NOTE IMDb
6,3/10
8,8 k
MA NOTE
Le récit artistique, parfois violent et toujours cinématographique de Pasolini, de certains des contes les plus érotiques de Chaucer.Le récit artistique, parfois violent et toujours cinématographique de Pasolini, de certains des contes les plus érotiques de Chaucer.Le récit artistique, parfois violent et toujours cinématographique de Pasolini, de certains des contes les plus érotiques de Chaucer.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire au total
Orla Pederson
- Pilgrim
- (as OT)
Derek Deadman
- The Pardoner
- (as Derek Deadmin)
George Bethell Datch
- Host of the Tabard
- (as George B. Datch)
Avis à la une
When I was going to see "Canterbury Tales", I knew Pasolini was infamous director who made crazy films, that weren't for everyone's taste.When I saw it. It was one of those movie experiences that change the way you see films. It's not that I loved this film, I don't see how I can use word "love" here. It's just that from the beginning to the end I couldn't believe my eyes. Sequence after sequence, the movie became one of the most original films I ever seen in my life. Wife having sex standing on her husband's shoulders, woman farting in the face of the young boy who loves her, drunken man, p***ing on dining people, giant ass, that defecates with demons, it's shocking, yes, but it's not the point. The point is,we believe every single thing we see on the screen. Of course, it's because Pasolini uses natural lightning, unprofessional actors, and partly because when there is fucking on the screen, it's not simulation, it's real f**king (what other film can be classified as "porn", and also have Oscar-winning costume designer in its credits?). But it's not the reason. I always admired Pasolini, because he was one of those people, who make others respect them, who have remained hip even twenty years after they are dead. And being this incredibly fascinating person, he could put part of the magic that made him the person he was into his movies.
This, even though it lacks a bit the wit and spirit of IL DECAMERON, which was funnier, it still manages to satisfy as you reach the end. Pasolini's perverted humor as well as some of his usual actors are here. There's full nudity, both male and female. Maybe here the erotic element is more intense so its less humorous, I am not sure. I suppose it will satisfy those who like Pasolini's humour like, say, IL DECAMERON.
The copy I saw had awful dubbing - Italian language- maybe it's bad sychronisation, or something else...
As far as I am concerned it is worth it alone for this special, absurd, perverted, surrealistic last scene, taking place in hell. It rulez! Some others scenes are awesome too! And of course there'e Pasolini evident dislike of church/religious dogmas.
If you're not easily offended and like old films, specially European ones, give it a try, IL DECAMERON as well.
The copy I saw had awful dubbing - Italian language- maybe it's bad sychronisation, or something else...
As far as I am concerned it is worth it alone for this special, absurd, perverted, surrealistic last scene, taking place in hell. It rulez! Some others scenes are awesome too! And of course there'e Pasolini evident dislike of church/religious dogmas.
If you're not easily offended and like old films, specially European ones, give it a try, IL DECAMERON as well.
Continuing his 'Trilogy of Life' cycle exploring medieval literature, The Canterbury Tales by Pier Paolo Pasolini, delves into some of the tales weaved within Geoffrey Chaucer's famous stories. It explores the myriad sexual depravities and allusions with bawdy gusto, featuring almost every perversion known, from voyeurism, flagellation, homosexuality, to even the "love" of a watermelon. The disparate, prurient tales are interwoven with Pasolini plays Chaucer here at his writing desk, imaging his lasciviousness upon villagers. There is even a strange comic interlude paying homage to Charlie Chaplin, in the form of Pasolini regular, Ninetto Davoli.
Whilst the visual style is similar to The Decameron (1970 - Dante Feretti again is art director), the stories do not intertwine as well here, which could create some confusion in the viewer. With a largely British cast (including Tom Baker, Hugh Griffith, Jeeny Runacre, and even Robin Askwith), the film film sometimes feels like a slightly less repressed 1970's British sex comedy (Carry On Canterbury, if you like). With its delight in sexual promiscuity and perversion, it is certainly one of Pasolini's less than intellectual affairs, and even fails to humour. Unless of course your funny bone is easily pleased by fart jokes.
With a bizarre finale set in hell (its visual design clearly inspired by the painting of Hieronymus Bosch), we see an over-sized Satan shitting out some plebeian folks, to the obscene delight of those scattered round the pits. Whilst this incredibly short ending is disgustingly joyous, it fails to save a very scatological film, that vies more towards the crass than the enlightening.
www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com
Whilst the visual style is similar to The Decameron (1970 - Dante Feretti again is art director), the stories do not intertwine as well here, which could create some confusion in the viewer. With a largely British cast (including Tom Baker, Hugh Griffith, Jeeny Runacre, and even Robin Askwith), the film film sometimes feels like a slightly less repressed 1970's British sex comedy (Carry On Canterbury, if you like). With its delight in sexual promiscuity and perversion, it is certainly one of Pasolini's less than intellectual affairs, and even fails to humour. Unless of course your funny bone is easily pleased by fart jokes.
With a bizarre finale set in hell (its visual design clearly inspired by the painting of Hieronymus Bosch), we see an over-sized Satan shitting out some plebeian folks, to the obscene delight of those scattered round the pits. Whilst this incredibly short ending is disgustingly joyous, it fails to save a very scatological film, that vies more towards the crass than the enlightening.
www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com
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...
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...
It is the second part of Pasolini's "trilogy of life" and IMHO,the weakest :part of the reason can be found in the fact that it's merely more of the same ;after" Il decameron' the sensation of surprise has disappeared.Bawdiness,bawdiness and bawdiness,and a good dose of scatology.Besides,the stories,adapted from Chaucer are less interesting than in "IL decameron" ;the only good really good segment,as far the script is concerned ,is the one with the students and the miller's family:the mistaken identities are hilarious.But what remains is never really exciting.The scene in which a gay is literally "fried " is downright disturbing,coming from a director like Pasolini;the sequence is treated seriously ,almost without humor-unless the donuts seller counts-.
No one can argue the splendor of the cinematography;most of the times,it looks like pictures at an exhibition:the moist misty landscapes -particularly in the students' sequence- sharply contrasts with the mediterranean overcome by the heat ones in "il decameron";and the score,which includes old English traditionals is first-rate too.Ninetto Davoli,Pasolini's favorite actor,does his usual (almost silent) stint,in the grand tradition of Charlie Chaplin,which almost seems supernatural in this context;One should add that Josephine Chaplin is also part of the cast:some kind of double tribute.
The script is the Achille's heel of the movie."Il fiore della mille e una notte" will set the record straight and redeem Pasolini,for it's without a doubt the peak of the trilogy of life,with its numerous stories " à tiroirs".
No one can argue the splendor of the cinematography;most of the times,it looks like pictures at an exhibition:the moist misty landscapes -particularly in the students' sequence- sharply contrasts with the mediterranean overcome by the heat ones in "il decameron";and the score,which includes old English traditionals is first-rate too.Ninetto Davoli,Pasolini's favorite actor,does his usual (almost silent) stint,in the grand tradition of Charlie Chaplin,which almost seems supernatural in this context;One should add that Josephine Chaplin is also part of the cast:some kind of double tribute.
The script is the Achille's heel of the movie."Il fiore della mille e una notte" will set the record straight and redeem Pasolini,for it's without a doubt the peak of the trilogy of life,with its numerous stories " à tiroirs".
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesRemarkably, this is the only major cinematic take on Geoffrey Chaucer's classic tales.
- GaffesSome of the women have tan-lines from bikinis.
- Citations
The Wife from Bath: There's nowhere in the Gospels that says we ought to stay virgins. Anyway, tell me, what were the genital organs made for at the creation? Not to lie dormant I suppose. And nobody's going to tell me they were just put there to piss through. Mark you, I use it for that as well. And every man must serve his wife in wedlock...
- Versions alternativesThe original UK cinema version was cut by the BBFC with edits to anal sex shots, a man being whipped, and Rufus urinating on the crowd during the 'Pardoner's Tale' segment for an 'X' certificate. The cuts were fully restored in 2001 and the certificate downgraded to a '15'.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Playboy: The Story of X (1998)
- Bandes originalesThe Old Piper
written by Carl Hardebeck in 1912
performed by Frank McPeake
Played over the opening credits and sung frequently by Perkin the Reveler in the Cook's Tale
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is The Canterbury Tales?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Site officiel
- Langues
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Los cuentos de Canterbury
- Lieux de tournage
- Battle Abbey, East Sussex, Angleterre, Royaume-Uni(merchant's tale: hall interior)
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Montant brut mondial
- 9 028 $US
- Durée1 heure 58 minutes
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant