Cagliostro

This is an unusual blend of courtly intrigue, romance, supernatural thriller, and swashbuckler, from United Artists and director Gregory Ratoff. Orson Welles stars as Joseph Balsamo, a gypsy magician who is gifted with true powers of hypnotism due to a traumatic childhood incident. He renames himself Cagliostro and attempts to gain entry into the upper echelon of 18th century Parisian society, but when he is rejected, he decides to take by trickery what was not given freely. Also featuring Raymond Burr.

I'm not a worshiper at the altar of Welles, nor a detractor. I think he was a gifted man who squandered much of his talents, and had perhaps too much hubris to achieve what he wanted in his chosen art form. I like many of the films he's associated with, but have disliked just as many. This movie reminded me a bit of his later work, inspired in places, threadbare in others, and often giving the appearance of being awkwardly stitched together. He wasn't the director, although he's rumored to have directed scenes, and the film was produced in the traditional manner, and not in the start-and-stop way of later films that kept losing funding.

The sets and locations are good, although they occasionally clash, as one camera angle shows an impressive real courtyard with dozens of extras, while the next angle reveals the performers against an obviously painted backdrop. Instead of ruining the atmosphere, it instead imbues the proceedings with a slight dreamlike quality. I thought Welles did a fantastic acting job, never less than believable, and Nancy Guild isn't bad in a dual role. Valentina Cortese and Akim Tamiroff provide nice support.

Not having readt the story by Dumas,I really don't feel qualified to comment as to this film's fidelity to the original work.However,it has very little,if anything,to do with the actual history.till,it's a superb example of a cross between swashbuckling and film noir. Has anybody ever commented on the fact that,when Orson Welles did historical or Shakespearean figures,he was really telling so much about himself.Noble,talented,gifted people,whose grandiose designs were brought low by their own tragic flaws.And how good looking he was.If he hadn't doubled his girth in later years,he could have played leading men similar to those of Walter Pidgeon.

HISTORICAL NOTE:The real Cagliostro was exiled from France in 1789,following the business about the diamond necklace.He then moved to Rome,where he established a Masonic Lodge.Now,in Europe,the Masons are NOT viewed as a men's fraternal organization,as in the U.S.A.,but,rather,as a hot bed of treason,treachery,and heresy.Consequently,he was arrested,and sentenced to be executed.The Pope commuted the sentence to life imprisonment,and he spent the rest of his life in prison.

MORAL:We really don't need anyone else to foul up our lives,now,do we?We happen to do a great job on our own.

I see a lot of praise heaped on this is some of the other reviews and I have to wonder how much of that is based on the idea that Welles was frequently behind the camera and taking the lead.

That is the case and it often shows. Welles style and eye can be seenbat several points during the film. Unfortunately this in and of itself does not ultimately make this a good film. It is very much a product of the assembly line era that it came from.

Take out Welles contributions which in certain scenes give us great shots and what you have is a completely forgettable period piece with a convoluted story that overstays its welcome in terms of length. The film feels too long, yet does not do enough with its running time. Here is Cagliostro the boy, here is Cagliostro the man, here is Cagliostro the toast of high society... all in the blink of an eye, with the only exculpatories being some montages of mass healings. Poor and rushed storytelling, only to hurry up and wait when Cagliostro happens upon the man whom he has sworn to never forget, and the rather tedious and drug out revenge plot takes over.

Nothing I say will stop anybody from watching this, and that's a good thing, you should watch it. It is an interesting bit of the Orson lore, but don't expect the "lost classic" or a "hidden masterpiece". It is neither of those things.

An excellent adaptation of a rather obscure (even in France) novel by Dumas who appears 'in the flesh" in the first -and a bit pointless- scene.But all that remains is quite absorbing and there's never dull moment.

The beginning displays an unusual cruelty ;the hangmen are about to scratch the boy's eyes out :in the distance ,we can see the gallows,where his parents have just been hanged .Orson Welles is absolutely stunning in his portrayal of a disturbing dreadful mysterious person,who could mesmerize (no pun intended) the crowds who stood in awe of this French Rasputin (too bad Welles never portrayed the Russian monk).

Taking with French history the largest liberties ,to put it mildly , the screenplay mixes fictionalized events with some real ones :yes,the king would play the occasional clock-maker ,a footnote of history;yes, Marie-Antoinette could not stand La Du Barry and she had her sent to a convent for two years after Louis The Fifteenth 's death;actually the affair of the necklace occurred about ten years after in 1785. Dumas replaced the Dramatis Personae by his own characters: thus Lorenza unintentionally plays the role of Madame De La Motte ,of evil memory,and the Viscount of Montaigne that of The Cardinal De Rohan ,a naive man who wanted to attract the queen's attention .On the other hand,Cagliostro did take part in the greatest French swindle of the eighteenth century (the queen was totally innocent,in spite of the liars Madame De La Motte would write ,in her obnoxious memoirs ).Cagliostro ,nevertheless,did not die after the trial but about ten years later (apoplexy):he got a life sentence,after being tried for heresy by the papal court .

The love affair is almost devoid of interest ,but it's Welles that counts and he delivers the goods: the scene of the would be sick people in the palace of Versailles ,or Cagliostro digging up Lorenza ( a Poesque scene) can still grab today's audience.

I just watched the video of BLACK MAGIC again tonight and was once again impressed with it. Orson Welles turns in one of his finest performances. I was also impressed by the quality of the production considering it wasn't a Hollywood studio production (although it was released by United Artists). Elaborate costumes and sets and tons of extras. Interesting plot and photography. It has a nice film noir look to it. But the best part of BLACK MAGIC is Welles.