Starring: Heath Ledger, Sienna Miller and Jeremy Irons
Director: Lasse Hallstrom
Rated: M
GIOVANNI Jacopo Casanova lived from 1725-98.
During his life he was a seminarian, gained a doctorate in law and worked at one stage as a secretary to a cardinal in Rome.
There is no question that Casanova had serious problems.
Most of the legend around this man comes from no less an authority than the man himself.
He wrote his memoirs in 12 volumes, and in them, among other things, detailed the many sexual relationships he claims to have had.
Whichever way we read his history, Casanova was, either, a sex addict (now an identifiable and serious obsessive neurotic disorder), or he was a compulsive liar. Maybe he was both.
In any case his fame is misjudged. By his own pen we discover that what he calls all the women he “loved”, were in fact women he used, manipulated and dumped. He was a sexual abuser.
This film continues the myth of the romantic hero.
Casanova (Heath Ledger) is found in a convent seducing a novice. We discover he has had relations with most of the nuns. The Holy Inquisition is after him.
The Doge of Venice (Tim McInnerny) protects Casanova but insists that he marry a girl of impeccable reputation and settle down.
He offers his hand to Victoria (Natalie Dormer). She accepts.
Casanova judges that behind the veneer of this marriage he will be able to maintain his lustful ways.
Then he meets Francesca Bruni (Sienna Miller), and he falls in love with her.
But this Enlightenment feminist is not interested in him. The rejection fuels his desire to have her all the more.
Just then, Bishop Pucci (Jeremy Irons) from the Holy Inquisition’s headquarters in Rome sails into town to capture Casanova. With mistaken identities and an exchange of love interests, the hunt is on for the real Casanova, and for true love.
This film is a farce. The producers and writers intended it that way.
The plot is absurd, even for this genre, the acting is high camp (Jeremy Irons is particularly annoying), and the satire is not especially funny.
The best things in Casanova are the sets, costumes, music, art direction and the locations in Venice. All sumptuous.
The Catholic Church comes in for a good pasting in this film, with nuns having affairs, cardinals having mistresses and the Inquisition doing its worst.
While these things have been part of the Church’s chequered history, the producers, for their own purposes, seem to prefer the decadence of the 16th century to the mid-18th century.
Surprisingly for this story, there is only fleeting nudity and a couple of low level sex scenes, hence it has attracted only an M rating.
My worry is that the teenagers who may see Casanova could imbibe the values of it which hold that being a sexual predator is cool, to use their jargon, rather than a symptom of a serious pathology.
