Medea

Maria Callas, Prima Donna of the Century, appeared for the last time on the opera stage in 1965, at the age of forty-one. Renown as a singing-actress, she was often approached by film producers and directors, hoping to interest her in the cinema.Various sources indicate possibilities such as "The Guns of Navarone" (1961, Irene Papas took the role of Maria Pappadimos), portraying Maria Jeritza in a biographical film of Giacomo Puccini (directed by Luchino Visconti), Sarah in John Huston's "The Bible...In The Beginning" (1966, Ava Gardner portrayed the heroine), "Boom!" (1968, après Tennessee Williams, directed by Joseph Losey; Dame Elizabeth Taylor portrayed the part of Flora "Sissy" Goforth), even a proposed version of Mother Courage. Perhaps most intriguing was "The Greatest Story Ever Told" (1965), with the producers proposing La Callas as St Mary Magdalene and her dear friend Princess Grace of Monaco as the Blessed Virgin Mary. Additionally, Franco Zeffirelli attempted to make a film of the soprano in Puccini's "Tosca," with the soundtrack being her 1964 recording for EMI. (According to Musical America at the time, even screen-tests were made with Callas and Tito Gobbi; if so, they have not surfaced.)None of these came to fruition, of course. When Mme Callas finally signed a contract for a film, it took many by surprise. Pier Paolo Pasolini, even then a controversial figure in the Fine Arts, was to direct her in a film entitled "Medea," first seen in 1969. Luigi Cherubini's "Médée" (in the corrupt Italian version) had been one of her great assumptions in the theatre, and the Colchian sorceress long held a fascination for her. However, Pasolini granted more than one interview to insist his film was not of Euripides (pace the box of the current edition) or of Cherubini, but of the ancient myth of Medea, the woman who slaughters her children to aggrieve their father.Many opera buffs have proven, from the première until today, that they would have much preferred Callas to have appeared in an easily-digestible bon-bon by Zeffirelli, etc. Pasolini's film, an extreme example of the Neorealismo movement, is dry, turgid, non-narrative, and seemingly cinematically primitive by later standards, especially regarding the heavy-handed dubbing so beloved by the Italian cinema of the time. The soundtrack consists of a disturbing mélange of pseudo-prehistoric sounds. Callas not only does not sing (though apparently one or two songs were recorded), according to some sources it is not even of her speaking voice. One can see her august lips reciting dialogue in English, while we hear the dubbed Italian!It was, nevertheless, Callas's fiat that had her go forth with the project. She had seen Pasolini's work and read his ethereal poetry. She was not an intellectual, but she was very sophisticated, and knew this was not going to be a Hollywood "hit." Instead, this film is imbued with mystery and a quiet terror. Callas is here the epitome of exotic beauty, she moves with extraordinary grace, and her mystique is not lost on the camera. To say the least, the project, imbued with the remarkable intellect of Pasolini, is well worth one's effort.Pasolini's 1964 film, "Il vangelo secondo Matteo," was recently named by L'Osservatore Romano as "the best film about Jesus ever made in the history of cinema," and had been dedicated by the atheist-Marxist director to Pope St John XXIII. His films following "Medea," culminating in "Salò o le 120 giornate di Sodoma" (concerning Italy following the fall of Benito Mussolini), are indisputably some of the most shocking films in history. Pasolini, who was brutally murdered in 1975, will long be a highly disputatious artist, but one who must be taken seriously, as difficult as is that proposition.Much further research needs be done regarding this "Medea." Does the English version still exist? Are the recordings of the songs sung by Callas extant? The production of this troubling enterprise are some of the most obscure pages in the tumultuous life of Maria Callas.

I'm not much of a film critic, and to be perfectly honest I only watched the film because Maria Callas was in it. I love her work in opera and was intrigued when I found out that she starred in this one film. And for Callas, it is worthwhile - she gives an incredible performance, despite never singing a note and having minimal dialogue. The film itself is unique in other regards - the pace is slow, and dialogue is kept to a minimum. Visually, we are provided mainly with landscapes, profiles and facial expressions. Aurally, we get a range of exotic world music. In both ways, the movie is like a collage - the sets and the music clearly do not fully belong to the time period or the cultures depicted in the story, nor even do these elements necessarily combine harmoniously with each other. So I do warn that this film is a challenge for the viewer; it's definitely not your standard Hollywood storytelling, but undeniably artful and interesting. Recommended for those who have an appreciation for international film and art film.The one complaint I have in this film is with the dubbing of the dialogue - I've read many places, that it was filmed in English, then dubbed in Italian, possibly by Callas herself and/or possibly by another actress. The Amazon On Demand version is presented in Italian with English subtitles (which I don't mind), but while it sure sounds like Callas, I can't be certain. I would be very interested to see the film with the original English restored, though that may be impossible. Otherwise I wish it could be confirmed that Callas's own dubbing is presented.

Am I the only one to notice that the killing of the Princess and her father is shown twice in the DVD version? (Is it in the tape edition also?) We see them burst into flame, then we go back to Medea planning the murder, and then we see it again! I wrote to the distributor and he said he forwarded my comments to the producers. I never heard a word from the latter. So I am posting this to ask if any one else has noticed this strange duplication. I would very much appreciate hearing from any body whose copy has the same flaw or does not.

As with his version of Oedipus, Pasolini succeeds in bringing a subtle and socially disturbing element out of the Greek myth. The film is watchable, with patience, but unlike many so-called art-films, the patience is rewarded immediately. The scenes alternate between tedium and action, awkwardness and certainty, which works like an investment that promises a high return. Pasolini's "return" is the connections between ancient myth and contemporary relevance. Criterion needs to take of his lesser films, like the mythological pair, before they are lost to poor transfers and burned-in subtitles. This DVD edition, though, is quite acceptable compared to others (like the Water-Bearer DVDs).

Long out of print, finally released and a beautiful film. This is a European film, so American audiences take note. If you think Will Farrell is funny or Mark Wahlberg is an actor or Steven Spielberg makes interesting films, then this is probably not for you. It's slow, very slow, very very slow. There's almost no music to wake you up as you fall asleep in your popcorn. There's very little violence to pump your adrenaline up and, unforgiveably, there's almost no blood. There's no nudity and no sex. Again, it's a European film.If you appreciate Bergman, Fellini, Antonioni, or Almodovar, you might like this one.Aside from the fact that it's the only fiction film Callas ever made, it's a gem. Accompanying it is a beautiful documentary on Callas.

It seems that I am not the only one to think I was buying an early opera featuring La Callas, What a mistake to make, but as a film it is quite good but a bit too gory for me in places

I got this for my Dad, he love it made him happy and kept him quiet for a while :)If you're a Callas fan I think you should buy this, personally I'm not but is seems I am the only one in my family that doesn't like her hence the 5 stars as they all loved it.

The costumes, photography and Maria Callas are all wonderful. Unfortunately the screen play (very loosely based on Euripides) editing and action are all poor. If you just want a film version of Medea do not buy this.

Very nice but faulty. Subtitles did not work and English audio did not work either ns Amazon does not seem to understand the difference between returning something you do not want and something which is faulty.

Quick deliver, really good