Under the Sign of Scorpio (1969) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
The Tavianis clunk up an interesting "Lost" premise
lor_30 September 2011
In recent years many brother acts, ranging from the Maysles, Coens, Farrellys, Wheats, Quays and Hugheses to the Pates have been directing movies, but for me the all-time greats are the Taviani Bros. With UNDER THE SIGN OF SCORPIO they lose plenty of brownie points, but I'm willing to write this misfire off. (The only sisters I know of are in the porn field, the cutely named "de Neuve" girls who directed in the mid-'70s.)

Set-up parable is apocalyptic, falling somewhere between the strange sagas associated with Werner Herzog (like "Heart of Glass") to an episode midway during the run of TV's "Lost". An island has been decimated by a volcanic eruption and the few survivors escape to a nearby island. Led by Giulio Brogi, they know that their new home is equally susceptible to such a catastrophe via its own volcano, but they are unable to convince the current inhabitants of Island #2 to flee with them to a mainland.

That is essentially the entire plot for a series of blackout vignettes that are sometimes interesting but often banal or merely pointless. Early in their estimable career the Tavianis are experimenting with the cinematic form and I, for one, was unimpressed with the results.

One of the problems is a disinterest in conventional acting or credible human behavior, much in the manner pioneered around this time by Pasolini. Though top talent is employed (Brogi for one clan, and the brilliant Gian Maria Volonte and Lucia Bose as patriarch and matriarch on Island #2), they are instructed to perform amateurishly. In an effort at forced primitivism, the protagonists' actions oddly come off as much phonier and postured than if Volonte (for example) were giving one of his usual flamboyant, theatrical turns (see: INVESTIGATION OF A CITIZEN for example).

There is plenty of sex and violence in the stew, leading to extremely cryptic sequences later in the film. The barbarian-seeming denizens from Island #1 take to dressing up in cowbells and prancing around all night long in militant stomp fashion to annoy and perplex Island #2 folk, when latter don't take kindly to their insistence that everybody flee the place immediately. (I thought I'd wandered into a recent East Village off-Broadway show at this point.) Later they kidnap most of the women and hogtie them in bondage, cueing brutal violence as Islanders #2 don't take kindly to this action.

Film's open ending is sudden and cryptic, as if the Tavianis were purposely dumping the entire narrative in the viewer's lap instead of attempting to tie up any plot or thematic threads themselves. I shudder to think what fans of similar material (like LORD OF THE FLIES) will think should they have the temerity to sit through this failure, as I had to being a completist. Next up for me (gulp!) is 3-1/2 hours of Laetitia Casta pretending to be an actress rather than a supermodel as the TV star of the Tavianis' LUISA SAN FELICE, crudely dubbed into English no less. Ah, the joys of movie masochism.
7 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Just A WASTE Of Valuable Filmmaking Resources !!!
JoeKulik1 September 2015
Warning: Spoilers
The Taviani brothers' Sotto il segno dello scorpione (1969) is a VERY disappointing film.

The Taviani's had a great concept here, but really failed in the execution of that concept and the resulting finished film is just unconvincing, in my opinion. I had to stop watching this film after about sixty minutes because I just couldn't take anymore.

The behavior of all the people in this story just contradicts normal, common sense assumptions of how people behave. Most evident is the fact that people isolated on an island in such a primitive state would literally be spending every minute of the day trying to generate enough food just to survive, either through gathering, farming, hunting or fishing, and not spending the bulk of their day playing the social games that these people do. The whole thing with the visitors wearing an exceeding amount of cowbells and dancing in such a choreographed manner is just absurd, least of all because there was no herd of cattle shown to even warrant such an extravagant amount of cowbells, not to even mention the seeming lack of technology on this island to even be able to manufacture such a stockpile of cowbells.

The editing in this film was radical, but to a negative effect. With great frequency, the viewer is suddenly transported to a scene that is framed by a set of totally new conditions, without the benefit of having the film tell him how this set of new conditions ever came about. The scene where we suddenly find all the male visitors to the island seemingly trapped in a very deep, neatly dug pit is a case in point. How did all these men end up in that pit?

Efforts by me to see the unlikely behavior of the people on this island in some allegorical, or symbolic manner didn't work for me either, because the storyline on the literal, straight level is such an unreal, fractured, and unexplainable mess that associations at a meta-level of elements of the literal storyline is just not possible for me.

Overall, I am compelled to place this film in my own personal genre of Cinematic Oddity. In fact, this film is such an oddity, so unconvincing, and, ultimately so irrelevant that it isn't even worthy of Cult Film status, at least in my opinion.

This film is just a WASTE of valuable filmmaking resources that could have better spent on another film, ANY film but this one.
1 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed