Cheap The Name of the Rose (Video) (Sean Connery, Christian Slater) (Jean-Jacques Annaud) Price
CHEAP-PRICE.NET ’s Cheap Price
Here at Cheap-price.net we have The Name of the Rose at a terrific price. The real-time price may actually be cheaper — click “Buy Now” above to check the live price at Amazon.com.
Enter Sean Connery as investigator-monk William of Baskerville (the Sherlock Holmes connection made explicit in his name) and his naive young assistant Adso (a youthful Christian Slater). The Grand Inquisitor Bernado Gui (F. Murray Abraham) suspects devilry; but William and Adso, using Holmesian forensic techniques, uncover a much more human cause: the secrets of the library are being protected at a terrible cost. A fine international cast and the splendidly evocative location compensate for a screenplay that struggles to present Eco's multifaceted story even partially intact; Annaud's idiosyncratic direction complements the sinister, unsettling aura of the tale ideally. --Mark Walker
| ACTORS: | Sean Connery, Christian Slater |
| CATEGORY: | Video |
| DIRECTOR: | Jean-Jacques Annaud |
| THEATRICAL RELEASE DATE: | 24 September, 1986 |
| MANUFACTURER: | Nelson Entertainment |
| MPAA RATING: | R (Restricted) |
| FEATURES: | Color, Closed-captioned, NTSC |
| TYPE: | Mystery / Suspense |
| MEDIA: | VHS Tape |
| # OF MEDIA: | 1 |
| UPC: | 042995134230 |
Related Products
Customer Reviews of The Name of the Rose
Entertaining Mystery with a Creepy Air I first saw this movie in the 80s while in college and just saw it on Bravo recently. Sure, it may not do complete justice to the book as some reviewers have lamented. I haven't read the book, so I cannot critique the movie on that point; however, given the time constraints, it probably does fall somewhat short of the book. One reviewer who claims to be a medieval expert (when compared to the average Joe) slammed the movie for its imprecise portrayal of the time period. OK, but big deal.
Sean Connery and Christian Slater put in fine performances. Ron Perlman, playing the grotesque Salvatore, would have stolen the show if he had more screen time. He didn't have much of anything intelligible to say; nonetheless, it was neat to hear his mumbo jumbo, forked tongue, pig Italian dialect. Lon Chaney would have been proud of Ron.
When seeing it again after many years, I picked up more on the religious and philosophical theme and debate (I guess the first time I was impressed more with the look of the film). Our medieval expert pooh poohed the movie for its supposed inaccurate parody of Christendom during the 14th century; however, 700 years later there is still much to lampoon in regard to religious dogma of all sorts from every religion. I was amused when some of the monks in the movie, believing the end times to be near, became panic stricken. Good thing nobody believes in that poppycock anymore, right?
All in all, the movie is engrossing (and most of the characters delightfully gross) and a nice deviation from typical Hollywood fare, despite complaints from some reviewers that Hollywood seeps in at times. I thought the ending could have been a little better.
Unique
What I appreciate so much about The Name of the Rose is its uniqueness. How many other medieval-themed movies about the pedestrian (not the stuff of legends) are there? How many mystery stories set more than a couple centuries ago are there? It's a movie without equal... not because it's all that excellent a movie, but, rather, because nothing compares in subject matter and style (and it's still a good movie, to boot).
It takes guts to make a movie that takes place 100% at a monastery in the 14th century. There is also no romanticizing of the life of monks or the operation of the monastery. The grimy, cold, lifeless world is a realistic portrayal of many of the (especially northern and remote) monasteries of the day. Despite the bleakness and corruption, however, I'm fascinated with how institutions like this are almost solely responsible for the preservation and duplication (represented in the film) of many of the old texts and manuscripts that we have today. That's not any focus of the film, but just an observation that makes the setting feel more alive and fascinating for this history buff.
It's really unfortunate that the critics registered such terrible reviews. I can only imagine that they viewed it as riding the coattails of Amadeus' success, with buckets of blood thrown in to make things more interesting. Taken alone, I think that it stands on its own as an awfully good mystery movie set in a period and setting largely unfamiliar to cinema.
A Winner in Every Way
I have seen this fine film 5 or 6 times and each time I see something new and fascinating in it. Umberto Eco's novel was a complex story to adapt to a major film, and this was done with skill and intelligence by Andrew Birkin, Gérard Brach, Howard Franklin & Alain Godard. The idea of such a tragic murder solved with only the tools of the time is nothing short of brilliant. I am wondering how much the BBC television series "Cadfael" with Derek Jacobi is based on this motion picture. Both are superb in their own way.
If you enjoy a film with mystery, brilliant performances, gothic photography and magnificent art direction, you will enjoy this masterpiece. Be warned, however... you will require an attention span. This is not a film kids will understand.