Francesco

I thought Mickey Rourke did a wonderful job portraying Francesco. I did not realize the historical surrounding of what was going on in Francesoco's time. It is so important to understand the context of what makes a person into what they are. His experiences and what he witnessed in the prison and the lavish lifestyle that he and his friends were a part of and his experience in reading the "word" in his own language affected him deeply.

I also want to mention the portrayal of Chiara "St. Clare". What a truly beautiful and generous person.

I believe that the way the movie portrayed his journey in faith gave a lot of insight to a truly great man. It has helped me in my own faith as a Christian and as a person in general. The movie really moved me.

This is an Italian release version about S. Francis(1182-1226)life by Liliana Cavani . Set in 13th century and depicting the existence of St Francis , son of a wealthy merchant. Story begins after his death when his friends and disciples remember his life. It starts with starvation, famine,war, pest, caused for confronting between Italian cities: Perugia, Assis and Venice. Francesco is taken prisoner, he's freed by his parents(Paolo Bonacelli, Andrea Ferreol) and he becomes into prodigal son. He's judged and condemned, then he's naked himself and begins a miserable life caring poor, hapless and lepers. After his religious awakening he founds the Franciscan order of monks, approved by Pope Innocence III(1210). He's followed by St Clare(Helena Bonham Carter)as devote disciple and fine support, founding the Clarisan order of nuns(1212). Francesco establishes a rigid rules of life and his thoughts were included into 'Flowers of St. Francis' and 'Singing to brother Sun or the creatures' where he praises the mirth, poverty,and love for nature. He receives blessing from cardinals(Mario Adorf) and later from Pope Innocencio III(Zinschler).Finally, he got the stigmata or wounds of Jesuschrist suffered in the holy cross.

The motion picture is a good portrayal about known Saint played by Rourke in a definitive change of role. However the movie is slow-moving at times and some pedestrian, resulting to be a little boring and dull. The developing movie is made by means of several flashbacks creating confusion and tiring. Evocative and metaphysical musical score by always excellent Vangelis. Atmospheric though dark cinematography by the cameramen Ennio Guarneri and Giuseppe Lanci. The picture is professionally directed By Liliana Cavani who previously directed another one about this religious character played by Lou Castel.

Furthermore, the Hollywood version titled Francis of Assisi(60) directed by Michael Curtiz with Stuart Withman and Dolores Hart. And Italian adaptations such as, 'Flowers of St. Francis(1950)'directed by Roberto Rosselini with Aldo Fabrizi and 'Brother sun, Brother moon(1973)'by Franco Zeffirelli with William Faulkner and Judi Bowker.

...or one of them. This is - so far- the best portrayal of Saint Francis of Assisi I have ever seen. I was surprised. I actually cried. But Rourke knows how to move ya believe it or not. Fantastic acting and scenery. The feel is right and the story is based more on basic facts than the usual overly-dramatic, semi-fictional scripts that we see too often from Hollywood produced "bios". This film was shot in Italy and you get a real sense of our dear Saint here. Helena Bonham Carter's portrayal of Saint Clare of Assisi is wonderful. She truly brings Clare to life here - or gives you a sense of realism and passion and true friendship. Unlike the 60's "version" and others - this is the one to see if you want to understand the basics of Francis. I also suggest reading the "Little Flowers of Saint Francis of Assisi" and "The Life of Saint Francis of Assisi" - the latter book written by Saint Bonaventure.

I was surprised to see that Mickey Rourke did this movie. He does a lot of B movies. His performance was done very well. He can be a good actor when he applies himself. He just does not know how to pick good roles. The story was interesting. It tells the life of St. Francis of Assissi. It was very inspiritual. It is interesting to see how this sect of monks came to be. 7/10

I am continually amazed that this truly great film still receives so little recognition. There are probably multiple reasons for this. Certainly, the initial distribution was lackluster. Critical commentary is also hard to come by. Still, even in its most widely available and unfortunately truncated form (more on this later), Francesco impresses and inspires.

The decision to cast Mickey Rourke as St. Francis must seem almost like a goof to many. Those who are most likely to want to see a film of this nature might even be put off by what they may see as stunt casting by a director who is not serious. But this is just not the case. Rourke's career since this film has been spotty at best and his screen image has often descended into self-parody, but there was a time when he was a fine actor doing exemplary work and his performance here is absolutely on par with any of that. He gives us a vision of the saint which is rooted in material human essence, not overwrought histrionics. His internal changes are evoked through delicate, nuanced moments--small changes in Rourke's facial expressions, physical gestures, etc. Not a note is careless or inconsistent. The paroxysms of emotion toward the end are earned.

The development of his spiritual quest is not overstated; we are constantly positioned on the outside looking in--the film is framed by the reflections of Francesco's followers. This has the effect of heightening the aura of mystery around the man and establishing respect for him as a man, not simply an iconic caricature.

Cavani takes the religious aspect of the story very seriously; far more so than many more overtly pious films. Though every scene carefully considers the implications of faith, no points are made simply. The reality of the life Francesco chose is depicted as rough and uncompromising. The film's theological arguments are subtle and complicated, benefiting from the deeply serious tone of the piece. Having said all that, it must be added that the version currently available in the US is pretty atrocious actually. At 119 minutes, it savagely whittles the original version down by a full half hour. This is common with European films distributed in the US and isn't always unbearable. Here, though, it isn't a matter of just cutting out or trimming scenes. Whole sequences have been rearranged, creating a jumbled rhythm. Vangelis' music cues, which add so much to the emotional quality of the film, are also switched around for no apparent reason. It is a tribute to the strength of Francesco that even in such a butchered state it remains powerful (the US cut was all I could see for years), and it does benefit from the ability to hear Rourke and Bonham-Carter's real voices. If you give the film a chance and like what you see try hunting down the region 2 DVD release. It is well worth the effort to see such a glorious work in its proper form.