Valentino (1977)

like each of his films, it is a demystify. precise, ironic, seductive in a special way, provocative. the first challenge - Nureyeev in the lead role. using his talent and art and body. for give the portrait of a world more than the portrait of a man. because it is a film about media and Hollywood and idols and sparkles. about image. and, sure, about glory , success and its large cages. so, a Ken Rusell film. and, maybe, nothing more.

I saw this movie at home more than thirty years after it was first made, and without the background to appreciate the director and his style of directing, which frankly got on my nerves. I also dislike "biographies" which take wild liberties with the actual facts of their subject's lives.But oh, the sets! Oh, the wardrobe! And most especially, oh, Nureyev!! Now lost to us due to AIDS, international ballet star Nureyev did well in this movie, over-acting and under-acting apparently per the director's instructions. Of course, every dance scene is exquisite. (I flinched at the reviewer here who burbled that golly, he's a better dancer than Al Pacino! Yes, dear; a moment on Wikipedia would tell you why.) And, given who and what Nureyev was, the nude scenes are exquisite, too, and plainly show a great deal of acting ability (neither over- nor under- ) on his part. Alas, the beautiful seduction scene in the tent has *talking*. Ah, had they only shut up! The grumpy, intrusive dialog is acidic enough to stifle the eroticism of the encounter. For that scene, one could wish this movie about the silent-film era were silent itself.Trivia: compare his nude photo shoot scene with the two women to the costuming by Bakst for Nijinsky in "Afternoon of a Faun." (Google all that to see pics.) I felt terrible when I missed the revival of the Bakst costumes and Nijinsky's choreography when "AoaF" came to my area in the early 1990s; the photo session scenes in this movie made me feel that at least, I have seen the Faun. This means that the director did the work to reproduce the 1912 original wardrobe over a decade *before* the same exhausting work was done for the 1990's revival.The rest of the movie was essentially one long jangle and blare, with artsy flashbacks and an early stab at what I guess might be magical realism, or something else disjointed, recursive, and melodramatic. In any case, it was enough to alienate me and I never did get fully into the narrative thread (narrative snarl?) of the film. So, five stars - raves for the settings and wardrobe and Nureyev, and just "eh" for everything else.

Even if you know very little about Rudolph Valentino (like myself), it's obvious after just a couple of minutes that this "autobiography" doesn't have to be taken all too seriously. The dark humor and colorful, operatic way in which director Ken Russell tells his story, make this film interesting to watch, although some parts were just a little over the top to my taste (like Leslie Caron's excessive entrance at the funeral home, the cult of fans gathering outside Valentino's mansion and the scene in which Valentino and his co-star "practise" their love scene).Although the choice of Rudolf Nureyev to play Valentino was a gamble, I think he is surprisingly well-cast in the title role. In my opinion, the whole essence of the movie was to make it look like a silent movie, whether in grotesqueness of the scenes or in the overly dramatic dialogs. In that light, Nureyev's performance should not be judged as "bad acting". His exaggerated accent and equally strong body language are part of his performance, which is supported by the fact that Nureyev in real life didn't had that much of an Russian accent (anymore) by 1977. Whether his acting style - or for that matter the style of the entire movie - appeals to you, is therefore merely an issue of personal taste than of professional capability of the filmmakers.As a homosexual (or more accurately bisexual), Nureyev certainly would have related to the hate directed at Valentino and as a world-famous ballet dancer, he would also have been able to relate to Valentino's fame, outrageous lifestyle, the parasitic way in which some people surrounded him and the pressure of being an idol. He created an impression that I found believable and endearing.Someone in another IMDb user review stated that Nureyev is "not handsome", "short" and "not muscular at all". Of course personal opinions about beauty may differ, but REALLY... if Nureyev is not considered the embodiment of physical perfection, than who is? This man has been a sex icon from the moment he became famous and was adored worldwide not only for his wonderful dancing, but also for his beautiful sculpted body and astonishing charisma. He definitely shows these trademarks in this movie. All his love scenes (even with Michelle Phillips, who he apparently disliked) ooze an erotic feeling. But above all, he shows that his dancing skills exceed the classical ballet. The most captivating moments for anyone with a warm place in his heart for dance, are certainly the spectacular ballroom scenes: from the passionate tango with Vaslav Nijinsky (one of several comical references to ballet) to the stunning duets with his two on-screen wives.There are chances that you have mixed feelings after having watched this film, but in my case this is mainly due to the script. The main characters stay a little flat in the narrative and the big leaps in between the events leading to Valentino's death sometimes make it hard for people not familiar with the historical background of Valentino to truly understand the implications of the story. The "why" behind the larger-than-life popularity of this iconic cinematic person thus stays a little obscure. However, the sadness over a talented life cut off too early, is a similarity between Valentino and Nureyev (who died in 1993 as a result of AIDS) which gives the entire film a melancholic shine.

This film topped the British box-office for two weeks and in doing so made Ken Russell the most successful filmmaker in Britain in the 1970s. It was his fifth No.1 hit in that decade. Guy Hamilton had four No.1s (Bond films), Sam Peckinpah had three No.1s; no one else had more than two. Ken Russell also spent longer at Number one than Spielberg, whose two No.1 hits, Jaws and Close Encounters, failed to match the record set by The Music Lovers (1 week at No. 1); Devils (Eight Weeks at No.1); Tommy (14 weeks); Lisztomania (2 weeks) and this. Valentino is not one of Russell's masterpieces, but there are mightily glorious things to see here.