Caligula: Uncut Edition (1979)

This is probably about as close you can get to high end film stars being involved in a porn film. Malcolm McDowell, Helen Mirren, John Gielgud and Peter O'Toole all offer their involvement in Tinto Brass' production, and it is certainly some production. The sets are enormous, the costumes impressive, and the twenty minute orgy that more or less closes the film is, at the very least, a bold final stretch of film. Without doubt one of the most controversial films ever made, Caligula exists in several forms; the one that I experienced was the 2007 Uncut Edition, although there is a also an 'Imperial Edition' which was also released in 2007 and, most excitingly (for some) there is a new cut that premiered at the Cannes film festival last year. The easiest one to get your hands on is the original UK cut, which is only ninety minutes long and is apparently unwatchable. Malcolm McDowell must be given credit for his performance as Caligula, heir to throne of his great-uncle Emperor Tiberius (a deranged O'Toole). He throws himself into this cacophony of filth and debauchery with aplomb, astutely assisted by a young Helen Mirren who appears in the second half of the film, and not only comes out of the film with reputation fully intact; has recently doubled down on her decision to star in the film, describing it as "an irresistible mix of art and genitals." My respect for Helen Mirren was enhanced still further after this comment; this after several more scenes of hardcore pornography were added to various extended cuts over the years (although admittedly not involving her). I absolutely agree that Caligula is an attempted mix of art and genitalia but I refute her claim that it's irresistible. By applying hardcore sex to mainstream film and selling it as art, you need to back up your claim and have a point to what you're doing. I didn't find Caligula offensive, indeed at times it's laugh out loud hilarious, but there are one or two scenes that are particularly difficult to sit through. One in which Caligula rapes a virgin then forces her to watch as he anally penetrates her fiance's anus with his fist is principally tricky viewing. Tinto Brass has disavowed changes to the cut that was eventually released- he claims his original version was more of an art spectacular- and when financier producer Bob Guccione (founder of Penthouse magazine) engaged Giancarlo Lui to film post-production scenes featuring hardcore sex, the film became something it was never intended to be. So is it art or is it porn? It's genuinely difficult to give and answer to this, because I haven't seen the several different cuts of the film. However I will say that a ninety minute cut of this film in any form wouldn't make any sense whatsoever, so the original UK release of this I can only imagine being absolute bilge. The Uncut Edition is two and half hours of madness, but there is a plot of sorts as we follow Caligula's rise after Tiberius' death, and there's some semblance of meaning, gradually following his great-uncle's descent into madness as he engages in repeated murders, rape, castration, incest and necrophilia, to name but a few. At times the film resembles Monty Python's Life of Brian, funnily enough released the same year as Caligula, and there's several scenes that could be extracted for a quiz- Caligula or Life of Brian? More pertinently does this mean that Caligula fails in what it sets out to do? Again, yes and no. For two hours Caligula walks a tightrope, but it spends more time slipping off that tightrope into the pit of foul matter below than it does feet on rope. In the final half hour the film abandons the tightrope completely, diving headfirst into a lengthy and explicit orgy, as Caligula decides that the foundations of Rome to the blame for the state it has become, and forces senator's wives to work in the service of the state as prostitutes. The scene is way too long, and it is essentially a porn film meaning that any good work in making the film a piece of art is cast aside in a section that is just crass. The final sequence of Caligula saves it from total oblivion. Many have accused the film of being far too violent as well as pornographic, but this isn't the case; in fact part of Caligula's problem is that it's not violent enough. Its finale ensures a satisfying conclusion to whatever it is we've just sat through, but trying to get your head around what that might have been proves particularly tricky. The great Roger Ebert walked out of Caligula after two hours, describing it as "sickening, utterly worthless, shameful trash" which is fair enough, but it potentially means he missed both the best and worst parts of the film. Does this make me a better man than Roger Ebert? In this specific case, no it doesn't. I'm still slightly unsure of what to make of Caligula. Malcolm McDowell and Helen Mirren's efforts ensure that it can't be completely without merit, and the set and costume design are admirable. But apart from that, it's a complete mess, and I mean that in every single depraved way you can think of. The problem probably lies with having a financier producer who was the founder of Penthouse magazine. His decision to employ someone to film hardcore sex sequences in post-production and insert them into the film in the same coquettish fashion that phallus's are used in Caligula, derails the film completely and utterly. So I suppose it is trash, but it's not completely worthless trash. I would have to regrettably admit that it should be avoided, but only because the clashing of art and porn seems so thoughtless- and there was definitely an idea somewhere along the line that's been completely lost amongst the nudity and nonsense, and quite nasty nonsense at times. I probably wouldn't this version of Caligula again, but I would be interested to see the recent Cannes cut, supposedly full of footage never seen before. Perhaps there are answers in it that some have been waiting over forty years for; but maybe it's simply another four hours of the original ninety-six hours of raw footage filmed. I suppose there's only one way to find out. 3.5/10