Far from Perfect, Far from Terrible

As somebody who had not heard any of this before, it became a curious phenomenon to sit and watch a film and slowly have the realities begin to click into place.

It is both painfully honest and laugh-out-loud funny at the same time.

The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

This movie simply spoils a great character and its incredibly rich environment with a long series of pseudo-romantic inventions, a poor direction, and an awful Andy Garcia. Too many facts are totally invented, and alter deeply the personality of Modigliani, as well as the real course of the events, relationships, and even time line (Edit Piaf was definitely not singing yet at the time of the movie). Some scenes are ridiculous, and the large use of little cinematographic tricks (such like Modi whistling the Italian anthem, the "hollywood manual" competition applause, to name a few) lower the level to unacceptable. Fully disappointing.

Modigliani (2004)Wow, somebody besides Modigliani was smoking hashish when making this thing. It's incoherent, it takes fictional liberties that border on infantile (never mind trying to create an interesting story), and the acting and writing (basics, yes?) are strained and patched together. Stephen Holden is right, this is a movie about how not to make a movie about a famous artist.Andy Garcia? I can see how people find him handsome, and Modigliani was a lady's man, for sure, so that much works. But he isn't an actor with either subtlety or fire, mostly just self-consciousness. His girlfriend, Jeanne, who was supposed to be 19 when the artist met her, is played with surprising unevenness by the usually talented Elsa Zylberstein, who was almost twice that age, 36. (She does have a naturally long face, which fits the elongated look of the artist's many portraits.) And then there is an even worse fit, the man playing the short fiery Spaniard named Picasso, an Iranian-British comedian name Omid Djalili. He neither looks nor acts like Picasso, who was filmed and photographed so much we know quite exactly what he was like.So what is it about this film that makes sense? Nothing. There is snow in one direction and not in the the other. There is the foolish brandishing of guns, glasses smashed to the floor, hallucinations that play cheap cinematic games, an invented rivalry between Picasso and Modigliani as if they were the only two artists of note in town (this is Paris, 1917, remember). Oh, and speaking of that, where's the war? You know, World War I. Ha.So, Modigliani impregnates this young Catholic student, Jeanne, and shows raging compassion and neglect in almost the same scene. He loves poverty and seems to never really paint--except when he gives up halfway through and destroys the thing in a fit. (This is only partly true--he drew and painted like mad, but not destructively.) The light is often nice, his T.B. is neatly invisible until the dramatic final bow, and Paris never looked so tawdry and small. It's a shame, because it could at least have been brimming with atmosphere. Or, taking it another direction, the movie could have leapt into complete fantasy like Derek Jarman's "Caravaggio" or the inventive (and more accurate) "Goya in Bordeaux."I wouldn't recommend this to anyone. Anyone, not with all the better artist films out there. As a final note, even if you like everything I didn't, you'll have to keep track of the many side characters (artists who come and go like Max Jacobs, Diego Rivera, and Utrillo), and the put up with a pastiched together simultaneous scene of several of these painters all making their works for the competition, feverishly painting as club music plays in the soundtrack as if it were a high school football tournament. Good luck. The death mask at the end? That's for real. And the final tragic suicide, as well. The truth of Modigliani is far more intense than this frivolous thing.

The main assets of Modigliani are the spectacular acting, the beautiful camera shots and the great music (featuring La Vie en Rose and a beautiful Ave Maria interpretation). Andy Garcia does a wonderful job as the tormented Modigliani (he always does a wonderful job), whom everybody loves very much but nobody can help at all.Omid Djalili comes very close to the Picasso image I had in my mind.The story does not work very well, it is in fact a love story intertwined with a male friendship/rivalry. They tried to cram in so many characters into the plot that I sometimes felt at loss, and would have wished to know more about individual characters, respectively.For example, there is a scene in which Jeanne tells her father to leave her be and that she "recalls what he has done" already, a reference to her youth or early childhood, I assumed. I did not gather what he supposedly did.Then Modigliani also sees other women- has there been a break-up with Jeanne, I wondered or is it just his nature, and are we later on witnessing a reconciliation, the story does not tell. I did not understand why at the end, when Modigliani gets beaten up, his boy-self does not try to intervene, or reflect on the happenings, or why he did not try to urge his adult self to get going from the bar earlier, whereas he quite strongly interferes earlier, suggesting that Modigliani does not let Jeanne leave. The plot also includes many visions of Modigliani, such as the death of his friend in the asylum, or the conversations with himself as a child, which make a follow-up even harder. Although the runtime of Modigliani exceeds 2 hours, which I did not notice as the story captured me right from the start, there have been plot lines left unfinished.The movie Modigliani does not try to be authentic or historical, but rather captures the Montmartre, the Parisienne painters' everyday life and struggle in the '20s, seen through a beautiful and difficult love story and friendship.If you take it for what it is, a fictional, strongly emotional (and somewhat irrational) story based on some non-fictional characters, in a beautifully arranged setting and shot in a highly artistic manner, Modigliani is a wonderful movie and a worthy homage to the era and the great artists of those times.

I just bought the DVD blindfolded in a way , without knowing much about the movie , Now I congratulate myself for this buy . The comments from this site are like from the agony to ecstasy , some are giving few stars 1 or 2 and others 10/10. I regret I did not give it a 10/10.Of course there are some goofs,mistakes,anachronisms ...etc.But you should get your attention to the story . Painters are artists and therefore they are not normal people , they can't be .An artist does not measure in material things . How much earned Phidias , or Ovid , or Aesop ? Their works lasts centuries and millenniums , time is the best critic . I felt sympathetic for Modigliani , for his tragic and sad life .But nothing was in vain.That is my opinion . Very moving film , touching . A must see ! I highly recommend it.