Der Schatten von Caravaggio

A decent but no notable retelling of the life of the celebrated 17th-century painter through his brilliant, nearly blasphemous paintings and his flirtations with the underworld. Caravaggio proceeded to develop a new style of painting giving a more realistic view of the world in which he lived. He also begins love affairs with his models, and relations with lower life people: prostitutes, hobos , beggars, street fighters, and robbers. Their relationship leads to murder and deceit. After fleeing Rome accused of murder, Caravaggio takes refuge in Naples, under the protection of the Colonna family, there he awaits a possible absolution from Pope Paul V. Caravaggio proceeded to develop a new style of painting giving a more realistic view of the world in which he lived. When Pope awares Carvaggio (Riccardo Scamarcio) uses bad-life women, thieves and vagabonds as models for his religious works, he orders to investigate him secretly. For this reason, an inquisitor (Louis Garrel) is sent to find him and interrogate him, as the Pope weighs whether to grant him clemency for killing a rival. Along the way, Caravaggio is protected by aristocrat Costanza Sforza Colonna (Isabelle Huppert) . Following some sad events, Caravaggio stayed a few more months in Naples and finally left for Malta, the seat of the Knights of Malta. It is believed that his trip was sponsored by Alof de Wignacourt, Grand Master of the Order. De Wignacourt was so pleased with the painter's work that he proposed him as a candidate for the Order. In 1608 the painter was named a knight of grace and devotion of the Sovereign Military and Hospitaller Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, of Rhodes and of Malta.

The film is acceptable and passable but it gets bogged down in the darkest, most critical and painful moments of the painter's life, which is why it is somewhat unsympathetic and unpleasant to watch. Thus, the movie recreates a multitude of sexual moments, orgies, murders, with a lot of dirty and ugly characters, describing dark, impious people or evil inquisitors. Although Caravaggio's life could have developed in this way, it is not necessary to recreate his life so dark and creepy. See instead the example of the much better biography of Michelangelo: ¨The Agony and the Ecstasy¨ by Carol Reed with Charlton Heston, which despite being much longer was much more entertaining, bright and enjoyable to watch. And that is even though Michelangelo also lived a life in poverty and related to people of all social classes, especially the lower classes, and also suffered persecution.

The protagonist Riccardo Scamarcio, who gives adequate acting, is well accompanied by an international cast of known actors, such as: Isabelle Huppert (Elle) and Louis Garrel (Little Women), the latter plays the role of the Vatican emissary in charge of investigating what is hidden behind his works. The motion picture was mediocrely directed by Michele Placido.

Caravaggio captured close anatomical observation with a dramatic use of chiaroscuro that came to be known as tenebrism. This technique became a dominant stylistic element, darkening shadows and transfiguring objects into brilliant shafts of light. He vividly expressed crucial moments and scenes, often involving violent struggles, torture and death. He worked quickly from life models, eschewing sketches to work directly on canvas. His influence was profound on the new Baroque style that emerged from Mannerism and can be traced in the works of such great masters as Peter Paul Rubens, José de Ribera, Rembrandt and Diego Velázquez. His pictorial work was immense (many of them appear in the film): Medusa, Love Victorious (1602) shows Cupid above all earthly powers: war, music, science, government. The Death of the Virgin, The Conversion of Saint Paul on the Road to Damascus, Seven Works of Mercy, Saint Jerome Writing, The Flagellation of Christ, The Beheading of Saint John the Baptist (the only painting by Caravaggio with his signature). The Burial of Saint Lucy, The Raising of Lazarus and The Adoration of the Shepherds. And Portrait of the Grand Master of the Order of Malta Alof de Wignacourt, as well as portraits of other knights of the Order.

There are various biographic adaptations: 1941 ¨Caravaggio¨ directed by Goffredo Alessandrini, produced by Elica Film.1986 ¨Caravaggio¨ directed by Derek Jarman, with Nigel Terry, Sean Bean, Dexter Fletcher, Spencer Leigh, Tilda Swinton, Michael Gough. 2007 ¨Caravaggio The Shadow of Genius¨, directed by Angelo Longoni, produced by Ida di Benedetto and Stefania Bifano, for Titania Produzioni, two-part television miniseries. 2018 ¨Caravaggio - The Soul and the Blood¨ directed by Jesus Garces Lambert.

A lot is not known about Caravaggio's life, but a lot is. It is understandable and legitimate that a film like this fills in the unknown gaps. The fact that it twists, falsifies and rewrites the known things is unworthy of a biography.

I am anything but a friend of the Catholic Church and even less of the church leaders. But the way he was portrayed here in a one-sided way as a victim of the church, whose representatives were Caravaggio's most zealous supporters, is infamous. "The Death of Mary" has nothing to do with being rejected by a pope; the monks who commissioned it did that themselves. Because Caravaggio did not paint in accordance with the commission. And the painting was not saved by Rubens, who is said to have bought it in Rome according to the film, but by Ferdinando Gonzaga, Duke of Mantua, the year after it was completed. Or the questioning of Artemisia Gentileschi. Caravaggio probably didn't even know her, even if her father did.

And these inaccuracies, distortions and falsifications run through the entire film, which has only one goal: to save the artist's honor. But he doesn't need to be saved. His art speaks for itself, as does his raw, unbridled character, which borders on brutality. Presenting the church as his murderer is an affront to all the church's real victims.

So an honorable attempt becomes a historically useless piece of work that doesn't bring you any closer to the artist's work. His apotheotic classification as a three-eyed man among the blind is tiring early on in the film.

I just thought that this movie about such big artist would have more art in it. The process and the hard work. Instead, all I got was already finished paintings and an italian telenovela with more dialogue than Nolan's Oppenheimer, with no time to absorb the beauty of the cinematography and the poetic essence of Caravaggio's life and his work.

But I thought using Schatten's perspective of interviewing Caravaggio's models and other people he met and capturing their narratives and stories so the viewer can learn more about the artist was smart and the story came nicely full circle at the end. But that still doesn't compensate the rest for me.

Riccardo Scamarcio has a nice butt tho.

Caravaggio's Shadow is a fever dream of a film, vividly photographed and convincingly played by an (unsurprisingly) handsome Italian cast.

There's plenty of melodrama, but it's an Italian period piece; anything less would have felt restrained.

At the heart of it is an irresolvable contradiction: the Vatican and papacy are the immensely rich and powerful core of Catholicism, but Catholicism is anchored by the teachings of Jesus, friend of the poor, the outcast and the desperate. What happens when the Vatican's most talented painter - a devout genius - uses the poor, the disgraced, and the outcasts of society as his subjects in seeking the truth of scripture?

Expect plenty of debauchery, plenty of on-location renaissance architecture, some intrigue, and even some swashbuckling swordfighting.

Worth your time.

I saw it as a fair work. For beautiful cinematography, reminding, scene bty scene, the art of Michelangelo Merisi, for Riccardo Scamarcio and his work in skin of Caravaggio, for Isabelle Huppert and Louis Garel, more than inspired crafters of their characters , for music and for good kick to viewer to (re)discover a great artist masterpieces.

Obvious, the film reflects the perspective of Michele Placcido and, I admitt, far to be easy say about the best manner to reflect a life defined by torments, force and shadows like this.

A beautiful film, not perfect, not correct in many details, not exactly for admirers of Caravaggio, simplistic for few reasons but enough for define it more than decent movie , not comparing with Derek Jarman 1986 film or with documentaries across last decades.