Stealing Beauty (1996)

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

All the delightful characters, so well developed, and the mystery sub-plot, perhaps help us old fellers feel not so guilty about watching teen Liv Tyler sport about in short, filmy dresses, or less. Yep, she's gorgeous. But where will this movie go? Will it follow its intrigues and conflicts to their resolutions, and thus show that it is more about story than underwear? As the answer to Juicy Lucy's mystery brings us to further interpersonal conflicts, will these be heeded? Unfortunately not. In the postscript to Lolita, Nabakov defines pornography (very soft, and quite pleasant, here) as successive escalations of eroticism to climax. Ultimately, in Stealing Beauty, that escalation takes over, as the director kills all art-house soap opera with the deflowering of his own movie's purported innocence, and with rather sudden ideal romance. Shouldn't we see a bit more flirtation between Lucy and her true love? As in even this softest porn, the rule is that story and character play second fiddle to sex. Story ends when the sculptor tells Lucy, 'This will be our secret.' He doesn't have to tell his wife! His wife isn't even more strongly driven to return to Ireland. Lucy has to continue to pretend she is merely a visitor. Doesn't she want to tell her sister, "You are my half-sister?" All that gets dropped, for a bit of sim-sex, that is supposed to feel like a climax.Oh, yeah, and the three long-distance shots of the villa: It was a little disconcerting to keep seeing Gladiator Maximus's villa, supposedly in Spain, here in Tuscany. But for a place 2000 years old, it was well preserved.

Stealing Beauty is a character piece, not so much ever really driven by plot, and which makes it a particularly European-flavored entry in the Bernardo Bertolucci cannon of films he's made. This shouldn't be a surprise; the guy's been making them this way for most of his career, save for when he can't not have some semblance of a story (i.e. 1900 and Last Emperor, which were epics). It's got some purely luscious cinematography- thanks, in part, to the equally luscious and vibrant locations out in these Tuscan fields and villas and vineyards and homes, all secluded like in an over-elaborate dream- and some brilliant moments, though in the end it's almost something of a minor work for the director. The most admirable aspect is that he's able, in short, to make a contemporary movie that doesn't feel stuck in time.It's a 90's movie, with a hot-young-talent in her first role (I think it's her first), Liv Tyler, and in a way it works that she's not all that great in the part. Her awkwardness, her moments of sadness over her character's loss of her mother and the confusion over who her father really is, and the girlish and nearly overrated conundrum of still being a virgin, works to her ability as a 'first-timer', so to speak. And, luckily, she's surrounded by much better actors, people like Jeremy Irons who has a presence that is immense and cool even when bed-ridden for much of the film (thankfully it doesn't turn out how I originally thought the set-up would be with him wooing Tyler), and Rachel Weisz in one of her early roles as a woman who has reasonable suspicion her self-absorbed American husband is a lying/cheating louse. There are others as well, like the one who plays the old Frenchman (I forget his name), who's incredible as the old crank who can't bear to be where he's at.If it does feel like a minor work, as I mentioned, it's that Bertolucci- working from his original concept with a screenwriter- doesn't give very much depth to the situation, or to some of the characters, until a little more than halfway through the movie. For a while it feels like a shallow enterprise, the kind of "will she or won't she" attitude towards sex that should be above him. But at some point there's something that opens up a little bit, then a little more, and all the while as Tyler's Lucy becomes more aware of what matters the central conceit starts to become less and less like some big hurdle and something more natural. As well as this, Bertolucci does litter his film, which is uncharacteristically good in the present setting (he blends musical choices very well, from alternative rock to old R&B and classical and jazz) and has a couple of really tremendous scenes. The bit at the party where Tyler and a possible-father dance and the dancers all choreographed and strange come in, it's enthralling.Fans of the director should check it out, as should for those of the actors, but this being said it's almost kind of a light work. Lacking really hardcore dramatic tension, it's mostly predicated on a 19-year old girl's quasi-coming-of-age. Which is interesting, up to a point.

I had the opportunity to watch this movie twice in a single day - first in the morning, and then, unexpectedly, again - in the evening.Maybe it was my destiny.. Just maybe...So at first, I gave it a "9" because I thought there were some minor plot weaknesses.But when I saw it again, everything just worked...This isn't a movie that you watch once and you say "Oh yeah!" It just requires more attention. You have to think harder and, something more - you have to feel harder...As with every great work of art, you have to experience it several times, in order to actually get into it...And when you do, you could find anything in it...In time, I'll watch it again, and I hope I can learn something from a true cinema virtuoso.Watch it more than once - 10/10.

"Stealing Beauty" depicts (two hours of) Tuscany summer, slow paced drifting camera, a beautiful girl, lots of dark people around, candid sex, and pop music.Hey, Bertolucci... Slow down, take a deep breath, say "no, thanks" to the American audience, cry a little, and start again. I mean, from the very beginning.Remember: Pier Paolo and Michelangelo are contemplating you from above. And Godard says he wants you to show up in his next movie; "Un Italiano is an Italian is an englishman". Are you really sure you still want to make films? How about entering History, or Buhdist philosophy, for a change? Are you aware that your work as director here is as sordid as Marcello Clerici's life was?Reveille toi!