The movie that made Roger Ebert “disgusted and unspeakably depressed”
Riding a wave of controversy can often turn out to be a blessing in disguise for a film that otherwise would have fallen through the cracks, but an infamously obscene movie detested by Roger Ebert didn’t have that benefit as a lavish historical epic boasting a cavalcade of recognisable names on either side of the camera.
Penned by Gore Vidal and directed by Tinto Brass – both of whom actively distanced themselves from the original cut – 1979’s Caligula starred Malcolm McDowell, Helen Mirren, Peter O’Toole, and John Gielgud among others, with the dramatisation of the titular Roman emperor’s rise and fall proving every bit as debauched as the events that inspired the story.
In several countries, it remains banned to this day, while it was seized by United States customs officials, subjected to an unsuccessful lawsuit by the Morality in Media group, and was only deemed not to be obscene in cities such as Boston, Madison, and Atlanta after being taken to court, with the uncut version of Caligula not even approved by British censors until 2008.
That’s quite the legacy to leave behind, but Ebert was left astounded by the depravity on display upon his first viewing. Describing it as “sickening, utterly worthless, shameful trash” in his review, his assessment was all the more scathing when he drew the distinction that Caligula “is not the worst film I have ever seen, which make it all the more shameful”.
He didn’t even make it to the end credits, either, walking out two hours into the 173-minute feature, leaving him “disgusted and unspeakably depressed”. Calling anyone willing to hand over their hard-earned cash to see Caligula as “eyewitnesses to shame”, the critic could barely comprehend what he’d just witnessed.
In Ebert’s eyes, “Caligula is not good art, It is not good cinema, and it is not good porn”. Instead, he found it to be “garbage on an artistic level” as well as “garbage on the crude and base level where it no doubt hopes to find its audience”. It did at least win praise for its historical and political accuracy, but that was hardly the reason why the lurid erotic drama was seizing so many headlines ahead of its release.
Blasting the creative minds responsible as “jaded, perverse, and cruel human beings” for convincing themselves the contents of Caligula were something that needed to be put up on the big screen for audiences to see, Ebert further denigrated the film as “a nauseating excursion into base and sad fantasies”.
Retaining its status as one of the most controversial movies ever made more than 40 years later, Caligula has become something between a cult favourite and a curio with the passage of time, although Ebert is just one of many left appalled by the on-screen obscenities contained within.
