This movie was pretty darn good. I only have a few complaints about this wonderful film! first thing is that i do not approve of Francis taking off his (cough..couch) attire, in front of the bishop. So Unholy! Then he is with his friend who is talking to him, and while his friend is talking to him he is just dissing him by ignoring him and paying more attention to a stone on the ground. How Rude! St. Clare joins him when he decides to ditch his rich lifestyle for the life of a beggar. St. Clare goes out of her way to join him, and to repay her he gives her a bad haircut. That's A Hair Don't! Other than some "Unpleasent Moments", the movie was pretty darn good. Harumph!

Vastly superior to "Francis of Assisi," a movie which is as dry as dust. I watched the two movies one after the other with my Catholic mother-in-law, and she strongly preferred "Brother Sun, Sister Moon" to "Francis of Assisi." This film conveys real emotion and reminds us that those who feel called by God are different from most workaday folk. For those of you who have a strong aversion to the sight of the human body, be advised that there is a nude scene in "Brother Sun, Sister Moon." It has symbolic significance and is quite beautiful. Some reviewers on the internet thought the Francis and Clare characters seemed stoned. I did not see it that way at all. To me, they were conscious of being illuminated by the Holy Spirit. In other words, they were atypical and in a tiny minority of humans on earth; of course they're not going to act like your next-door neighbor or some concocted role model from a religious textbook. The acting is competent without being great. The soundtrack is written and performed by Donovan - think "Atlantis," "Jennifer Juniper," and "Hurdy Gurdy Man" - so you will either like or dislike the soundtrack because of this, depending on your musical taste. For those who strongly dislike the culture of the late 60s and early 70s, you may not like this film, because it was made in the early 70s and evokes the tone and feel of that period.

Good acting, some nice cinematography, all in all good considering it an old film but I must say it was way too spoonfeeding for my tastes and a lot of the life of St Francis was left out. This is the same director that shot Jesus of Nazareth, the Monthy Python boys could easily have spoofed this as they did with that due to this very spoonfeeding I am on about. I think I much preferred the movie "Francesco" with Mickey Rourke, although not even that made me feel as engulfed as the book I read about the man and saint, definitely one of my favorites. St Francis was a downright rebel, this is not documented well enough here and when they dare to I must say there are some cheesy and unconvincing moments. Another thing to point out and i am glad they don't do it anymore is when you get them Italian characters being played out in the cleanest English. Now don't get me wrong the man and his story are so great that even this version is worth a watch. There is a lovely part about the stones. Oh and the music to this film is truly special and adequately most poetic.

Three things of interest here.The first is cinematic. I am engaged in a movie indexing project that will likely go open source. There are a few beginning qualities I've been working on. I think I will add architectural cloth, as this film reminds me. Its main cinematic device — other than the ordinary ones — is the use of cloth to denote notions of eye, story, vision. There are four specific episodes here as well as the general acting style where the actors have been directed to act into their clothes.The second is largely historical and probably will only be appreciated by old farts like me. I can't quite explain the extent of the Beatles influence on the late sixties. There just hasn't been anything like it since then. They were more than admired and emulated, they were spiritual leaders. They were serious about this if not altogether willing, and that comment about being more "popular" than Jesus wasn't an offhand statement. In 1968, they were in Rishikesh, India seriously putting together something that they thought was attuned to cosmic structure. It was, in a sense. With them were a few Beach Boys and Donovan.Around this time they were approached by Zeffirelli to take roles in his "Brother Moon" project. They would have; Paul was the fellow behind the movie projects (and most else) and he truly wanted to. But this was the time of the breakup. So what happened was Zefferelli make the film with ordinary actors and Donovan's music composed with The Beatles at Rishikesh. So at least, this is an echo of the profound influence they had, perhaps as profound as Francis, and perhaps as compromised by the surrounding institutions.The third has to do with the church. How strange it is that the two most spiritually deep "Biblical" films (in my experience) were made by two gay Italians. These were men (Zeffirelli and Pasolini) not welcome in their chosen world, in fact persecuted for their being, persecuted by their own faith. And they would be even more today as the leadership has "gotten tough with queers."Lots of lessons here. I first saw this by an aesthetic hippie in about 73 who was carrying a worn print around from town to town to show it in coffeehouses, small ashrams and any alley he could find a spot in.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.