's carreer would later follow in an over the top fashion that is not at all concerned with subtlety. The major themes of the film are introduced: Roman life, the persecution of Christians, algolagnic extremities and Sebastiane's homosexuality and opposition to torture and violence. The film has him stripped of rank and exiled to a remote outpost. From then on, Sebastiane does everything in his power to accentuate his differences from his fellow soldiers (basically they are portrayed as a bunch of sadistic, degraded halfwits so to differ must have been easy for an educated, wealthy Roman with spiritual longing). The film consists of a series of algolagnic torture scenes mixed with a good measure of frustrated "boredom" scenes, which unfortunately mirrors the most likely state of its viewers. There is nothing of narrative cinsequence to speak of (save the first scene, the long middle and the ending). Plot is certainly secondary to the films thematic explorations. The performances are uniformly poor and the Latin "dialogue" sounds way too ridiculous in the actors' accents for a film that takes itself seriously, adding to the impression the film leaves as a low budget feature. Moreover, the characters are utterly unconvincing as Roman soldiers. They instead seem as convenient marrionettes in the films attempt to introduce its and convey its preoccupations.

The scenery is certainly one of the strong points of the film. But whereas the barren landscapes emphasize the complete isolation and give context to the soldiers' ennui, the film seems at times more like an excuse for copious amounts of male nudity. There are plenty of ways to enrich a story of utter boredom and debasement but the film sticks to one and drives in the point over and over again, in a sadly repetitive, narcissistic way that reminds more of cheap excuses for sexuality in softcore S&M porn than a story of profound spirituality and psychological torment (I am guessing the spirituality and sexuality/lust are supposed to be conflicted or even paralleled but repetitiveness spoils this).

Overall, the film fails to convey any sort of spiritual longing, significance and verismilitude. Best approaced as an experimental, low budget study of homoerotic sexuality than as a film with narrative and characters.

The DVD has no extras, the image is grainy(perhaps shooting on 16mm and later expanding to 35mm doesnt help) but passable. Rent if you have to see...

Expression is only the vehicle for content ...
I felt deeply disappointed by the film, which is empty, irrelevant and self-indulgent.
A lot of scenes in the movie were well arranged, sometimes sensual, defiant or narcissistic. However those images are static, hardly fluid and unsuitable for the media of motion picture. The sentiment, so, maybe too, beautifully portrayed in one split second, died quickly into the next, because of director's incapability to let those images or characters evolve and grow. Above all there is no coherent message or even an idea in the movie, except the director's own erratic obsession of beauty, moments or desire. His self-centeredness is hardly engaging to me.
I can accept paintings to stress forms while defying meaning. But motion picture has one more dimension than paintings. Such waste of its expressiveness is a crime. After all, ideas are the most powerful and exciting, but not an idea of emptiness.

sebastiane
My copy of the Kino DVD is full screen and not letterboxed as advertised. Several seconds have been deleted from the perhaps too long slow motion sequence with frolicking bathers - but these seconds are important and Jarman captured a natural and realistic event knowing full well what he was doing . I acquired the DVD to replace my old VHS version and while it is superior in many ways, I will keep the video as the true version and the one I saw originally on the movie screen.

Format
Why the heck did they letterbox this? They cut off Sebastian's anatomy. ... Read more