"A gift from your heart
Love for those who have no love,
Peace for those who have no peace,
PAX ET BONUM" (the words of a beggar that lead Francis' heart to conversion)
Encountering many biopics of saint Francis of Assisi, nobody should skip the one by the famous director of CASABLANCA Michael Curtiz titled FRANCIS OF ASSISI. What surprised me in this film was the way the movie begins: credits composed within the images of Giotto frescoes, a work of art in the Assisi Basilica which have depicted the life of the saint for many generations. And one can begin to expect something of a great job. But, as I went on watching the movie, I noticed the fact there is something missing in it. Since FRANCIS OF ASSISI is purely a biopic, it seems to be the question "Is it possible to show the rich life of the Poverello in 105 minutes?;" but, moreover, one can deduce that all goes so fast as if the producers packed biographical facts one after another... Yet...
...it would be very unjust to treat this film from today's perspective. We have to realize that the film was made by Americans at a certain point in movie history when colossal epics were being made and occurred blockbusters at the box office. Producers concentrated much more on high camp production than on the message a film would convey. However, if we get closer to the gist of whose life the biopic is about, we realize that Saint Francis, the poorest of the poor, deserves something different than that.
When watching FRANCIS OF ASSISI by Michael Curtiz, we do not find Francis "politically incorrect" with the social and ecclesiastical system of the time, we do not find him reject his possessions, we do not find him totally filled with the spirit of the Gospel nor so much a radical follower of Jesus Crucified. It does not mean that there is no spirit in the movie; it does mean, however, that there is hardly any "Franciscan spirit" That is, with some exceptions, combined with biographical aspects highlighted. Bernardo Quintavalle is an old man who offers financial help in rebuilding the church of Porziuncola; Francis' farewell to his parents is rather filled with "compromise" than the radical "no" to wealth and the "loveless toys we fill our days with" as it was nicely put in the screenplay of Zeffirelli's production (1972). Clare is rather a calm lady of aristocracy than a youthful girl in love with the example of the friars. As a matter of fact, Clare was much younger than Francis and could not visit aristocratic banquets merely as a child. Other errors could be enumerated but that is, I think, not the gist here.
To be more objective with the movie, I would like to concentrate on these "exceptions" contain foremost single moments. First, it is surely the scene I quoted at the beginning when we see Francis leaving the tavern and, symbolically, his life of earthly pleasures and wandering the streets of Assisi. There, he notices a procession with the Cross of our Lord and while gazing at Crucified Jesus, a beggar tells him the words I mentioned at the beginning... pretty powerful scene! I liked the idea of focusing on PAX ET BONUM message, the key one for Franciscans. Unfortunately, it is little developed in the content later on. Another strong moment of the movie is the execution of stigmata saint Francis received from the Lord in September 1224. Although some people may have doubts as for the depiction of suffering, generally the scene is worth a look as a more "traditional" interpretation than the one by Liliana Cavani in 1989 movie. Finally, it is important to mention the fact that FRANCIS OF ASSISI is the only film, so far, which shows Francis' memorable visit at the sultan's and does it in a pretty convincing manner (mind you: by "convincing" I do not mean stunning).
As far as performances are concerned, one can say there is much to be desired, particularly when concerning casting certain people. Dolores Hart is not bad as Clare, but as I have already said, rather a calm lady than an enthusiastic young female saint. Her personal biography later made this role, perhaps, more authentic as she became a nun. Bradford Dillman lacks the "godly madness" in the main role. All he portrays is just a seemingly unconvincing conversion from an easy going young man to a pious man of God. Finlay Currie, the mainstay of the genre, is not bad as Pope Innocent III but I do not think that he does equally good a job as in his other portrayals. Francis' parents (Eduard Franz and Athene Seyler) are far too old for the roles and, therefore, Pietro Bernardone appears to be too enigmatic.
All in all, what could I say in a nutshell about the film? More FRANCIS than FRANCESCO, more an Anglo-Saxon man of reasonable faith than the Umbrian Poverello of emotional belief. Perhaps, it is sad to say but FRANCIS OF ASSISI is the least convincing film about the saint so far among the several biopics. However, I would never call it a "failure"...no failure at least for the sake of message and final moment.
The scene of Clare's tribute and Francis' funeral leaves a visual effect in the viewer. PAX ET BONUM written in the red sky of setting sun just above the body of the poorest among the poor and birds chirping last farewell to their heartfelt preacher seem to link heavens with earth in the tedious spiritual pilgrimage of human hearts...
Love for those who have no love,
Peace for those who have no peace,
PAX ET BONUM" (the words of a beggar that lead Francis' heart to conversion)
Encountering many biopics of saint Francis of Assisi, nobody should skip the one by the famous director of CASABLANCA Michael Curtiz titled FRANCIS OF ASSISI. What surprised me in this film was the way the movie begins: credits composed within the images of Giotto frescoes, a work of art in the Assisi Basilica which have depicted the life of the saint for many generations. And one can begin to expect something of a great job. But, as I went on watching the movie, I noticed the fact there is something missing in it. Since FRANCIS OF ASSISI is purely a biopic, it seems to be the question "Is it possible to show the rich life of the Poverello in 105 minutes?;" but, moreover, one can deduce that all goes so fast as if the producers packed biographical facts one after another... Yet...
...it would be very unjust to treat this film from today's perspective. We have to realize that the film was made by Americans at a certain point in movie history when colossal epics were being made and occurred blockbusters at the box office. Producers concentrated much more on high camp production than on the message a film would convey. However, if we get closer to the gist of whose life the biopic is about, we realize that Saint Francis, the poorest of the poor, deserves something different than that.
When watching FRANCIS OF ASSISI by Michael Curtiz, we do not find Francis "politically incorrect" with the social and ecclesiastical system of the time, we do not find him reject his possessions, we do not find him totally filled with the spirit of the Gospel nor so much a radical follower of Jesus Crucified. It does not mean that there is no spirit in the movie; it does mean, however, that there is hardly any "Franciscan spirit" That is, with some exceptions, combined with biographical aspects highlighted. Bernardo Quintavalle is an old man who offers financial help in rebuilding the church of Porziuncola; Francis' farewell to his parents is rather filled with "compromise" than the radical "no" to wealth and the "loveless toys we fill our days with" as it was nicely put in the screenplay of Zeffirelli's production (1972). Clare is rather a calm lady of aristocracy than a youthful girl in love with the example of the friars. As a matter of fact, Clare was much younger than Francis and could not visit aristocratic banquets merely as a child. Other errors could be enumerated but that is, I think, not the gist here.
To be more objective with the movie, I would like to concentrate on these "exceptions" contain foremost single moments. First, it is surely the scene I quoted at the beginning when we see Francis leaving the tavern and, symbolically, his life of earthly pleasures and wandering the streets of Assisi. There, he notices a procession with the Cross of our Lord and while gazing at Crucified Jesus, a beggar tells him the words I mentioned at the beginning... pretty powerful scene! I liked the idea of focusing on PAX ET BONUM message, the key one for Franciscans. Unfortunately, it is little developed in the content later on. Another strong moment of the movie is the execution of stigmata saint Francis received from the Lord in September 1224. Although some people may have doubts as for the depiction of suffering, generally the scene is worth a look as a more "traditional" interpretation than the one by Liliana Cavani in 1989 movie. Finally, it is important to mention the fact that FRANCIS OF ASSISI is the only film, so far, which shows Francis' memorable visit at the sultan's and does it in a pretty convincing manner (mind you: by "convincing" I do not mean stunning).
As far as performances are concerned, one can say there is much to be desired, particularly when concerning casting certain people. Dolores Hart is not bad as Clare, but as I have already said, rather a calm lady than an enthusiastic young female saint. Her personal biography later made this role, perhaps, more authentic as she became a nun. Bradford Dillman lacks the "godly madness" in the main role. All he portrays is just a seemingly unconvincing conversion from an easy going young man to a pious man of God. Finlay Currie, the mainstay of the genre, is not bad as Pope Innocent III but I do not think that he does equally good a job as in his other portrayals. Francis' parents (Eduard Franz and Athene Seyler) are far too old for the roles and, therefore, Pietro Bernardone appears to be too enigmatic.
All in all, what could I say in a nutshell about the film? More FRANCIS than FRANCESCO, more an Anglo-Saxon man of reasonable faith than the Umbrian Poverello of emotional belief. Perhaps, it is sad to say but FRANCIS OF ASSISI is the least convincing film about the saint so far among the several biopics. However, I would never call it a "failure"...no failure at least for the sake of message and final moment.
The scene of Clare's tribute and Francis' funeral leaves a visual effect in the viewer. PAX ET BONUM written in the red sky of setting sun just above the body of the poorest among the poor and birds chirping last farewell to their heartfelt preacher seem to link heavens with earth in the tedious spiritual pilgrimage of human hearts...