I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

This film tells the life story of the 17th-century painter, Caravaggio, from his adolescence to his death.I find "Caravaggio" not very easy to follow, because characters are not introduced by name; and it also does not help when Caravaggio is played by three different actors! There is little dialog in the film, as many messages are conveyed in the unsaid. This also adds to the difficulty in understanding the plot.It also tries to push boundaries by having obvious anachronisms. I find myself stopping to think whether these objects exist in those days, which adds to me being more lost. Though I did not particularly enjoyed "Caravaggio", I will give Derek Jarman's films another go though.

I really hated this film. I have watched many experimental, ambitious, and complex movies that demand much thought and attention from the viewer, but this one was an inexcusable exercise in self-indulgence by the filmmaker. The voice overs contained language which was heartbreakingly beautiful and I wished that more of that intelligence and beauty had been transmitted to the rest of the movie. Instead we get a tawdry pastiche of soft-core pornography which becomes so tedious that, when another perfect male form was displayed I became numb and angry. One would imagine that Caravvagio created his work in a vacuum, and that his art was a product of his violent and transgressive nature only. Having studied art, and being an artist myself, I was looking for some insight into this fascinating man and his revolutionary work. The scenes of him painting were unconvincing and the paintings in progress looked like amateur attempts in figure-drawing. I was able to wrest some meaning from Caravaggio, but that occurred early on and the only reason I kept watching it was the thought that it would kick in and start making some overarching sense. Watching this would lead one to believe that Renaissance Italy was populated mostly by homosexuals with a strong predilection for violent sex, and the clergy who exploited them for their private titillation. "Caravvagio" managed to demean the people it was trying to celebrate, oversimplify a complex individual, and bore and confuse its audience. Only recommended for a committed student of Jarman's work, as the "auteur" was obviously more interested in himself than in the subject.

I found this film completely and utterly incomprehensible. I knew some of he facts about Caravagggio, but here they were twisted and puzzling. The images were weirdly interesting but I was looking more for a biographical and/or critical accounting of Caravaggio's life and works, not an LSD type drug trip. The dialogue was very confusing and jumping back and forth in time via the use of trains, calculators, typewriters and cigarettes was extremely distracting. Had it been labelled an "artsy film" I wouldn't have purchased the DVD; now I have a DVD that I'll never watch again and who would buy it? I prefer mainstream films not those that require translation or elucidation. Thumbs down on this one for me!

One reviewer says of those who might not like this film that "it will only be appreciated by film goers who weary of film as diversion". This, I feel, is rather unfair to those of us who find it boring.I have not become weary or disillusioned with film or with film makers, but found this tedious and self indulgent. But then, it's true, I'm not too big into deep meaningfulness. I feel that it may have great meaning for those in the know, you know.It is very slow and it spends a long time in trying to make its individual points, using imagery, indeed, to do so. But in such days as these, it seems possible that a film like this might be the kind of thing that you'd come across in one of those dark and daunting booths in modern art galleries, rather than on the screen of a popular cinema setting.