i must have seen a different film!!

Good movie but grossly overrated

Excellent but underrated film

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

beautiful. in profound sense. for the recreation of atmosphere. for the acting. for the different perspectives about a delicate subject, for the delicate force of image. for the image of a woman against her period expectation who wins and gives a nuanced definition to the sainthood. it is a film who propose more than gives. it propose the reflection about society from the XII century and from today. it propose an useful example of courage. and a not ordinary expression of the faith. a film who propose many questions and who rediscover an impressive figure of Middle Age who change the perspective about her time.Barbara Sukowa propose a Hildegard von Bingen who becomes heroic step by step, scene by scene, in a precise and convincing style.

there's a lot about this movie that is very kitsch and tempted me to reject it out of hand without finishing: terrible use of CGI in depicting the "visions", hackneyed interpretation of the role of a saint as burning urgent faithfilled zombie on Ritalin, as old as Saint Joan, God and Barbara, etc., ping-pong "topper" pious dialog, alte musik meets ambient electronica vision score, the good guys vs the bad guys thing (all dressed in black however), ellipses that are bit strange (somehow Hildegarde/Richardis become Petra von Kant/Karin Thimm in a scene that seems to come out of nowhere dramatically), and finally the generally overheated soap operatic treatment of a sacred theme...however...in spite of all this, the whole thing is managed pretty deftly and cleverly and once I embraced it with a more camp perspective I came to quite enjoy this romp of sapphic sisterhood!

The movie follows the life of Hildegard Von Bingen a famous medieval nun/magistra/convent founder who had religious visions and was interested in science, music, medicine, and much more...The cinematography was absolutely beautiful and the story captivated me even with its modern feminist sensibilities every where....from the suitably milque toast priest Volmar to her renaissance passion for all intellectual pursuits....The cliché over veneration of books learning etc comes off as nerdy and dumb when exaggerated too much as it was in this movie. That said I wish I had read up on Hildegard before watching; there was apparently much substance to the woman--the movie fails here..having her oohing and aawing over stacks of books or staging an avant garde (for the era) play doesn't do her credit.The part of her that captivated me of course were the visions. Everyone hopes things like that are not mental illness. You grow to really like this woman and that is the key to good cinema no?The character of Richardis is good too...more than a hint of female homosexuality that was sublimated by both parties.This movie would have been a 10 if the visions had been shown better and the pseudo intellectual nerd and feminist stuff toned down.RECOMMEND

This movie was a disappointment. The viewer coming to the film without a knowledge of who Hildegard of Bingen was and her significance is likely to leave the movie in almost the same condition. Why nine hundred years after her life is she still discussed? This movie will not answer that question.The plot is minimal and predictable. It tells the story of Hildegard's becoming a nun, becoming the head of her group of sisters, starting her own nunnery, her conflicts with male authorities, and her relations with political authorities. At least as presented in Vision, this is not riveting. Neither the photography nor the acting is very impressive.While the movie alludes to Hildegard's musical works, her scientific and medical interests, and devotes time to her visions, we do not receive a coherent well developed picture of the woman and her accomplishments. And that is a disappointment since Hildegard was an interesting person.In short, Hildegard the person simply is not the same as Vision the movie. A movie reviewer ought not confuse the two.To cite just two points on which a more enterprising film might have focused:(1) For all of the movie's talk of Hildegard's visions, no effort is made to present them visually. That could have been quite dramatic cinema. Even if the budget constrained dramatic staging of the visions, a skillful writer would have used a plot device (such as manuscript illuminations or wall paintings) for graphic effect. It would have provided us with some feel as to their power and impact on her contemporaries. Alas, instead the movie has Hildegard narrating small disconnected passages without any real vitality.(2) The movie ends just as Hildegard is going out to preach. She made four such trips and apparently they had major impacts throughout the Rhineland. Yet we do not see those trips. Undoubtedly they could have been presented in very dramatic fashion. Alas again, the movie misses a great cinematic opportunity.One final point before closing. Yes, Hildegard is a strong woman resisting domination by male Church leaders, a creative artist, and an interesting intellectual figure. Unfortunately her legacy is not wholly uncontroversial. Some of her visions are profoundly anti-semitic. During the Second Crusade of 1147, the Jewish communities of the Rhineland were massacred. While Bernard denounced these mobs, Hildegard was silent. Wouldn't a more balanced picture of Hildegard have shown these moral failures? It might have made for a more interesting movie.