Customer Reviews

Klimt

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(8)

 

 

The motion picture "Klimt" by the vangardist director Raul Ruiz is a nonchalantly descriptive allegory of the art of Klimt more so than a purist's biopic. The resonant lyricism of the cinematography has an appeal of its own, but the movie suffers from a neurosis of sober surrealism rather than the decadent Viennese indomitable foray of which Klimt is a patriarch. We see Egon Schiele as a flaky genius who revered Gustav Klimt while swirled within a psychotic dispondancy outlined by art critics and a clinical practice where Klimt was receiving treatment for Syphilis. The movie is staged well and creatively portrayed but the artistic intentions of the director become entangled in a state of overindulgence where the fictive recreation of Klimt's last and most productive years are saturated by a prosthetic expressionism that overwhelms the designs of the creators. The farrago of jaded models and Jewish paramours stands to make of the eroticism of the painter into a detached grandiloquence he carelessly stands ceremony upon while critics insinuate and frame to their liking and in consonance with a theoretical/moral decrepitude well on its way. John Malkovich overcompensated for the duldrums of an era and the unaffected delirium that he chances to become a spectator of instead of a victim to. The importunity of such a representation are deserving merit but fail to characterize the passion and zeal of a master who changed the art scene. No reference to influences are made and no epiphanies are ever sallied through the movie. The rhythm is decadent and the mood ominous, but of such talents and expertise we were well aware and even used to when it comes to Ruiz. If Klimt was a precursor to surrealism is a topic for art historians and critics which the movie does its best to undress, but to depict a representative time capsule of an artist and his times in such a fashion neither entertains nor proves insightful. "Klimt" is devoid of both the hypnotism and the opulence of the expressive decadence that is a trademark of the painter's style. The promising pronouncements of this piece are debilitated by a bouquet of inadequate metaphors where decay and derangement seem to speak the same language but cannot communicate with adequacy.

This is a very VERY bad film and Dee J. probably didn't even watch it. Klimt was Austrian, not German, okay? He lived in Vienna, Austria. To paraphrase from a review from the Columbus Dispatch, the film sheds little light on the artist. It's the kind of film that gives Art House films a bad name. There isn't much of a plot, just a series of generally bizarre incidents in which Klimt meets potential models, patrons, family and others. He treats them with indifference and contempt, just as they do him. The real Klimt was famous for his reticence and generosity. The film shows him in situations that never happened and with people he never met. Klimt is depicted dying of syphilis. In reality, Klimt suffered a stroke and succumbed to influenza. Malkovich looks good but doesn't do much. He lacks much expression or emotion, but he does LOOK a little like Klimt. So what? He's actually pretty annoying and vapid. Much like the film. If you're wondering why this film went straight to video, read any online reviews. Steer clear of this one. It's gold-leafed pseudo-Artistic drivel.

... that films about painters are nearly always pretentious, precious, pompous soft porn? In just the past few years, I've set myself up to groan through a film about Goya, fret through Frida, and pout through Pollock. This film by the daring director Raul Ruiz, billed as an allegorical interpretation of the art of Gustav Klimt rather than a mere mundane biographical documentary, might well be the worst of the lot. Actually, I can't be sure how bad it was, since the music track was so loud that it covered half the script, and there were no subtitles. If I turned the volume high enough to catch most of the mumbled dialogue, the sudden blats of thoroughly unrelated music threatened to damage my eardrums. Several of the actors/actresses, whatever their nationalities, seemed to be trying to affect a slight Austrian accent -- who knows why -- while John Malkovich, starring as Klimt, made no effort not to sound 100% American. Malkovich IS 100% American, not just his voice but his posture, facial expressions, emotional affect. He was either sadly miscast in this role, or else the director intended some coy cognitive dissonance.

The whole film is -- big surprise! -- framed as a collage of flashbacks from Klimt's death bed in a hospital, where he's given some sort of weird subliminal Last Unction by the epicene Egon Schiele. The retro-narrative is all about submissive/seductive nude models and mysterious voyeurs and Klimt's boorish refusal to play any part in his own life agreeably. I warn you, even the fleeting glimpses of those lovely naked ladies won't be enough to keep you from wishing the whole film over.

What are the last thoughts, images and emotions one dwells upon before exhaling their last breath and leave their mortal coil? This is the approach taken by writer/director Raul Ruiz in his biographical film about the Austrian painter Gustav Klimt. As he lays comatose in a hospital bed the story of his life unfolds in disjointed, near hallucinogenic sequences.

The audience is moved swiftly from the dying artists' bedside caught up in his feverish visions. Join him at art exhibitions, social events with the rich and famous, painting while surrounded by numerous nude models in his studio, pleasuring himself at a local brothel or gazing through the lens of a microscope at the hospital. Surely Klimt was a man with a lot on his plate.

Recently released in '06, `Klimt definitely falls into the category of an art house film. While I have to award the production high marks on its original and unorthodox approach to the storyline and its ability to underscore the mundane events pictured with an illusory feel that fits perfectly with what one might expect from the mind of the dying artist I must admit that I found the film overall unsatisfying.

Atmosphere can only hold your attention for so long and then one begins to expect something more which this film never delivers. In my opinion there was no attempt to establish some level of personal attachment to any of the characters, no plot surprises, nor any peak moments to re-involve the audience in the story. For me one viewing was definitely enough.

The one star I'm giving this is strictly for the lushness of the photograhy, sets and costumes. The filmmaker's trying so hard to be artsy that it gets almost nauseating. The surreal, disjointed scenes are nearly impossible to follow, but I was determined to persevere to the end, assuming all those loose ends might cohere eventually. They didn't. I was not expcting a biopic but I did expect SOME verisimilitude. Klimt was a trendsetter who influnced many artists of his time and beyond, and his memory deserves better than this abomintion. He's probably spining in his grave at this very moment.

I've never posted a movie review on any web site ever, but I feel like I have an obligation to society to review this monstrosity. This is EASILY the worst "movie" I have ever seen. I put "movie" in quotes, because I don't think "movie" is an apt description of what I saw - a jumble of audio and video is more accurate. I wanted to give it 0 stars, but that was not an option, thanks to Amazon.

From the other reviews, you already know this is not a biopic - which is fine. What is not fine, is that this "movie" lacks any sort of plot, character development, or coherent thought, message or theme. After watching it almost twice, I don't know what I was supposed to take away from this film, if anything.

Also, this "movie" has absolutely nothing to do with Klimt. They could have called this movie Steve or Johnson or Mark or Randy and it would have had the same effect, since there is essentially nothing in this film that has anything to do with the painter, except for the fact that it is set in Vienna.

That's the real tragedy of all this. Raul Ruiz knew he wanted to make a crummy "movie," but to ensure he wouldn't loose too much money on it, he made the title Klimt, because he knew Klimt has so many fans. He basically piggybacked off of a more successful artist.

I am so angry at Mr. Ruiz for ruining what could have been a great subject. I also plan on boycotting any future movies that these writers, directors, producers and cast members become involved in.

Mr. Klimt deserves so much better than this. I thank God every day that he is not alive to see what Mr. Ruiz has done.

Obviously, Raoul Ruiz's fantasy flick about Viennese Fin-de-Siecle artist, Gustav Klimt was honed down quite a bit to fit into a 97 minute format for theatrical presentation. Unfortunately, this DVD does not include the longer director's cut that in all probability would shed some much needed light on this cinematic phantasmagoria.

A miscast John Malkovich plays Klimt with a disdainful aloofness that I imagine does not adequately represent the artist's humble background. Klimt's decorative paintings implementing design techniques and motifs found in Byzantine mosaics and Egyptian and Japanese art, revolve mainly around his obsession with the female form. Many of his overtly sexual allegorical drawings were considered pornographic--indeed he was criticized for this at the time and he thumbed his nose at his critics with his painting "Goldfish" where his model is deliberately posed with her derriere presented to the observer and subtitled: "To my Critics." Klimt's erotic nature is exemplified by his many relationships with his models--he never married but fathered at least fourteen children--and the erotic poses he captured--most notably Danae depicting a woman in the throes of orgasm.

My brief history suggests an earthier Klimt than that depicted by the effete Malkovich. Nonetheless Ruiz's vision of Klimt begins with him in a hospital on his deathbed, suffering from the ravages of advanced syphilis (Klimt died of pneumonia) and looking back on a life that he equates with an inferno of sorts. Frequently, Malkovich as Klimt quotes from Dante and indeed he like the esteemed poet was plagued with his fair share of Beatrices.

Fashion designer Midi or Emilie Floge, (Veronica Ferres ) makes a lovely companion for the reckless Klimt. Ruiz hints that their relationship was strained. Platonic? Klimt does not kiss her on the mouth and Midi shows anger and annoyance. Nonetheless she is privy to the birth of his daughter by another woman--she and a caftan-clad Klimt cavort about in her dress studio celebrating this news as a photographer captures their avant-garde style. However, she remains steadfast and most obviously a lovely muse as shown in the sequence where her face and neck meld into a variety of Klimt backgrounds: poppies, swirls and gold foil.

A rather sylphlike stick Saffron Bellows plays Lea di Castro, the sultry turn-of-the-century ballet dancer and postcard beauty that turned the head of the Austrian Emperor, Cleo De Merode. Fascinated by her, Klimt pursues her to her rooms and is observed through a double glass by her keeper, a voyeuristic duke, while the two carouse amongst opulent pillows and sheets fit for royalty. As Klimt is unsure as to whether he is bedding Lea or Lea's double, I ponder Ruiz's symbolism with regard to this. The intentional confusion muddies an already overloaded bombardment of images of the Viennese caught in the act of armchair philosophizing about everything and anything seemingly intellectual and pretentious in the city's numerously well-heeled coffee shops.

Klimt as Mr. Erotic himself holds center stage in this venue. The artist is depicted as being hounded by a variety of odd characters. Mizzi, the mother of his son, Gustav, wishes to bring her child up Jewish. His mother and sister, both prone to crazy outbursts, sarcastically enumerate all of Klimt's illegitimate children while Klimt notes with typical Malkovich affectation that "Children are gifts from God." Painters Egon Schiele and Oskar Kokoschka blow in and out of different dreamlike segments where we see them envisioning their own art. And Klimt and a figment of his imagination in the form of a functionary, "The Secretary" allow Ruiz to ruminate on art and its function as an outlet to the reality of everyday life in true coffeehouse talking style.

What does it all mean? Good question. Probably better answered in the longer version that would add more sequences to the overall film and allow Ruiz's vision more time to dwell in the mind of the audience. In the "Making of Klimt" bonus footage, Ruiz and the actors speak of their experience creating the film. Within this context there are segments of the film shown that do not appear in the featured 97 minute format. Because of this and the convoluted dreamlike state the film conjures up, I suggest viewing the longer format and if possible viewing it a few times just for clarity sake. Do watch the bonus features as they give some illumination on the film's intention.

Bottom line? Malkovitch plays painter Gustav Klimt with his usual free-wheeling free-spirited snobbery which in light of what is known about this personage seems counterproductive. In true art house style, director Ruiz presents a muddled portrayal of the artist who is depicted as being at odds with himself with regard to the true meaning of what he has accomplished. If he lived according to his conscience, did he live well and with the gusto he seemed to preach? Malkovitch's Klimt seems too detached. Somehow I believe the real deal lived just the way in which he wanted--with little if no regret and with little regard to the rules of convention. I recommend viewing the longer director's cut of this film at least twice for a better understanding of the director's intent. Not for those expecting a standard bio-pic--this one is definitely a surrealist interpretation of the artist's life. Supplement your understanding with "
Gustav Klimt: From Drawing to Painting," the novel, "The Painted Kiss: A Novel" narrated by a fictive Emilie Floge and the current online Tate Gallery Klimt exhibit. IKlimt.com also provides a marvelous timeline.
Diana Faillace Von Behren
"reneofc"

I know they were trying to go for an unique artful portrayal of Klimt, but if you don't know anything about the artist besides having seen his work, there really isn't much substance in this movie. I love all the actors, especially Malkovich being one of my favorites. But the camera angles were unnecessary and the editing was confusing. Some parts stood out as beautiful, but most left something to be desired.
I think overall the atmosphere of the film does portray qualities of Klimt, the struggles he had, his temper against art critiques, and outright sexuality he possessed in private as well as throughout his work. So in that way, you can take from the movie something that adds to your experience of Klimt the Artist. But otherwise... I hate to put down a film that includes one of my favorite actors and is about one of my favorite artists, but so it is.

In a series of more or less disconnected scenes and vignettes which oscillate randomly between reality and the protagonist's hallucinations, the movie depicts the mental deterioration of a character loosely based on the Viennese Secessionist painter Gustav Klimt. According to director Ruiz, this fictionalized Klimt was ravaged by general paresis, that is, syphilitic dementia. The real Klimt died not from syphilis but of complications of a stroke. Largely unexplored by this film are the Vienna Secession, and the development of Klimt's artistic style. Certainly this is not the first fictionalized biography: in contrast to Shaffer's Amadeus, for example, Salieri was not responsible for Mozart's death, but in his fictionalized version of history, Peter Shaffer far more deftly explores the mystery of genius. Some reviewers have commented that one needs to do research to understand the film. I submit that such a requirement is evidence of the film's failure.

Malkovich doesn't do biopics, so if you were expecting to watch a standard biopic you will be sorely disappointed. I really enjoyed this film, but it raised more questions than it answered, sending me straight to Wikipedia. There I found the answers to my questions, and then the film made a little--not a lot--more sense.

Klimt was in Austria around the turn of the 20th Century. In one scene, the real world intrudes on his cloistered cafe lifestyle, but it is World War I, so a little before the Nazis. One of the characters, a petty government official, makes several appearances, but he is an imaginary character, a product of Klimt's delusions. Perhaps it was brought on by syphilis? Nevertheless, Klimt fathered 14 illegitimate children.

He also came from an artistic family with lots of siblings. His father was a gold engraver, but after his death, they relied on Gustav for support. He incorporated gold leaf into some of his paintings, and others used broken mirrors. The fragile gold leaf is sent flying when someone slams a door, and I couldn't help thinking it was a metaphor of his fragile relationship with his father, a gold engraver. In another thinly veiled symbol a mirror spontaneously shattered. Was this a bad omen for the 20th Century? He drinks in a tavern where the waitresses all have mustaches. Perhaps it is also a brothel, but when he goes into the back room, he is placed in a monkey suit and put in a cage. Throughout, there are lots of beautiful women and models.

Malkovich as Klimt gives another of his enigmatic performances, an artist who doesn't react at all as expected. If you saw him as the composer drawn to the bleak deserts of Northern Africa in The Sheltering Sky, then you get the picture. Klimt didn't say or write much, but was once quoted saying that he just liked to paint every day, and you could find out all you needed to know about him from looking at his paintings. Malkovich as Klimt is curiously not the least bit jealous when young protégée Egon Schiele (Nikolai Kinski) takes up with a former mistress. Plenty more where that came from.

Nikolai is the son of Klaus Kinski and the half brother of Natassja. Nikolai makes an excellent Schiele as he has those crazy banjo eyes. In the bonus material interview Kinski says he really studied Schiele's art and was blown away by it. Schiele would make an excellent subject for a biopic by the way. Even if it was a more traditional narrative, the unusual life of the painter would provide quite a compelling tale. I had heard that there was a project with David Bowie playing him, to be called The Wally, but don't know what ever became of that. If anyone knows, please drop me a line.

Klimt was an art film about an artist, so please keep an open mind. It is so beautiful--a work of art in its own right. One of the themes that really does come across is Klimt's relationship with the government. The support of the government, Vienna really did nurture the artists and composers, helped him to survive while he painted every day, but there was a price, as much of his work celebrated the beauty of women and was subject to the whims of the censors. The imaginary petty government official was the symbol of this discord. In real life the situation was paralleled by the struggle to get the film made, but finally a foundation stepped in with a generous grant, pleased that they were making an art film, even though it was unlikely to do well at the box office. Perhaps it was released straight to video?

Raoul Ruiz, the writer and director of Klimt, is from Brazil, but this film was a quite international affair, with cast and crew coming from all over the world. Ruiz and the actors besides Malkovich all have multiple credits in their resumes, but I am unfamiliar with most of them.

One final plea to keep an open mind and just watch this film. You will learn a lot about Klimt and his art--if only by the process of osmosis. Just don't expect it to make sense, unless you mean the peculiar logic of dreams where pocket watches melt, and of course, are then swarmed over with ants.

OTHER SELECTED FILM ROLES OF JOHN MALKOVICH

Art School Confidential (2006) .... Professor Sandiford
The Libertine (2004) .... Charles II
Being John Malkovich (1999) .... John Horatio Malkovich
Mulholland Falls (1996) .... General Thomas Timms
In the Line of Fire (1993) .... Mitch Leary
Of Mice & Men (1992) .... Lennie Small
Queens Logic (1991) .... Eliot (Cast includes Mr. Kevin Bacon)
The Sheltering Sky (1990) .... Port Moresby
Dangerous Liaisons (1988) .... Vicomte Sébastien de Valmont
Places in the Heart (1984) .... Mr. Will