Le Nom de la rose

I openly admit that I am damaging The Name of the Rose with a four-star rating because this film deserves five stars. However, I have read the novel and it left an indelible impression on me - it is one of my top five literary experiences and I have my own ideas about the film adaptation, although I realize they will never be fulfilled. Umberto Eco wrote a multilayered novel where the detective investigation of a series of murders is secondary. "The Name of the Rose" is actually a description of medieval thinking, a value hierarchy, and social stratification. It is like a history textbook in an enticing package. To film "The Name of the Rose" as Eco wrote it would mean bringing the film studio to bankruptcy because it would be extremely expensive and not very accessible to a wide audience. Not to mention that it would have to compete in its length with a TV series like Prison Break. Jean-Jacques Annaud is a director with a refined sense of visuals and it's simply noticeable on the screen. His portrayal of the Middle Ages is not sanitized but rather presented in a very naturalistic way - full of mud, dirt, and rawness. He managed to fill the film with fully fleshed-out, audience-friendly characters portrayed by top-notch actors. Sean Connery and Christian Slater are both good actors and perfect for their roles. The film is not so much about the plot and the final twist as it is about capturing the medieval atmosphere - and it succeeded. Overall impression: 85%. (07/12/2007)

Fans of Umberto Eco will probably slam the film – where are the master's many layers, where is the diversity of reading that makes the book a unique work? Well, it evaporated in the medieval fog. Annaud's The Name of the Rose is a nice detective story with a good atmosphere and a thrilling plot, but it completely lacks a sophisticated symbolic plane... but that doesn't hurt it. If you want to deal with puzzles above all, look for Eco, and for those who above all want a nice story, then you want Annaud. Just don't mix them up! (31/01/2004)

I remember almost nothing of the book, which I once read in high school and now understandably want to reread, and maybe that's for the best. I didn't have to compare what was different in the film and what didn't get into it, and I just watched it tensely and had fun for two hours. The film is an excellent medieval detective story with an overlap for a slightly more knowledgeable viewer, has a million-dollar atmosphere and a first-class cast with Sean Connery in the main super role. (06/11/2016)

Annaud does not present us, like most other filmmakers, with a slick medievalism, but with a dirty era, dirty and ugly people, his vision of the Middle Ages is flawless. Connery's scholarly demeanor exudes respect and wisdom, I'd go to hell and back with him. The book is supposedly much better, but those who haven't read it may not care, the film is excellent. (08/05/2003)

Annaud's vision of the Middle Ages as dirty and harsh is remarkable and captivates the viewer right from the start. The portrayal of the characters is also solid – I haven't read the book, which obviously affects my objectivity. However, the brilliant first half is followed by a noticeably boring part. Although the mysteries and puzzles around the murders are revealed, I still occasionally couldn't help but feel bored. I don't have much to say about the ending and it fits the film quite well. And even though The Name of the Rose is undoubtedly a quality piece of filmmaking, one viewing is enough for me in this case. Annaud is one of the few filmmakers who shows us the Middle Ages with a maximum dose of brutality and reality, but personally, it didn't appeal to me as much as I would have expected from a director of his caliber. (15/11/2005)