Site icon valledeuco.org

Caligula: The Ultimate Cut movie review (2024)


The final film received universally horrible reviews — Variety described it as a “moral holocaust,” and the progenitor of this very site dubbed it “sickening, utterly worthless, shameful trash. If it is not the worst film I have ever seen, that makes it all the more shameful.” Despite, or perhaps because of, such critiques, the film would go on to be a success, especially when it arrived on the then-emerging home video market. Over the years, it has developed a cult following, to be sure, but that’s almost entirely due to a morbid fascination regarding its bizarre confluence of artistic ambitions and pornographic content. Although Guccione had discussed producing other films in the wake of “Caligula,” he never did—since one of these projects was rumored to have been about Catherine the Great, this is perhaps not that big of a loss.

And yet, what might have resulted if the film kept its initial conception? Is it possible that somewhere in the reported 96 hours of footage shot during its production lay a movie that was actually … good? These are the questions raised by “Caligula: The Ultimate Cut,” one of the oddest reclamation projects in cinema history. Producer Thomas Negovan has gone through all that footage and reconstructed an entirely new version of the film — using alternate takes and cut scenes and removing all of the hardcore footage — that hews closer to what it was intended to be. This renovation is so elaborate that, although it now clocks in at just under three hours, it does not contain a single frame of footage seen in the original version.

The result is different from what came before and is, in many instances, a marked improvement. This time around, viewers can have a better appreciation for the often-stunning costumes and production design contributions from the legendary Danilo Donati (who had worked with the likes of Zeffirelli and Fellini and who would go on to do the sets and costumes for “Flash Gordon”) that were inexplicably given short shrift the first time around. By selecting more nuanced takes instead of the over-the-top ones used before, McDowell’s performance displays more of an actual arc, making his characterization far more interesting than the flat-out loon seen the first time around. He still has plenty of moments where he struts around like a cross between Alex from “A Clockwork Orange” and Mick Jagger, but he also has moments that allow a bit of humanity to shine through.

Exit mobile version