uppermontclair
First of all, it's hard to take this seriously with Mickey Rourke cast as St. Francis. The movie was way too long and extremely boring. I got the gist of it in about half an hour. There is no mention of how he became the saint of animals. I watched the whole movie because I kept hoping to learn something....but what I learned is minimal. I hope to watch other, more educational films about the life of St Francis. This was a waste of my time-boring, depressing and redundant. I have no idea how it got nominated or won any prizes. There is nothing positive that comes out of this film. When you watch this, be prepared to be bored out of your mind and depressed.
Carlos Souza
Of course it is not a good movie. For example, you have a lot of actors acting as they were in an "hippie" trip. They have long hair, trimmed beard, they have earrings.. it is unbelievable. The edition is confuse.... It is really awful. And Mickey Rourke have tattoos in his arms and shoulder ! Is it possible ? Saint Francesco with tattoos... If you compare this film with the fantastic "Brother sun, sister moon" from Zeffirelli, you'll see what a difference ! They are both about the same person, but completely different. That one is a musical, a little bit bored, but is fantastic, all the actors are perfect. The one that perform Saint Francesco IS really Saint Francesco reincorporated ! Don't waist your time with this film. Liliana Cavani was right in the "Il portiere di notte", but not now ! I was wondering why they don't sell this DVD anymore and now I found ! It is a lost of time.
dano33334
That will tell us what we might expect to gain from this movie. For fans of either Mickey Rourke or Helena Bonham Carter, its another chance to see them stretch their acting muscles to grasp and conquer characters previously untouched. The casual viewer might not suffer any distraction whatsoever.For the viewer who has experienced other portrayals of St Francis, or one who is looking for a deeper understanding of the saint, it may be difficult to get past the casting choices for these 2 main characters. An awareness of Mickey Rourke's other prominent roles may taint our perception of his ability or suitability for this task. Innocence is not something we expect from the actor, and I had difficulty recognizing it. I cringed at times when his performance seemed almost "sexy", not a word I would ever want to use to describe a saint. Is it unreasonable to expect Francesco to seem somehow super-spiritual? Maybe.Remembering Helen Bonham Carter's cinematic history further crippled my ability to "suspend disbelief". While both are accomplished actors, and able to draw an audience, it seemed counterproductive to cast such readily identifiable stars for this venture. It was like watching Tom Cruise portray Lincoln.I'm sorry to say that while the script was good and there was so much more to glean from the film in general, I found myself unable to ignore "the 800 lb gorilla in the room".
sam_3
Oh please! Mike for Fransis? LOL! This is like casting Julia Roberts for Ellen Ripley, Barbara Streisand singing "Like a virgin", or a snap shot of G. W. Bush with Monica L. (aka "that woman"). Certain things just don't go together, it's not meant to be, it's that simple. This film has little to do with realism, it's just that they haven't understood. This film has little to do with creativity, it's mere confusion. This is a text book example of what one should not do when portraying a historical person (or event). What next? Eddie Murphy plays Martin Luther King? Oasis and Spice Girls joint concert! Do you still want me to give this film any stars?
