Valentino (1977)
“There [will] never be another Valentino — there will never be anyone remotely like him. He was a god!”
Synopsis: |
Genres, Themes, Actors, and Directors:
Review: As one might expect from any Ken Russell “biopic”, Valentino does little to illuminate the mundane details of the actor’s past, instead focusing primarily on his public persona and the seemingly endless string of scandals he was embroiled in. Indeed, the entire second half of the film concerns itself with Valentino’s struggle to defend his masculinity in the face of assertions that he was more “powder puff” than All-American Male — a thematic concern bolstered by an earlier scene in which Valentino is shown dancing “intimately” with the Russian ballet dancer Vaslav Nijinsky (Anthony Dowell). Nonetheless, Russell simultaneously goes to great pains to show us how extraordinarily appealing this sexually provocative actor was to females of the day — the opening scene of the film is particularly effective at recreating the chaos caused by the (mostly female) fans clamoring to get a closer look at their beloved Valentino’s dead body. Ultimately, while it’s not entirely successful as a narrative, Valentino does admirably convey the larger-than-life popularity of this iconic cinematic “Latin Lover”, and will likely be of passing interest to film fanatics for this reason alone. Redeeming Qualities and Moments:
Must See? Links: |
One thought on “Valentino (1977)”
Not a must, but Ken Russell fans won’t ultimately be disappointed.
First viewing.
There is very little middle-of-the-road with a Russell film. You’re either with him or you aren’t. He can be an acquired taste. He can serve up straight drama while tacking on excess if he feels that’s still appropriate for the piece he’s working on. He can also at times change tone and become slightly more exaggerated than is called for (as if reminding us that film can also be frivolous for its own sake). In other words, when watching a Russell film, you may have to prepare yourself to follow his moods as you’re also following the narrative. That’s certainly true here.
I liked ‘Valentino’ more than I expected to. I agree that the performances are fine (tho I don’t think Phillips is all that “shrill” in her role – but when she is, it seems to come organically from the character, who is a little ‘out there’ at times). Nureyev is, in fact, surprisingly effective. One of the standouts for me, though, is Felicity Kendal as studio exec June Mathis – a very natural and knowing turn there. A number of the supporting actors also come off well (including Leland Palmer, Huntz Hall, Peter Vaughan and Penelope Milford). (Actually, the performance that seems a bit too much and needlessly abrasive is William Hootkins’ portrayal of Fatty Arbuckle as an obnoxious buffoon.)
Russell’s script (with Scorsese collaborator Mardik Martin) is occasionally flippant early on but its flashback structure, jumping from individual to individual who was close to Valentino, is fluid and flows nicely overall. DP Peter Suschitzky (who had just filmed ‘The Rocky Horror Picture Show’ as well as Russell’s ‘Lisztomania’) is certainly on the same canvas as Russell’s colorfully expressive mind and the film is bolstered by Philip Harrison’s art direction and dependable Shirley Russell’s costumes.