I love this movie so much

The Age of Commercialism

Absolutely Fantastic

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Prophecies of the Apocalypse and mysteriously dying monks make for an effective murder mystery thriller set in an isolated, Fourteenth Century Benedictine abbey. Sean Connery looks like he might have been made for the role of William von Baskerville, exuding a worldly wisdom to go with his venerable appearance. His young ward Adso (Christian Slater) does appear somewhat a lightweight by comparison, though the Franciscan brothers do complement each other quite well. The story turns on a virtually unknown sect called the Dolcinites, notorious for murdering wealthy priests and bishops who corrupted the Christian principles of poverty. An intriguing aspect of the story resulted in a debate on whether Christ owned the clothes he wore, something I've never even had occasion to consider before. Some of the story elements get a bit confusing and muddled, although the Sherlock Holmes type instincts of Brother William eventually discern the cause of deaths at the abbey, even if he has to place his own life in jeopardy at the hands of the Grand Inquisitor, Bernardo Gui (F. Murray Abraham). There's an effective sequence that takes place in the labyrinthine alleys of the abbey's secretive library, home to volumes of forbidden books and texts that their protector wishes to remain undiscovered. And there's a monumental test of Adso's vow of celibacy that he monumentally fails. Needless to say, this is an offbeat murder mystery in an offbeat setting, and made with an eye toward bump in the night creepiness. Say your prayers before and after watching.

Umberto Eco (1932 – 2016) has been always difficult to handle. More so after he is already dead and have left a solid legacy. "Name of the Rose" (1986), both the novel and the film, have inspired considerable acclaim now in its 30th anniversary. Perhaps the movie guild should make an effort to prepare a new critical edition since the last release from 2004 on DVD and Blu-ray, which is good but outdated.I thought some time before writing these lines. It says in the introductory cadres of the film - a Palimpsest on Umberto Eco's Novel! Definition from Gerard Genette (1982) - "Palimpsest examines the manifold relationships a text may have with prior texts ... In this regard it treats the history and nature of parody, anti-novels, pastiches, caricatures, commentary, allusions, imitations and other textual relations". Wikipedia can provide further extension on this definition. This is in essence literature in the second degree!Then came the pressure of semiotics - What is it all about? I have a huge library, some 10 000 volumes that I have purchased with my pocket money for many years on a row. My selection here is with David Crystal (editor) "Encyclopedia of Language", where unfortunately Umberto Eco is not included as semiotician. By-and-large starting with Charles Peirce and Ferdinand de Saussure, we get here an updated scheme on Semiotics where subject matter is three-some or five-some:1. Auditory or vocal language with speech, musical effects, vocal cord physiology, etc;2. Body language or non-verbal communication with A/ Visual mode with signs and symbols, writing, kinesics; B/ Tactile mode for deaf and blind with codes, proxemics, etc;3. Olfactory and gustatory signals which is bio-semiotics and predominantly models communication in the animal kingdom.I hope that my reflections haven't hurt anyone, not least the estate of the author himself. My humble origins doesn't give me a single chance to become celebrity like Umberto Eco. I live in the fringes of Europe and my home town Sofia - although having perfect record of European residence - have been overshadowed by Turkish and Soviet populace. I don't see much future in those places and much less opportunities for science and film industry. However, future is with the young generation and people like me live on minimal retirement pension, with reflections on the past. Thank you!

THE NAME OF THE ROSE, 1986. Directed in English by French helmer Jean-Jacques Arnaud and based on the international best seller by Umberto Eco. Viewed at the 2015 Munich film festival. The year is 1327: after a mysterious death in a Benedictine Abbey, the monks are convinced that the apocalypse is coming. I saw this at some festival back then, probably Tokyo, and walked out on it early because it was so heavy and dreary. This time I sat it out, at the Gaststeig great hall in Munich, but only with effort, being tempted to walk again several times, until at last It picked up some steam after the hot copulation scene I had missed in Tokyo, between a peasant girl in heat and Connery's naive young sidekick. At the time Connery was trying to cut loose from the pigeon holing of his James Bond image and this was the first major step in such a direction. In this murky shaggy dog whodunnit mystery in a medieval Italian monastery Connery plays a Franciscan friar wrapped up in a thick wooly cloak, who is called in to investigate a strange death in a Gothic Benedictine castle. Sean has an admiring young sidekick (Christian Slater) who refers to him as "Master" but ends up teaching the chaste spiritual master a thing or two about carnal love between man and woman. The relationship between Sleuthing Connery and awestruck Slater is obviously derivative of, if not actually a homage to, the more secular Sherlock Holmes doctor Watson pairing. Along the way there are dark intimations of homosexual leanings by some of the creepier monks, there is a hunchback of Notre Dame clone, the only character in the film who occasionally speaks bits of Italian -- and lots of bloody grotesquery as the murders in the monastery keep piling up until the killer can't keep pushing the blame off onto the works of the devil any more. There is a big thing about banned books in a secret library -- notably one by Aristotle that the church regards as Heretical, and F. Murray Abraham following up his borderline villain role as Salieri in Amadeus with a full blown villain role here as head inquisitor Bernard Gui (Pronounced "gooey" and he lives up to his name in spades) -- This revival was the center piece of an Arnaud homage and retrospective, and Mr. Arnaud, now a white haired senior citizen was on hand to accept a lifetime award. The director was introduced by veteran German Actress Veronica Foss, quite a dish still at fifty. Very good English and Great legs.

An intellectually nonconformist monk (Sean Connery) investigates a series of mysterious deaths in an isolated abbey.First of all, thank you to whomever cast William Hickey. The man has not been in enough films, so it is great to see him here. Truly an underrated talent.Connery's character is said to be an amalgam of Sherlock Holmes and William of Occam. This is quite evident, with the way he treats Christian Slater very much like a young Watson. And even Occam was apparent following the belief that the easiest explanation was probably the correct one... this is, in effect, a Holmes tale with a medieval twist.The film did poorly at the box office in the United States, playing at only 176 theaters and grossing only $7.2 million on a $17 million budget. However, it was popular in many parts of Europe and had a worldwide gross of over $77 million. It received generally positive reviews from American and Italian critics. Why Italian, who knows? But the critics were right, and this is a great film. How it failed to go over well in American is a mystery.