Product Details

• Actors: Rudolf Nureyev, Leslie Caron, Michelle Phillips, Carol Kane, Felicity Kendal
• Directors: Ken Russell
• Format: Color, NTSC
• Rated: R (Restricted)
• Number of tapes: 1
• Studio: MGM/UA Home Video
• VHS Release Date: September 1, 1998
• Run Time: 128 minutes
• Average Customer Review: 3.4 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (20 customer reviews)
• ASIN: 6302995884
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #173,478 in Movies & TV (See Top 100 in Movies & TV)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

36 of 42 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A cinematic fantasy that provokes and enthralls, October 14, 1999

By 

Austin Elliott "godwinwoll" (Cairo, New York USA) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Valentino [VHS] (VHS Tape)

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.

17 of 18 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Valentino by Ken Russell is good bio viewing!, April 26, 2010

By 

David E. Pouliot "oh_popeye" (Acworth, GA United States) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Valentino (DVD)

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).

33 of 42 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Deserves to be watched and bought for you home collection, March 28, 2000

By 

"zara_azari" - See all my reviews

This review is from: Valentino [VHS] (VHS Tape)

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.