A character study and a meditation on art in a time of opulence and syphilis. Gustave Klimt (1862-1918) lies in hospital, dying. In reveries, he recalls the early 1900s: it's fin de siècle Vienna. At the World Exposition in Paris, Klimt meets Georges Méliès, who does a moving picture for him, and Klimt falls under the spell of a woman who may be Lea de Castro. We see Klimt in his studio; we meet his mother and sister, who suffer from mental illness. We watch Klimt the libertine. On his deathbed and as a younger man, he imagines things as well: encounters with ministers and waiters and with women who are willing participants in his pleasures. Is this the source of art?Written by
When Klimt mashes the cake in the man's face, the icing on the man's face is not covering his right eye. In the next close-up shot, there is a large blob of icing covering the man's right eye. In the next long shot when Klimt starts to wipe the man's face, the icing is no longer covering the man's right eye again. See more »
Those who find this movie boring, even terrible, are probably not familiar with post-modern cinema. This is not a Hollywood classic recipe movie, it is an post-modern art film that relies on poetry and a reference system to other pieces of art to give meaning to symbols.
Concerning one of the uncultivated commenters who thought that there was too much "talk, talk, talk", well that part was meaningful and well done. It portrayed the pedantic falsely deep talk of that particular social class in that particular era, and at the same time show Klimt's point of view on it.
As another commenter said, bad scores to this movie is not about the movie but more about the viewer. Not because you don't understand references and are not used to that kind of movie that it is bad.
9 of 17 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this