Customer Reviews

Valentino

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

 

 

Ken Russell's "Valentino" was released in 1977 to the condemnation of most of the critical populace as well as the Catholic Church.Most of this disapproval was due to an ignorance of Ken Russell's artistic method,his intentions,and the extreme nature of some of his work.Over twenty years later with baroque directors more common and sexual and violent imagery less outre, "Valentino" deseves to be recognized as the undeniably flawed yet vital work of art that it is. Influenced by "Citizen Kane",Valentino's narrative is presented in a series of flashbacks by the people who admired,pitied,despised and loved the silent screen superstar.Ken Russell weaves tragedy and satire together to criticize the absurdities and nightmares engendered by the pursuit of the American Dream.The film dissects the obverse and reverse of stardom with its mindless and volatile adulation on one side and jealous hatred and contempt on the other."Valentino" also depicts the ethnocentism and homophobia of the 1920's-and by implication,as in most of Ken Russell's films,depicts ours as well.The film's tone is mercurial and constantly challenges you to think about what is being depicted as you are affected by its power.It enthralls as it provokes. Yet the film is not without its flaws.Rudolph Nureyev in his first acting role displays charm,grace and sex appeal-but he is sometimes stiff and lacks emotional depth.The great actress Alla Nazimova is savaged (in a very funny performance by Leslie Caron)as a pretentious and vain phony.Natasha Rambova(a very beautiful Michelle Phillips)is depicted as a shrill,grasping shrew.The screenplay as written by Ken Russell and his co-scenarist sounds unduely influenced by films of the early 1930's(though this does give the film atmosphere,you sometimes feel as if you were watching an R-rated Lloyd Bacon picture). Yet the film's merits make it worth experiencing.One can mention its exquisite art direction and costumes,its tour de force cinematography by Peter Suschitsky.But its Ken Russell's direction of its many great setpieces -choreographed with great intensity that are the ultimate proof of its genius.Not every setpiece works-one involving an empty-headed starlet brought to orgasm through sheer fantasysing while going through the motions of having sex with Valentino falls flat.But others such as Valentino's revenge on Fatty Arbunkle or the Nijinsky photo session with Nazimova and Rambova are emblematic of Ken Russell's use of images rather than words to achieve poetic comedy.Much more disturbing are Rambova's seance turned nightmare as well as the jail sequence in which various lowlifes sexually taunt Valentino and force him to urinate on himself.It is one of the most horrifying scenes in film history. "Valentino's" faults(such as its occasional historical inaccuracies and the aforementioned depictions of Nazimova and Rambova)seem irrelevant when you begin to understand that Ken Russell's intentions were not to tell Valentino's life story but to explore satiric and tragic themes based on his and his contemporaries' lives.His method is similiar to Shakespeare's Macbeth.Macbeth's raison d'etre was to enact corruption through ambition.The biographical or "real" Macbeth is of no significance to the play.Ken Russell's method is the same.This is not to say that he willfully distorts history for distortion's sake-but that he presupposes his audience will have prior familiarity with his subjects and will be able to reference both his fidelities and his departures from fact. Is "Valentino" a great film?I think it is, despite its uneveness-though I don't think it is one of Ken Russell's best films.But other great works of English art such as "Women Beware Women","Paradise Lost" and "David Copperfield" are all admittedly uneven and hopefully one day "Valentino" will be judged upon its strengths and not weaknesses -as they are.

In Valentino, Ken Russell places his spin on silent Hollywood and its biggest icon of its period...Rudolph Valentino. The film captures the distruction of what happens when fame over powers hollywood and the changes it has on actors. As well as the Directors and Producers who saw Valentino's death as a bottom line loss to potential financial wealth in future films. Rudolph Nureyev's dancing talents are stong, but he lacks screen drama and presence; however, playing the role fit his style as silent movies didn't carry the actors voice.

There are tense moments with 'Mama' Michelle Phillips (32 at the time filmed) that captures her and Nureyev completely naked in a 'tongue and Sheik' love scene (truly enjoyable for Phillips fans). The movie has an artistic flair as the costumes and era are captured nicely with the setting and props for the time. There are odd moments of celebrity spot-lighting as in the grand entrance by Leslie Caron into the funeral parlor and a sequence at the producers home and choice of having a baby gorilla in the office.

Overall, I think this film captures the rise and fall of Valentino and his untimely death and the women in his life that knew of his character. Many believe he was a homosexual and maintained lavender relationships...so much could be said for Rudolf Nureyev himself (who died of AIDS in 1993).

I am not gonna talk about "Valentino"'s cinematic merits or Ken Russell's ones, for that matter. Previous reviewer has done a pretty good job on that. I'll just say that I own this movie and I watch it every so often. I enjoy it, because it is full of satirical images and it DOES take me back to the Hollywood of 20's. Of course, people should not consider it a real biographical movie about RV, but rather a huge satire with terrific costumes and wonderful cast. I must say that the film looses its edge half away thru; in the beginning you are taken by it, then it becomes more of a toy for Ken Russell himself. As for Nureyev's playing Valentino, I think that was THE INGENIOUS PART OF RUSSELL'S PLAN. Yes, it was Nureyev's first role in cinema (first and the only one, buy the way). Yes, he seems stiff at times, but I believe this was part of the idea: to "ham" it up a little in order to heighten the effects of constructed set (Hollywood of 20's). Anyone who saw Nureyev on stage/in ballet/ should have no doubts about his actor skills; he did not simply dance, he ACTED. Besides, for anyone who saw movies with Rudolpho Valentino (well, I did), com'on, how much "ham" is that, especially from today's perspective?.. NOW, think about it, Valentino and Nureyev: they had the same name, they were both dancers, they were both immigrants (suffering from not ever seeing their mothers again), they were both gay, they were both surepstars, etc. I think the similarities are uncanny! Russell took full advantage of them, by constucting a surrealistic plot, where you are not always sure whether you are watching Nureyev as Valentino, Nureyev as Nureyev, or even Valentino as Nureyev. That is possibly why Nureyev would want to play this role, even though he had not done any films before. ONE SCENE ESPECIALLY PROVES MY POINT ON THIS: right in the beginning we see young Valentino, who lived in NY then, is supposedly giving tango lessons to the great Nijinsky, who was also in NY at the same time with his troop ("Russian Seasons Ballet"). No such encounter ever happened in the real life, I am sure (Valentino was young and handsome small time jiggalo...Nijinksy's each move was monitored by Sergey Diagilev, troop's director and Nijinsky's pathologically jealous lover... Diagilev would have never allowed Nijinsky to see a handsome/ gay/Italian for private lessons or any such thing). So, how fanastic was it of Russell, to put two of the 20 century's greatest ballet dancers together in a marvellous tango? I just loved it: the idea itself and the scene! Anyway, if you watch this movie, you'll see it for yourselves. This movie is well-worth watching repeatedly.

There are two ways to approach a biopic.
There's the standard linier present-the-facts-
and-draw-your-own-conclusion approach. And the
Citizen Kane non-linier tabloid way. This late
70's litmus test takes the latter approach and
wraps it all up in delicious Ken Russell excess.
The result is a laugh out loud cinematic outrage
that rightfully drove most audiences to drink.
The 'what-were-they-thinking?' casting of ballet
legend Nureyev and 'Mama' Michelle Phillips as
Valentino and his wife Natasha make this a camp
classic ripe for rediscovery. But it does have
truly glorious production design - and this dvd
preserves much of it in widescreen format.

The jury is out on whether or not Ken Russell was a good director but most certainly he is an interesting one. In the Mid-Seventies there were a series of film bios about figures from Hollywood's Golden Age, notably "Gable and Lombard" and "W.C. Fields and Me" to name a few. These were for the most part earnest affairs that mostly took a straightforward approach to their subjects. Russell here takes an opposite tack by sending up the genre. For better or for worse "Valentino" is sublimely surreal. Watching this film I found by jaw drop and in most cases that's not such a bad thing. What Russell is doing here is lampooning the Roaring Twenties which some would appreciate and others offend. What keeps me from giving the film the full five star treatment is the comically inept performance by Rudolph Nureyev as Valentino. Intentional, perhaps? Struggling with what I think is an Italian accent, Nureyev doesn't seem to be in on the joke or maybe he doesn't comprehend. Regardless, I give kudos to Russell for some of his casting choices. You can't go wrong with a film that includes among it's cast Huntz Hall (The Bowery Boys) as Jesse Lasky, John Ratzenberger(Cliff Claven from "Cheers") as a reporter and Billy McKinney ("Deliverance") as a sadistic jailer. On a final note of trivia, Carol Kane who is in this film, also appeared in another film in 1977 that featured Valentino albeit in abbreviated form, Gene Wilder's underrated comic gem "The World's Greatest Lover".

This is one of Ken Russell's best films combining the pleasure of seeing Rudolf Nureyev on screen with his expertise. I have seen it several times and decided to buy the film which was included in an August 2010 Ken Russell retrospective at the Walter Reade Theatre at Lincoln Center, NYC, with Mr. Russell in attendance. Simply put, if U love Nureyev, Leslie Caron or Ken Russell's oeuvre, U will undoubtedly want to view this film.

Perhaps Ken Russell's experience as a ballet dancer with a troupe in Norway enhanced his feelings about ways to illuminate homophobia of the 1920s in this semi-fictional account of silent screen star Rudolph Valentino's short film career. The real coup in this uneven but fascinating film is the casting of a mesmerizing Rudolf Nureyev as Valentino. The original poster is one of the greats (click under shared images), but the persistent rumor is that the studio chopped Russell's cut to bits. Is this yet another film ripe for restoration? Can what many see as high camp be reverted to art in a restoration? I think it's possible. Wonder if Criterion is up to the task assuming the original director's cut still exists?

no, the acting isn't great; and yes, the story could have been fleshed out a bit more but i think that what you get is a fairly accurate portrayal of an iconic personality in film history. no complaints from me, as i enjoyed the movie on its' merits

The movie is a bit hard to follow, starting as it does with the sad ending, then flashing back through Valentino's brief but amazing career. One would have to be a real history buff to know how closely the story follows real life, but it's interestingly told and well-acted for the most part. Worth your time !

it may be a 5 or just a 1.... it all depends on your taste, humour and love of movie nostalgia....

They(the cast) all give camp performances, but the "storyboard" sitting between Leslie, Michelle og Rudolf and "the wedding" of Leslie and Michelle at his funeral are definate highlights....

The dance bewteen Valentino and Nijinski is never to be forgotten... But....

Nereyevs diction leaves something to be desired... True, he may be the only 1 i the era who could play Valentino(today - Johnny Depp) - but is is of another tradition... Still - I have to admit he fills Rudy`s shoes well.

Leslie Caron is a great Nazimova... The set designs and costumes are all well made in 20s style...

It is a cross between good drama and good camp:-)))