Caligula (1979)

Back in the days…

The story is about the rise and fall of the Roman Emperor Caligula. He becomes emperor after Emperor Tiberius is killed. Caligula was apparently 25 years old at the time. He was popular among the people, but I wish they had given us a couple of scenes to establish it better. Malcolm McDowall does an impressive role as Caligula. I never thought he would do a role that makes Alexander DeLarge seem like a rather pleasant person, but here we are. McDowall and Brass agreed on instead of playing Caligula like a madman, they were more interested in portraying him as a great anarchist. Where the truth lies is hard to say, but it remains an interesting choice that works.

Our possessed emperor Caligula.

Based on the historical sources from the time, this portrayal of ancient Rome is apparently pretty accurate. For instance the island Capri was legendary for the sexual perversities Emperor Tiberius indulged in (probably a good thing that part isn’t shown). Peter O’Toole does a fine job as Tiberius and that demonic look in his eyes eventually shows in Caligula too. Though it isn’t really necessary for the film it would have been interesting to explore his origins a bit further. John Gielgud’s minor role is a pleasant one that gives the film, along with McDowall, O’Toole, Mirren and John Steiner, the acting depth it needs. Apparently Gielgud loved the film and saw it three times. Teresa Ann Savoy deserves to be mentioned as well. McDowall comments that according to her own admittance she wasn’t the greatest actress, but there is something very likeable about her. She has a great smile and we are shown her as what stops Caligula from going completely overboard, for some time at least. We are treated to a nice threesome between her, Caligula and Caesonia (Mirren) as well. John Steiner, now a successful real estate agent, plays convincingly creepy as Longinus. He is an actor I always feel is unfairly neglected, that actually had the guts to take on some very, let’s say, alternate roles. While it’s great to see Caligula walk his path towards doom I always get the distinct feeling something is missing, though I’m never entirely sure what.

The real star of Caligula, to me at least, is Danilo Donati’s art direction and costume design. Everything here looks great. There is the wonderfully unpractical head decapitating machine, which Helen Mirren refuses to watch on the audio commentary. Yet oddly enough she has no qualms with seeing the penis severing later on, which makes me think Lars Von Trier may have been onto something with Antichrist. We also have the magnificent ship used during the big orgy scene after Caligula has prostituted the senator’s wives. The soldiers dancing in this scene has a comical quality to them. You can see a similar walk in Robin Hood: Men in Tights. Seeing huge white sets with a lonely Caligula walking through wearing a red dress is truly beautiful and captures the grandeur of it all very well. Donati expertly realizes the excesses of ancient Rome.

One big happy family, well maybe not, but Donati sure knew how to make a film look grand!

The sex is frequent, yet doesn’t feel very erotic for the most part. The unrated version tries to deal with this with mediocre results, partially due to more sloppy cinematography. Caligula shows the sexual debauchery that went on to great extent, but still allows the viewer to observe it with a certain detached attitude. There are some stand-out scenes among them though, one being Caligula having his way with the bride of a Roman soldier and then further humiliating him with lard and putting a cherry on him. It reminds me of a similar moment of cruelty in Salon Kitty where a Nazi steps on the toy of a little Jewish kid. The insanity that can possess people, rendering them unable to empathize with others, because they simply think they are better. Kudos to Brass for making uncomfortable scenes like these and actually making them work very well.

Uncomfortable art. Caligula humiliating the bride and groom.

Year’s back I bought Caligula on VHS thinking it was the uncut version. It was the R rated 98 minute version, but I still enjoyed it, despite having this feeling that there was a bigger movie in there yearning to breathe free. More years passed and I finally got to watch the unrated 156 minute version and the alternative 153 minute version. The unrated version is the one closest to what Penthouse founder Bob Guccione envisioned. It features a lot more hardcore footage and some curious editing choices. Unlike the alternative version, this has Caligula and his sister running around in the forest somewhere around the middle, the unrated cut opens with this. I thought it was a rather charming and naïve way of starting the movie. It made me think this would be a entertaining sexual romp to put a smile on my face. This of course soon changes. Anyone venturing into the world of Caligula should expect a certain amount of sexual debauchery and then some. The unrated cut delivers in this aspect. My problem with a lot of this footage, which Guccione shot himself, is that it you notice it’s inserted. I don’t really mind inserted footage if they’re able to make it work or if a directors like Bruno Mattei or Joe D’Amato does it, but this is supposed to be a great motion picture. Instead all the added hardcore footage makes you yawn. Guccione complained that the film wasn’t erotic enough, but his contribution does next to nothing to help this matter. The additional footage makes the movie drag and the editing here is inferior to that of the alternate cut. The R rated cut drops all the hardcore footage and remains the weakest of the three versions, clearly screaming something is missing.

Guccione had a vision of the film. His vision was somewhere along the lines of the ultimate porn film. Gore Vidal, who wrote the screenplay, had a vision of the film. In fact Vidal has, quite arrogantly, said that a director’s job should be to stay as faithful as possible to the authors vision. And director Tinto Brass had a vision of the film. So what happens when egos collide? Three different cuts, a director who is only credited as “director of principal photography”, Malcolm McDowall and others re-writing the script almost on a daily basis among others. I think the history around this movie is important because it gives you a better understanding of what Caligula is and what it should have been. Seeing an interview with Tinto Brass I was surprised that he didn’t really hold a grudge against Guccione. Instead he blames the men surrounding and influencing Guccione. Of course he controlled the money, which had a lot to do with the outcome. Having seen Brass’ excellent Salon Kitty I really wish he had been given a fair chance to prove his worth. Tinto himself states that he intended to make a movie about the “orgy of power” and not the” power of the orgy”, which is closer to what Caligula has become. It’s strange how things can turn out.

While Caligula may not seem like such a big deal today it’s was quite controversial upon its release. Seeing actors of such stature in a film frequently shelved in the porn section wasn’t everyday stuff. All the controversy seems only to have given it a bigger audience and the movie was a hit.

I appreciate and like Caligula for what it is, even though I feel the parts don’t really add up as a whole. It’s an interesting, well made, depraved and severely flawed film. It’s frustrating to see a film where you see its intentions unfulfilled. Caligula is a case where the making of the film is more interesting than the actual film itself, unfortunately. Even so it has rightfully made its mark in movie history. Caligula is worth seeing for the open minded and the excellent DVD release features an abundance of anecdotes and insight well worth seeing.

Alternate cut – 7/10

Unrated cut – 5/10

R rated cut – 4/10