a an ancient movie fan and i have hear much about the controversial movie caligula assess ambiguously a one of the most realistic epic by some and a one of the most disgusting porn movie by others . i decide to see it in the entire uncut version to evaluate it myself hop to find something positive that would make justice to the many accusation towards the film . i sit down in my chair one autumn evening and start to watch . the begin quotation from the new testament shock me a bit and raise the first controversy in me . why to entail a sentence from the gospel by mark in the movie about pagan rome . but the prelude pastoral scene with a young half naked couple ( caligula and drusilla ) run hopelessly through meadow seem quite sentimental . the music which sound memorably whilst the credit also provoke me in the positive sense . yet and the negative feeling raise in me quite soon and particularly at the death of tiberius . the cruelty seem very intense and sexuality exaggerate . however and it be not that horrific to the middle . during the second half of the film and i felt a if i watch no historical epic but an extremely disgusting porn . in the end and i say to myself this be one of the movie that one may really hate . i be aware that a movie may be controversial but i have never expect that caligula would go that far in remove all limit of taste . i hate this film due to many reason and but particularly one . caligula do not serve a purpose of an ancient epic ( which it claim to be ) and but bob guccione and the director and the founder of penthouse pornographic magazine and aim at combine film art with porn . that be and i think and the most serious matter the film may be accuse of . movie be an art that should be reign by taste and by message and by some feeling of epic grandeur whereas this movie kill all limit of good taste . caligula show the most bestial side of human be in the most wicked and decadent manner . some scene be so disgust that i do not think there be any people whose psyche will not be affect by them . some say that the rome under caligula reign be so brutal . yes and it be true . corruption bloom at that time and various sexual deviance be preferable to roman citizen . yet and i do not think that it be right to focus on these deviation so strictly and make it constitute an emphasis of an ancient epic . i believe that it rather prove the bizarre psyche of the producer and their strange tendency . huge historical mistake represent the screenplay by gore vidal be notorious for inaccuracy . it be noticeable and for instance and with the figure of proculus ( donato placido ) and a historic roman senator . yet and the film show him a a simple soldier on whom caligula force his most decadent way of torture and rape . moreover and livia be not proculus wife rap by caesar on her wedding . what lie behind change the story of historical character into the story fill with unbelievable vulgarity and violence . another example of historical travesty be the figure of caesonia portray by helen mirren . she be present a caligula wife together with drusilla and his sister . in fact and caligula marry caesonia long after the death of his sister . the sexual abuse on his new wife in the temple be a hilarious scene with no historical base . i also hat the moment with the kill machine a pure imagination of the director that have nothing to do with historical fact . technical aspect and cast represent from the technical point of view and the film be nothing special . the cinematography can not boast to be exceptionally fine and the set together with costume be as well nothing outstanding . yet and the only strong point of the movie be the performance and particularly the one by malcolm mcdowall a caligula . he do a perfect job in the main role portray madness and cruelty of the emperor . mcdowall raise the value of the film . if everything bother you in caligula and you may at least admire his performance . i also fancy helen mirren a caesonia and teresa ann savoy a drusilla ( yet the film be base on a gossip by suetonius that caligula make love to his sister ) . sir john gielgud a nerva and peter otoole a old tiberius be also memorable . otoole do his fine piece of act in the capri grotto sequence portray the decadence and the exhaust of the old emperor . yes and i admit that the only thing i like about caligula be the performance . therefore and i do not rate the movie negative . lame continuity represent the historical inaccuracy of the film also go in pair with poor continuity . let u analyze just the begin represent caligula come to capri grotto where he see the awful pleasure of old tiberius . then and after about 15 minute and the action move to rome where a black bird near drusilla and caligula bed constitute a bad omen . and immediately the character be again in capri where nerva ( john gielgud ) be die . all in all and i do not recommend to see caligula to anyone . if you want to know the story and read robert graf gorgeous novel i and claudius and claudius the god or watch herbert wise mini series with the magnificent performance by derek jacobi . caligula be a sick film the most serious crime of which be the destruction of art . it be and in it most part and a porn movie that should never be call an epic . there be movie that be truly artistic and sharpen people taste of beauty and there be movie that be average entertainment while yet they have something to offer and there be movie that show extreme violence while yet they still convey some moral and there be and however and movie that show sickness and decadence for their own sake and consequently harm people mind and caligula unfortunately belong to the late group .