dano33334
That will tell us what we might expect to gain from this movie. For fans of either Mickey Rourke or Helena Bonham Carter, its another chance to see them stretch their acting muscles to grasp and conquer characters previously untouched. The casual viewer might not suffer any distraction whatsoever.For the viewer who has experienced other portrayals of St Francis, or one who is looking for a deeper understanding of the saint, it may be difficult to get past the casting choices for these 2 main characters. An awareness of Mickey Rourke's other prominent roles may taint our perception of his ability or suitability for this task. Innocence is not something we expect from the actor, and I had difficulty recognizing it. I cringed at times when his performance seemed almost "sexy", not a word I would ever want to use to describe a saint. Is it unreasonable to expect Francesco to seem somehow super-spiritual? Maybe.Remembering Helen Bonham Carter's cinematic history further crippled my ability to "suspend disbelief". While both are accomplished actors, and able to draw an audience, it seemed counterproductive to cast such readily identifiable stars for this venture. It was like watching Tom Cruise portray Lincoln.I'm sorry to say that while the script was good and there was so much more to glean from the film in general, I found myself unable to ignore "the 800 lb gorilla in the room".
Cristi_Ciopron
In his best performances, Rourke is not a dynamic, nervous actor of the Cagney/Lemmon type, though he leaves the impression of supple energy; there are fits of rage, according to the needs of the role. But he is fundamentally a contemplative, even quiet performer (--that's one more reason why his so called action flicks are so abominably lousy …).There are,of course,his several performances as a mean person—there, he is violent, etc.—but one feels that is a periphery, ultimately untrue Rourke. His contemplative, discreet and hazy kindness was so far—away from the Hollywoodian clichés of the golden—hearted sissy ,that it passed almost unnoticed. Rourke played exquisitely several good, kindhearted man—in ;he was able to portray good, fundamentally kind men—and that is how he played St Francesco. As an Italian movie, this is very average and even unappealing; as a Rourke vehicle, it does have a secret warmth and is moving. Rourke portrays the saintly man that went through so many struggles. In the drear, stark, austere landscape, Rourke's face shines with a kind light. As the movie progresses, he installs himself progressively better in the role. In an old interview, he placed FRANCESCO among his dearest achievements, in the group of European or defining movies he made in the second half of the '80s. Rourke indicates the saintly love that united that Umbrian meek man to his lord, the Christ Jesus. (There is a scene in A PRAYER … and one in HOMEBOY where the same plenitude is to be found—Fallon leaning on Jesus' chest, in the first movie; and the fighter gazing at a small Jesus statue, in his sordid ugly dirty lousy room ….)A note rings very true in the few scenes where Rourke's characters are consumed by love for their lord, the Christ, Jesus.In fact, Rourke's best roles have an amazing quiet refined intensity, that makes them light like jewels. This actor had an amazing potential, huge virtual … of acting. It is only too pity that he did not succeed in having a career at least as fruitful as Matthau's or as Scott's.(In fact, there are, paradoxically, or, better, apparently paradoxical, lots of B actors, active in the '40s—'80s, who have luckier careers than his ….Rourke got a lousy time for pictures. Beginning in the '80s, movies meant, came to mean mostly crap. Ugly, stupid, boring, phony, banal, insipid things. That's why Rourke—and Willis, Gibson, etc., have fewer meaningful, good roles than Matthau, Caine, Connery, and ever many lesser actors ….) In his several Z movies, he was wasted (I mean the crap he did throughout the '90s). What distinguished Rourke the most in his worth—wile roles was his almost supreme authenticity, genuineness. Mme. Cavani's direction here is what one might call, euphemistically, neutral. In fact, she was a leftist hack with interesting projects and, above all, ambitions. I know that Rourke, grateful for this role ,got along very well with her. In '94,in a magazine, I saw a picture of the two, on FRANCESCO's sets, Rourke was addressing her his seraphic smile.
