Total Eclipse

Genius is by nature sui generis. Most of us can only observe and wonder, and from time to time pretend we are similarly gifted. As for the actual behavior of genius, it almost always entails what is commonly known as bad manners.

The other striking feature of genius, for some but not all, is what is commonly known as insanity. Although modern science has defined various types of mental disorder and found causes and cures for some of them, it really begs the question to try to judge character or morality on the basis of scientific data. Art lies after all outside the realm of science, and always will do.

Having said that, I believe the film Total Eclipse must be reviewed or criticized solely on whether it is a good work of art. My opinion is that it succeeds at some levels, and fails at others.

I accept that the writer and director knew exactly what they were doing at every step. Except for a few quibbles about editing, I agree that the artistic concept and the technique are first rate. The musical score is excellent. The camera angles are generally adept at conveying the actions and emotions of the cast. Outdoor scenes tend to be well conceived.

Unfortunately, all that falls by the wayside because of flaws in relating the story accurately and well to its origins. Anyone familiar with the lives and work of Verlaine and Rimbaud can only cringe at the superficiality of this film. As many others have pointed out, scant attention is paid to verse, and then only in a language -- English -- that only approximates the original. It would have been a graceful beginning to make this film in France with French characters speaking French, then allowing the subtitles to fill in the gaps for non-French-speaking viewers.

What that conclusion implies, of course, is that the primary cast is wrong for this film. I really hate to say that, because DiCaprio and Thewlis are great actors doing the best they can to carry the film forward. Although I would have picked a different physical specimen for the role of Verlaine (for some odd reason the face of the late German director Fassbinder comes to mind), the choice of an androgyne for Rimbaud was physically right on target.

Finally, I am appalled at some of the comments here that betray a preoccupation with sex. "Zany" is the only word one can apply to subjective and even judgmental interpretations of this film about this or that scene or bit of action not in accord with a viewer's personal sexual expectations. My own view is that this was, if anything, a highly bowdlerized adaptation of reality.

In short, recast this in French, and focus more on the full text of Rimbaud's genius.

I realized going into this film that it was not going to be a straight bio-pic about Rimbaud's life so that loosened my expectations for the movie a bit, which is good considering had I expected a life story I would've been sorely disappointed. This film is more about Rimbaud's rocky relationship with fellow poet, Verlaine, whom he falls in love with and subsequently about Verlaine being stuck between a rock and a hard place with Rimbaud on one side and his beautiful but ultimately empty headed wife, Mathilde on the other.

The set/costume design was done well enough; not enough to win awards but enough to make the time and place believable. What stands out the most, though, is the acting and of course the wonderful violin heavy score. DiCaprio gives an inspired performance as the young, opinionated, Rimbaud as does Thewlis in his role as the older poet, Verlaine who takes him under his wing. You won't get a complete round view of either man or his life here, but what you will get is a story about love, madness, writing and the search for meaning.

If you like what you see of Rimbaud from this movie, I would whole heartedly recommend his work to you and any and all written biographies as they will shed even more light on a truly great poet's life.

Of course there is pain and monstrosity in love. Two wild poets would need to live that out. But can a movie about it make any sense, without a fair portion of their poetry?

Michelangelo said that painting excels when it approaches sculpture, and sculpture when it comes close to relief. An art form is enhanced when nearing its periphery, almost turning into another art form. Along this line, I am sure that the poetry of Rimbaud and Verlaine would have stood forward excellently, when recited in the movie about their relation. It would also have helped in making their interactions understandable.

After seeing the movie a second time, I read some of Rimbaud's writings, and there was a slightly different character emerging from his words, than the one portrayed, though excellently, by Leonardo DiCaprio. Rimbaud's own words show that he was a victim just as much as a predator. Of course, he would say so, himself, but also: this modification would have made the movie rise beyond the black and white polarity it is too often caught in.

Still, I enjoyed the movie tremendously, mostly thanks to Leo and the way he made his character fire up. He might have been type-cast, to do the obnoxious adolescent, but they got more than they bargained for - he included the most important aspect of Rimbaud: the prodigy poet, the artist living for art, loving for art.

His acting is sometimes stunning, and not only in delicate scenes where minute nuances are essential, but also in all kinds of silliness in between. To hear him bark like a dog, really like a dog - did he do that himself, or was there an added sound effect? The pause, and the slightly humorous expression on his face, right before he tells his fellow poet that he expects more from him than his words. His posture and cocky moving about in the Paris of the noble poets, and his running on all four in the countryside. Brilliant acting.

There's a lot of formidable acting also on behalf of the others in the cast, even when the script and the direction works against them. And it does, more than once. Maybe the plot got all confused, simply because the poetry of the poets was not taken into account.

But a film gone awry can still be a wonderful experience. Frustrating, but wonderful. This one is.

Arthur Rimbaud was famous for what? For changing the face of French and possibly all modern poetry. At the age of 17. Do we see any of this in the movie? No. We have a director who thinks that being gay was Rimbaud's muse. All through the film, I kept wondering, "when are they going to let him read his poetry, and show us WHY it was important, HOW it contrasted with conventional poetry at the time?" I mean, if you're brave enough to try to sell graphic homosexual scenes to a Merchant Ivory audience, then why not be brave enough to "bore" us with some literary analysis?

"Total Eclipses" narrates the romance that is born among the poets Paul Verlaine (David Thewlis, in a courageous and excellent performance, Thewlis plays strong scenes with experience and professionalism) and Arthur Rimbaud (Leonardo Di Caprio, before being thrown to the Hollywood's stardom in "Titanic"). The film documents, without make-ups,Paul Verlaine's slow destruction,a man who is consumed by the love and hate that he fells for Rimbauld.Director Agniezka Holland accomplished a touching and beautiful work,counting with a perfect plasticity that reconstitutes the time and the romance among the two men in a detailed way and without shame, what can,in fact,shock Di Caprio's fans in some delicate moments.Even being a little slow in a lot of parts of the story, "Total Eclipse" is efficient when its seen as a drama that lectures about the difficulty of being homosexual, but besides this topic, it analyzes what happens when people abdicate of their happiness and suffer due to social conventions, and finally it ends up in a intelligent conclusion:that only through the courage and through the love it's possible not only to break such barriers but also to achieve redemption.Director Agnieszka Holland conducts with experience a story that, in the hands of another director, could be reduced into a common and not very innovative denominator, and the lenses of her camera shows, without make-ups and courts to alleviate the impact of the scenes, the whole suffering, the prejudice and the pain that marks the relationship between Rimbaud and Verlaine. The two poets' love is realistically developed by Holland, starting by the friendship, in which the two writers begin to know important things about theirselves and discover that they have a lot in common, in terms that both are unhappy with the path their lives acquired, the doubts, the fears and the frustrations,till the beginning of the romance. The scene in which the first kiss happens, when Rimbauld seduces Verlaine and tries to get closer to him and ease his nervousness,is strong,touching and beautiful,this decisive and provocative part is filmed and written in a sweet and human way. The focus that the production gives to the story, therefore,is natural and realistic, what can scare many people away of the box- offices for the context declaredly homosexual of the story."Total Eclipse" explores and studies the relationship without making concessions and without allowing any demagogy or fear. There are rough scenes such as the one in which Thewlis is tirelessly sodomized by Di Caprio, there are moments of fondness when the two kiss each other,but in the same way the sick and morbid aspect of the relationship is expressed, when, for example, Rimbauld stabs Rimbaud's hand to prove his love.Being a heterosexual, i concluded that, instead of adopting a dogmatic and racist posture, it would be better if i could appreciate the film not as just another plot about two gay guys who are in love but I tried to enlarge my point of view, understanding that the film was, actually, a simple feeble love history marked by the suffering and resignation. Thus, I recommend "Total Eclipse" as an intelligent and efficient drama, a work that deserves to be applauded by its initiative and courage, for the excellent performances and for the safe and kind work by Agnieszka Holland, who tells a love story in a distressing and realist form. "Total Eclipses" i rated for strong sexuality and nudity, language, and some startling violence and it runs 111 minutes.The Cast: David Thewlis, Romane Bohringer and Leonardo Di Caprio.