Vincent & Theo
|
List Price: Our Price: $10.31 You Save: $4.67 (31%) Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours Buy Used: from $7.33 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of Vincent & Theo
Movie Review: Interesting look
Summary: 3 Stars
Although Robert Altman is proficient in re-creating the scenery of Van Gogh's life through the eyes of the painter with striking color and a vaguely bohemian atmosphere, he still fails to present Van Gogh the man or the artist in with any genuine originality. He focuses on Van Gogh, the tormented saint-artist, who forges ahead on the canvas with a drive to present the "suffering" of humanity. However, Altman precludes Van Gogh's obvious manias, his periods of demented elation. It is impossible to believe that the Van Gogh presented here could have produced those vibrant wheat fields in Arles, or the Night Café. What remains in this fractured (though never incompetent biopic), is Tim Roth's virtuoso performance; he managed to literally crawl into the skin of Van Gogh, and the result may frighten you. However, his virtuosity always overshadows Paul Rhys' rather tepid presentation of his brother Theo, though there are other admirable performances in the film, such as Wladimir Yordanoff's amiable presentation of Gauguin. Altman seems to be commenting, rather uninterestingly, about the commercial dimension of artistry, and of the impossibility of true recognition of genius. This is a conventional portrait of the unrecognized genius, it is a tale told again and again. However, Altman's imagery is captivating (with the help of Storraro), the photography looks like vibrant haloes emitted by Van Gogh's paintings, though the musical score is dreadful and morbid. Still you much watch this one for Tim Roth's inspired performance if nothing else.Movie Review: Good but not great
Summary: 3 Stars
This slow moving BBC film by Robert Altman concentrated on Vincent's madness and the parasitic relationship he had with others, primarily his brother Theo. I am very sure that Vincent Van Gough was a difficult character, but his family was not any better. His own father described the artist as not special, but different. Theo did support Vincent financially and spiritually. But I don't think it was fair to portray vincent as a totally raving leech either. Paul Gauguin was given way too much credit for being a good friend, when in real life he was using Vincent for essentally pay. The ear incident was taken completely out of context as well. Having said that, the movie wasnt that bad. It was well acted and artfully photographed. I had high expectations and that may be why I was a little dissapointed in it. It was not a totally accurate depiction of the artist or his relationship with his brother, but it was a movie and not a documentary and as such was a good story and an evening well spent.Movie Review: Bad
Summary: 1 Stars
Vincent & Theo, a 1990 film by director Robert Altman, may be the worst film ever made by a major director who has made a great film. Watching this two hour and twenty minute abomination left me, and my wife, stunned by its wretchedness. From the nonexistent narrative, to the indulgence of every artistic cliché imaginable by screenwriter Julian Mitchell, to possibly the worst soundtrack, by Gabriel Yared, ever used in a film (even worse than the estimably bad Robot Monster!), it's a wonder Altman ever crawled his way out from under the odium of this horrorshow, the nadir of his career- even more so than Popeye a decade before. Yet, his very next film, The Player, somehow relaunched his career. If I can indulge a cliché, maybe it really can be darkest before the dawn!
I have still yet to see a successful film made on the life of a real artist, where all the clichés were not utilized. Perhaps the closest to that ideal was Amadeus, save for the fact that its protagonist was not Mozart, but Salieri, and the story was the latter's envy of the former's talent, and the truth was that that whole film was an almost total fiction.
This film, however, does not even address the artistic impulse, and the paintings, which is the ONLY reason anyone gives a damn about Vincent Van Gogh, his suffering, or even his brother. Altman states, in the featurette, that what interested him were Vincent's letters to Theo, yet we NEVER get a hint of what they say, only one ridiculously melodramatic scene where a raving Theo bitches at his wife's opening up of the letters.
Altman's always been at his best in ensemble pieces, like Nashville, M*A*S*H, The Player, and Gosford Park. He seems utterly adrift in this intense de facto two person stage play where both actors wildly overact, as if they were in a Roger Corman 1960s comic-horror version of Lust For Life, save with British accents, not Dutch.
Vincent & Theo is a horrible film, in its own stolid way as bad as Steven Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List, but it seems even worse because Spielberg's never come within a light year of a film as complex as Nashville. There is no progression nor insight into Vincent Van Gogh in this film, nor even his brother. When the brothers die we do not care, nor do we have an iota of insight into Altman's ideas on life and art. Vincent's graffiti that `I AM THE HOLY SPIRIT. I AM WHOLE IN SPIRIT.' are not only dull and trite, but not given a shred of evidence one way nor the other by Altman. I could go on and on, and list a few dozen other reasons why this is easily Altman's worst film, and a terrible film, period, but hopefully I've earned enough trust with my readership that I can tell them to simply skip this one and watch Lust For Life instead. It's a better film, and more intellectually honest, to boot. Ok, exhale!
Movie Review: Full of inaccuracies.
Summary: 1 Stars
This movie is full of inaccuracies. For anyone who would like to know more about the real Vincent, read his letters.
The portrayal of Theo's wife, Joanna Van Gogh, makes her out to be a cold woman who has no feeling for art or Theo's brother and his work. History proves her to be quite the opposite. In fact, without her the world might be saying, "Van Gogh who?"
Vincent was a mentally ill man with an incredible talent who wanted nothing more than to teach people through his art and letters, recommending books he read and found helpful to those who he loved. The only thing that he really desired was to be loved, it was the elusiveness of this and his depression over his complete reliance upon his younger brother that may have lead to his suicide. He wasn't merely a crazed painter. Watch it if you want to, but it is not at all accurate.
Movie Review: Vulgar and disgusting
Summary: 1 Stars
Saw this one on television.
Vincent van Gogh was misfortunate in life and certainly crazy. The artist who portrays him does his job very well.
The scenery is breathtaking.
However the nudity in the film is vulgar. The chaeracters are hard to identify with. Some of the scenes are disgusting.
Not going to see this one again.