pretty images to not a movie make
by
Douglas Messerli
Derek
Jarman, Suso Cecchi d'Amico, and Nicholas Ward-Jackson, (screenplay, based on a
story by Ward-Jackson), Derek Jarman (director) Caravaggio / 1986
Although
in the past I have enjoyed many of Derek Jarman’s overheated homoerotic films,
particularly his Sebastiane of 1976, his
movie of 10 years later, Caravaggio—although containing some fairly lovely
images—appears to have no logical point of view except to, apparently,
celebrate the Renaissance painter’s life for its open expression of
homosexuality and bisexuality, classifying the handsome artist as a kind of
wild aesthete in the manner of Shakespeare’s wild nemesis, Christopher Marlowe.
Yet Marlowe, who like Caravaggio was
killed (in the Italian artist’s case, evidently of poisoning), in revenge for
his bad behavior, was highly educated, while in Jarman’s version, the Italian
artist, although immensely talented, was little more than a street ruffian.
All the better for Jarman’s purposes,
since between friezes of the prostitutes and street figures who Caravaggio used
for painted figures, he can let the handsome young Caravaggio (Dexter Fletcher)
and chiseled but decaying older Caravaggio (Nigel Terry), tended to by the mute
Jerusaleme (Emile Nicolaou/Jonathan Hyde)—who the artist evidently purchased,
with pederastic intentions from Jerusaleme’s Grandmother (Zohra Sehgal) early
in the film—play out their own somewhat orgiastic adventures without much
meaning.
Caravaggio, himself, has also been
“purchased,” it is suggested, by Cardinal Del Monte (Michael Gough) who
leeringly encourages the artist to produce his art, while evidently keeping the
boy/man up many a night with his sexual attentions. Jarman clearly loves a good
orgy or two, but mostly in this film he just hints at them instead of exploring
their political and social implications as he did in Sebastiane.
This film seems to be simply a kind of
endless narrative, narrated often in a voiceover of the younger Caravaggio,
recounting his sexual adventures, interspersed with very badly conceived
recreations of Caravaggio’s beautiful art.
Just to remind us how “contemporary”
the late-Renaissance bad boy really was, the director interposes numerous
anachronisms throughout the film: courtiers madly typing up messages,
Caravaggio standing aside a green truck, a motorbike speeding by, and a bar
laced with electric lights. Perhaps Jarman thought his campy-like references
might save his pointlessly wavering plot, but, I’m afraid, it points up the
fact that he has very little to say about the artist and his art itself.
He
might as well have chosen any other wild-living figure of the past. If
Sebastiane, as a sensuously sexual explorative Christian, was presented as
being torn between the licentious and the pure, Caravaggio, at least in this
depiction, simply jumps into the mud.
Observing a ruddy-faced street-boxer,
Ranuccio (Sean Bean), he demands his sexual attentions, which the man, given
enough money, is willing to entertain; but with him, fortunately, comes
Ranuccio’s girlfriend, Lena (in the amazing Tilda Swinton’s first film role),
and in order to get the red-faced streetboy into his bed, it appears that
Caravaggio must enter into a meage a` trois. As a threesome they work well
together, but when Ranuccio and Lena are observed making love to the artist
separately, jealousy, as the cliché goes, “rears its ugly head.”
Much of this film is, in fact, filled
with clichés or, at least, with sentences that are destined to become clichés
through just such a film. As Washington Post film critic Paul Attanasio wrote
in his 1986 review:
“What's
most puzzling is Jarman's view of Caravaggio himself. Throughout, the artist
talks in voice-over, a jumble bizarrely composed of overheated poesy,
homoerotic dreams and the kind of "insights" that might inspire a
sophomore at Bennington to scribble in the paperback margin, "|" or
even "|||" Thus: "Man's character is his fate"; "The
gods have become diseases"; "All art is against lived
experience"; "I am trapped, pure spirit in matter ..."
I have no idea what Attanasio had against
Bennington University women, but the script might remind us of thousands of
such well-intentioned university-student perceptions throughout the world. I
probably wrote some myself.
Of course, tragedy lies just behind the
tapestries. Lena, who is now pregnant does not implicate either of her lovers
and now intends to become mistress to the wealthy Scipione Borghese (Robbie
Coltrante). Murder seems to be the result of her determination, as Caravaggio
and Jerusaleme clean Lena’s nude murdered body in order to capture it in a
painting.
Arrested for Lena’s murder, Ranuccio claims
innocence, Caravaggio appearing to believe him and arranging through his
Vatican connections to release him.
But when Ranuccio admits the murder to
the artist, Caravaggio slits his throat, while we return to the murderer’s own
bed, where he has visions of attempting to deny priests from offering him the
last rites.
Okay, this wild young genius lived large
and mostly uncontrollably, a kind of Warhol of many centuries past, which is
what I suppose attracted Jarman to his subject. Yet, you want to ask, so what?
Was murder by poisoning the AIDS of other centuries? Did he deserve what he
got? Was he somehow simply misunderstood by a society that was, in fact, far
more open to various sexual deviances than our own? It’s hard to know what to
make of the film Caravaggio because I don’t believe the writers had a clue about
what they were trying to say.
Pretty images do not a movie make.
Los
Angeles, Thanksgiving Day, 2018
Reprinted
from World Cinema Review (November 2018).
No comments:
Post a Comment