Customer Reviews

The Canterbury Tales [VHS]

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(7)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(5)

 

 

I was fortunate enough to purchase this DVD when originally issued, not so with Pasolini's other films. I had seen this film almost a year before buying it, and while it's not a GREAT movie it is still better than some. First off, the picture quality is not great, due to the museum conditions the print seems to have been stored under. This leads one to believe that not many prints survived. Using a mostly British cast adds as much realism to the film as can be mustered. The humour is typically bawdy and quite perverse at times (as in Satan farting out the monks ). I am quite sure that Chaucer would have been proud of this film of his work. The only problem i have with the picture is the uneven cinematography. Tonino Delli Colli's work has greatly improved since, but in this film is either over-saturated with light or is too dark. His ultimate camera work is in Leone's ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA, but apart from the inconsistancies with lighting he is a quite capable cameraman. One wonders what use Pasolini could have made with Giuseppe Rotunno or Luciano Tovoli. Other people might have a problem with Pasolini's inclusion of homosexual love scenes, but they are quite subdued from being actual pornography. And although Pasolini was himself homosexual, he doesn't throw it the viewer's face as being all-important. All in all, the film is quite deserving of the NC-17 rating which my DVD copy carries. Too bad the United Artists logo doesn't appear at the beginning since they distributed the film in the early 70's

Writer and director Pasolini presents a selection of Chaucer's stories, most notably The Wife of Bath and The Miller's Tale. The Canterbury Tales is not without its weaknesses. The quality of the acting is variable (the dubbing doesn't help), and the editing is rough. Some stories end/start so abruptly that it takes you by surprise. However, I can forgive this film almost anything. For me, the atmosphere and feel it conveys far outweigh any faults it may have. Pasolini has recreated Chaucer's lusty medieval world with an earthy realism, exuberance, and zest for life in a way that few other directors could have managed. People who are easily shocked should beware. Pasolini has concentrated on the bawdier aspects of the tales, and added few of his own for good measure. It all combines to give The Canterbury Tales a wonderful hedonistic quality. The finale, a vivid depiction of Hell, makes for a superbly appropriate ending.

It's certainly not a faithful adaptation of Chaucer's work, if that's what you're looking for. It includes four segments that are fairly faithful tellings of tales (Merchant's, Miller's, Reeve's, Pardoner's), along with bits that take one or two elements from different tales but don't really go all the way, and quite a number of unspeakably bizarre bits that have absolutely nothing to do with the source work. Extraordinarily strange, with less-than-impressive acting/dubbing, but sort of entertaining anyway. And...do my eyes deceive me, or is one of the extras in the first scene that guy (Nicholas something) from Are You Being Served?

My apology. I am the same guy who commented on the quality of the DVD. I have made one mistake. Pasolini chose a mainly English cast when he made this film. Therefore, either the Italian or the English version is dubbed, thus making no difference or importance to the 'orginality'. But of course, it would be perfect if Image Entertainment could provide a DVD with both choices. Now I want to comment on the film itself.

Pasolini's THE CANTERBURY TALES is the second part of the 'Trilogy of Life'. This time Pasolini plays Chaucer who jots down the stories told by the pilgims on the way to Canterbury, which is by all means a more convincing character to link up the tales than Giotto the painter in THE DECAMERON, who has nothing to do with Boccaccio, and only appears in the middle of the film. This is a clear improvement from THE DECAMERON in terms of presentation. (THE ARABIAN NIGHTS is even better in showing the most complex cobweb-like story-within-story structure, but this is not to be discussed here.)

The tales Pasolini has picked up are all very interesting for-adults-only entertainment, often daringly making fun out of farting and even pissing! Though transition from one tale to another appears to be too abrupt sometimes, the conculsion can let audience forgive everything, as Chaucer (Pasolini) writes, 'Here end the Canterbury Tales, told only for the pleasure of telling them. Amen.' Amen - a word that effectively connects the 'hell' scene (Judgement Day) with the final scene of the pilgrimage. It seems that Pasolini intentionally makes no connection among the tales, as he has done none in THE DECAMERON either.

Beware, and read the details carefully. This DVD is only in dubbed English, which destroys the originality of the film. Quite unforgivable. Don't buy this.

I've read the Canterbury Tales, so I was expecting lots of toilet humor (nakedness, fart jokes, etc.), but this film seems to take it too far. Their were bits that got a chuckle out of me (the Devil's fart, for example) but altogether they Pasolini seems to have enjoyed putting raunchiness in for its own sake, rather then to further the film.

There was a few good actors, but too many were horrible. They seemed as though they were reading off cue cards, and were not involved in the scene at all.

The screenplay didn't help matters. It was a shoddy adaptation with wooden, unmotivated dialogue. Only a few stories were truly based on Chaucer, others were supposedly juxtaposing several stories into one, it didn't work. Pasolini also threw in some Chaucer but at uneven moments only to have the actors butcher the verse.

Their was some nice cinematography, as far as filming the landscapes, but other then that, relatively insignificant.

Not being aware of Pasolini's reputation before seeing this film (though I have seen 'Il Decameron', which I enjoyed more) allowed me to view the work from one of two ways, either unschooled in his style, or open to making observations without being influenced by his fame.

Either way, I was unimpressed.

If you dare venture into the realm of this amazing director, be prepared and forewarned. This is not for everyone. But for those of us who love him, he is extraordinary and no other director has braved the waters that he has. Visionary and lewd, revolutionary and base, he is not for you if you are looking for Hollywood style flicks. You simply cannot judge Pasolini by the movies you have seen before. He is in a world all his own.

"The Canterbury Tales" is second part of Pasolini's 'Trilogy Of Life' but certainly the most innocent, and perhaps dullest, of the three. Based on stories by Chaucer the film has been set in England, however the native tongue has been dubbed in Italian with English subtitles. The stories are fairly adult in nature but mostly harmless unlike Pasolini's shocker, "Salo".

Final thoughts - watch but don't buy unless you're a fan of the director!.

It should be mentioned right at the start that this DVD is not the director's cut that won the top prize at the 1972 Berlin Film Festival. That version ran 140 minutes while this one clocks in at 112 minutes. That's almost 30 minutes of missing footage which no doubt explains the choppy quality of the editing and the incoherent nature of some of the stories. I first saw this movie when it played in U.S. theaters back in 1980. There was no NC-17 rating back then and so it was rated X. I watched as within the first hour virtually everyone walked out on the film. Those expecting a Masterpiece Theatre version of Chaucer were scandalized and those expecting a porno version of classic literature (remember GRIMM'S FAIRY TALES FOR ADULTS?) didn't get the sex they were looking for. While there were sex scenes, it was the full frontal male nudity that got the X rating (just like today). That and the infamous ending which still has to be seen to be believed. I saw the English language version which works better than the Italian because of all the English actors involved (including a pre-DR WHO Tom Baker in the WIFE OF BATH'S TALE).

If you are familiar with the works of Pier Paolo Pasolini then the nature and the overall look of the film will come as no surprise. In addition to being a filmmaker, Pasolini was a poet, a visionary, a Marxist, a gay rights activist, and a political agitator. It was the last two activities which led to his murder in 1975. His films have a raw power about them and a deliberately primitive style that recalls the films of D. W. Griffith and those of Italian Neorealism. Pasolini deliberately used non-professionals in many of his films to achieve the look he wanted and to get "unaffected" performances. The film was made in several of Chaucer's English locations giving the stories a real sense of verisimilitude. The fact that Sergio Leone's regular cameraman Tonino Delli Colli was also Pasolini's regular cameraman tells you that Pasolini deliberately wanted a cinema-verite look. Yes the performances are uneven and the dubbing is occasionally haphazard but that doesn't take away from the film's overall effectiveness. Hopefully one day we can see the 140 minute version which should flow better and make more sense.

This is the second in Pasolini's series of setting classic bawdy tales to film... In this case, he selected eight of Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, including the infamous miller's tale and the incident with the red hot poker kiss...

The tales revolve around a group of pilgrims who are journeying to the shrine of Saint Thomas a Becket of Canterbury... The trip is so boring that they begin telling each other stories that soon get obscene, gory and very sexy... Pasolini adds another motif to his visualization by placing Chaucer himself into the movie, periodically cutting to him writing at his desk...

Pasolini inserts pleasure and amusement at social customs, especially marriage... Some of the stories are funny, others are deadly serious... The scene where a young man is burned for making love to another of his own sex, for example, is chilling...

In fact, Pasolini's using non professional actors, is more in keeping with the tone of the original than the usual romanticized versions...