For those who doubt that Caligula was a pornographic film: a well-known porn site has the entire movie listed among its other pornographic videos. Though Caligula was a notorious politician, the graphic sexual scenes splattered throughout this film detract attention from the historical merit of what could have been, whether fact or fiction, the profile of a famous, though notorious, figure. The duties and reactions of Caligula's political circle were even unclear. Fortunately for the cinematic world, the careers of Helen Mirren, Peter O'Toole and Malcom McDowell seem undamaged by this artistic train wreck. They maintain their strength as acting greats, even though the movie was frightfully lacking in any redeeming qualities.

As a piece of high film-making, this is acceptable trash. It's over-the-top blubbery and overblown. The 'I wanna be Fellini' italo-euro 70's stylings don't help. It's hard to believe that anyone ever thought this thing should be taken seriously... so I don't! I look at Caligula as a blowout-budget b-movie. It allows me to laugh at the effluvia on the screen while simultaneously looking at boobies, and heaven forbid, actual copulation (depending on the version). It saves the film from being a poorly lit, pretentiously staged, unevenly acted pile of rueful garbage. Each and every one of the big names that appeared in this probably rues the day they heard of Bob Guccione, but they all cashed the checks...

As a teen, I remember all of the controversy surrounding this film being pulled from theaters and cut-back/edited-down from a XXX rating to X, then, finally to R...but, by then, no one wanted to see it.In 1979, I was thirteen and really didn't understand any of this. But, I did understand that film makers can make a gory movie; and, film makers can make a pornographic movie...but, if a film maker makes a gory-pornographic movie, everyone in America (at least, if not the world) pisses themselves, forgets who they are, and, cries themselves to sleep!?!? I read about this in the newspaper, and, saw reports of it on TV!I finally saw this movie in 1987, and, I was amazed at the quality of this production that media made me feel and believe is such a terrible movie on every level. The props are great and extravagant; costumes look authentic (when characters are actually wearing them); the script (by Gore Vidal) is accurate according to what I've read of Gaius Caligula, and, of other Roman Caesars, such as Nero; and, mainly and most importantly...only Bob Guccione and a handful of others actually had the guts to make such a film.The acting, by such heavyweights as the great Peter O'Toole as the crazed, rotting-faced syphilis-carrying Tiberius Caesar; the Award-Winning John Gielgud as Nerva (not the Roman Emperor of the same name much later in history); the classy and ever-beautiful Helen Mirren as Caesonia; the One-Hit-Wonder and beautiful Teresa Ann Savoy as Drusilla; and, of course, the 'almost-always-villainous' yet 'definitely-always-talented' Malcolm McDowell as the cruel and megalomaniacal Caligula Caesar.I don't condone or condemn anything about this movie as it's based upon historical records (just like "Mark of the Devil" 1970). This movie contains a lot of grotesquely-horrible scenes of torture; murder; execution; etc. As well as scenes of graphic sex, both hetero-and homosexual; rape; orgiastic sex; and, even hints at animal-contact...BUT - how can anyone possibly and fully understand the Roman Empire, or, "ANY" ancient culture or nation lead by a tyrant, if they so choose to, unless it is presented in the way that this film is - the way it really was...graphic and without any inhibitions whatsoever!?!? There's really nothing in this movie that people haven't read about in a newspaper or a book; or, heard about on the news. In fact, all of that is usually much worse than what happens in this movie. If you're prudish, this movie is not for you. There's very little sanitizing of history going on here!Some of the reviews of this movie are entirely understandable if those people are appalled; but, they'd probably complain, anyway, if all of this "Extreme Nastiness" (Malcolm McDowell in "A Clockwork Orange") wasn't there...because, it wouldn't be realistic to the Romans. It's no different than making a graphic film of the early Native Americans cutting-out of the hearts of enemies; or, the Incas eating someone's heart; or, even the French during the inquisition cutting-off sexual organs and burning them when someone was accused of witchcraft (these are all factual). The meaning of 'primitive' means exactly that; and, in primitive times with primitive cultures, this/that sort of thing(s) happened.Imagine some clown making a "G" rated movie about Joseph Stalin; Adolph Hitler; Pol Pot; Saddam Hussein; or, any other tyrannical leader!?!? That would be propaganda and BS with an agenda! This movie has no agenda, only reality of that period in that empire...actual-actuality!This movie is graphically-detailed in most every way imaginable that applies to an ancient culture. It's repugnant, deplorable, perverted, pathetic, and, deviant in every which-way possible according to the people of today who either refuse that such things once occurred; or, they're just more likely to only believe and understand it in private, and, that's where the word 'hypocrite' comes from, boys and girls.Every negative adjective likely applies here...but, despite what people think, if people even 'think' anymore, this movie is historical, and, to hide parts of history, even the smallest parts, is lying.I give this historically-accurate movie '8 Stars' for everything - accuracy to written history (screenplay); props; acting; casting; believability (if you choose to be realistic); and, all else dealing with production...and, as I wrote before...someone with the balls to even make this.However, I give it a BIG "0" (A GIANT GOOSE EGG) as a 'date movie.' Don't show a date, especially a first-date (or, a dummy who's naive of history), this movie as they may think quite oddly of that, and, of you. The same goes for Pier Paolo Pasolini's "Salo" (1975), which is not as graphic, but, more disgusting in a fecally way than "Caligula.""Gladiator" is a great movie set in Roman times and it's violent and very popular. "Deep Throat" is probably the most well-known and popular pornographic movie ever made. However, if you mixed these two movies into one, popularity turns to controversy, and, you pretty-much have another "Caligula."I'm betting there isn't a history teacher/professor on the planet who hasn't seen this, and, every other movie I've mentioned in this review.

Yep, I am one of the unfortunate few who have sat through this onslaught of vicious and violent pornography trying to pass itself off as a historical drama. I first watched this as part of a University Dare Night, where myself and my flatmates decided to watch something really racy and preferably controversial (because as we all know, when you go to University, you check your brain in at the door!).So what's the grilling? The film tells the story of Caligula, played by the always controversial Malcolm McDowell, the infamous psychotic, incestuous and delusionally murderous Caesar of Rome as he rises from his frightful youth under the rule of his Uncle Tiberius (played by Peter O'Toole, while drunk apparently), to his dominance as lord of the known World.What are the problems with this movie? Just about everything you could imagine, especially seeing as it is in fact a pornographic film. It's got all the gratuitous sex and perversion that you'd come to expect from a movie like that, the only problem being that it's not particularly sexy, if anything it would probably put you off.At the same time this is offset by incredible amounts of graphic violence, including brutal beatings, stabbings, murder, suicide, decapitation by moving wall with spinning blades, etc. This film really does push the boat out.The acting is incredibly questionable, either because you question what the actors were thinking when they did these unspeakable acts to each other, or questioning how many of these actors may or may not have been actually killed during production. Malcolm McDowell especially, who really seems to be getting into his role as the debauched ruler.I will however give this film two points. One point for the magnificent sets and locations built for the movie, which, now that I think about it, all seemed to have gone to complete and utter waste, and another point for the outfits, of which quite a lot of work appears to have gone into, for the few people who actually wear outfits and don't just wander about in the nude!Bottom line, I really cannot recommend this film on those two points alone. If you want a historical drama, this isn't for you, if you want a pornographic movie, it still isn't for you. It's incredibly violent, not sexy in the least, has no historical accuracy, and is about as fun to sit through as Root canal treatment. Stay away folks, stay far, far away!