Really Surprised!

A brilliant film that helped define a genre

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Based on the novel by Paul Bowles, "The Sheltering Sky" is the story of rekindling one's marriage is one of the greatest pieces of 20th century literature. When I rented the movie, I was even more flabbergasted when I saw the DVD cover sleeve and discovered that well-known Italian director Bernardo Bertolucci was behind the lenses. The desert settings were the perfect locality for a film of this calibre which resembles that of "Lawrence of Arabia" or cinematic classics like "The English Patient". Even though Bertolucci and his cinematographer Vittorio Storaro have physically made this film visual eye-candy, there are other traits that have an equally proportionate share of hits and misses.As it hurts me to say this, the biggest flaws lie in the balance of the two leads (John Malkovich and Debra Winger) who play the roles of Port and Kit Moresby, a duo of self-absorbed wealthy New Yorkers who travel to Tangiers, Morocco to spruce up some adventure to fix up their progressively crumbling marriage. Port and Kit pompously refer to themselves as "travelers" over tourists towards their somewhat mutual friend George Tunner (Campbell Scott), who has a subtle attraction to Kit. The triad bring an unnecessary amount of luggage and that it becomes clear that style outweighs substance as the trifecta just wander about without any kind of purpose other than the fact that they're just reeking in their wealth.The Moresby's are caricatures that spell out F. Scott Fitzgerald, they're in their 30's, flamboyant, condescending and have no cares for any kind of moral decency. Poor casting choice for Malkovich as the cultivated intelligent trying to gather his ideas in a setting that doesn't quite comprehend to an atmosphere where every foundation of him is quickly crumbling before his very eyes. Malkovich has none of the physical characteristics described in Bowles' novel let alone the immaculate mannerisms portrayed there either. His light monotone voice and his use of throwaways are opposed to the well polished dialogue from Bowles' novel. Malkovich is great at portraying macabre characters and brings that level with him in a lot of his performances, but Port is not at all like that. Sure he's self-righteous and unsympathetic, but he's not in any way shape or form diabolical.Debra Winger as Kit is a tad bit better though as her narrative is the focal point of the story. But she also seems physically wrong for the part. Where was Meryl Streep at the time? Bowles' novel called for a fair, vulnerable, fragile woman in the opening scenes of the book. Winger seems too play off Kit as a bold, strong-willed character. Her efforts to play it calculating seems at times quite contrived and very ridiculous complete with her raspy laugh and her ample limbs. She seems too independent-minded that's contrary to the character of Kit from the novel. Her Midwestern ways are opposite and seems out of place to the upper-class traits Kit portrays in the book. Sure at first she looks authentic to the characters in the book, but once she and Port wander aimlessly in the desert, her physical and mental demeanor are more Winger than Kit as opposed to the other way around.The supporting characters like Campbell Scott, Timothy Spall and Jill Bennett are quite convincing in their respected roles and seems to upstage the leads at times. The score by Ryuichi Sakamoto is quite thrilling, but at the same time very jarring. The dialogue can be very overwhelming and their motives are blank. The author(who plays a blind man at a bar) provides the narration. But the story of his journey feels more inferior than exterior and the translation of what he's talking about is quite complex. To put in a nutshell, it's better to read the novel first before getting into the book so you'll get a better comparison of the differences between the novel and the visually satisfying, but poorly executed adaptation.

Italian screenwriter and director Bernardo Bertolucci's eleventh feature film which he co-wrote with Kenyan screenwriter and director Mark Peploe, is an adaptation of a novel from 1949 by American author, translator and composer Paul Bowles (1910-1999). It was shot on location in Morocco, Algeria and Niger and is a UK-Italy co-production which was produced by English producer Jeremy Thomas. It tells the story about Port and Kit Moresby, an American couple whom without having made any plans and with the intention of working out their marriage, travels to North Africa with their single friend Tunner. Subtly and precisely directed by Italian filmmaker Bernardo Bertolucci, this quietly paced fictional tale which is narrated by expatriate Paul Bowles and from multiple viewpoints, draws an engaging and intimate portrayal of a composer and a playwright's increasing alienation whilst staying in a foreign country and striving to resolve their marital issues. While notable for it's naturalistic milieu depictions, sterling production design by Italian production designers Fernando Scarfiotti and Gianni Silvestri, cinematography by Italian cinematographer Vittorio Storaro and costume design by English costume designer James Acheson, this character-driven, narrative-driven, sensual, literary and dramatic love-story about the unawareness and lack of honesty and communication within a gradually dissolving matrimony where the half-hearted attempts to rationalize a dysfunctional relationship drives a man and a woman to the edge of their sanity, depicts two interrelated studies of character and contains a great score by Japanese composer Rhyuici Sakamoto and American composer Richard Horowitz. This atmospheric, psychological, at times humorous and internal journey where two travellers are heading in the same direction as their marriage, is set against the hot, dry and exhausting Sahara desert during the 1940s and is impelled and reinforced by it's cogent narrative structure, substantial character development, subtle continuity and editing by Italian film editor Gabriella Christiani and the fine acting performances by American actor, director and producer John Malkovich, American actress Debra Winger and supporting acting performances by American actor Campbell Scott in his second feature film role, English actor Timothy Spall and English actress Jill Bennett (1931-1990) in her last feature film role. A lyrical, somewhat romantic and existentialistic road-movie from the early 1990s which gained, among several other awards, the BAFTA Award for Best Cinematography Vittorio Storaro at the 44th British Academy Film Awards in 1990.

Bertolucci's superb The Conformist is one of my all-time favourites, meaningful, succinct, powerful and erotic. The Sheltering Sky is not quite up there with it, it seduces the senses with visual grandeur, rather than emotional significance. Set in North Africa shortly after WW2, not too distant in time frame from his masterpiece, it is not so much an epic without a plot or a love story as some have suggested, it's more a parable, but it needed deeper motivational elements for its' central characters to compel.The majestic dunes of the Sahara, stark beauty of a barren landscape, is beautifully captured, as is the slim sensuality of Debra Winger; she doesn't seem to mind too much about the sand and flies getting everywhere - in one scene, a fly surreptitiously wanders along her thigh and up her dress during love-making with her husband in the desert - an unpaid extra, who nevertheless, contributes to the realism. In my neck of the woods, flies always demand rehearsal fees.What is it with Italian directors and sex in the desert? Think Antonioni's Zabriskie Point, an artistic orgy, mind - not a fly in sight! Believe me, there are plenty here - not just up Ms Winger's dress, but buzzing around buses, in hair, on faces, attacking raw meat on sale in markets, everywhere.John Malkovitch, as the husband, doesn't provide any reason for his professorial ambiguity - married to a beautiful woman, trying to reignite their relationship, but as soon as the opportunity arises, exploring North African prostitution with a wholly non academic interest. And the character of George Tunner, their part-time fellow-American travelling companion, captivated and at the mercy of Debra's charms, seems unaware or unconcerned by at least one of the Ten Commandments - quite a big thing in those days - why, Cecil B. DeMille even made a film about them.I like meaningful films, I liked this one, in spite of - or maybe because of - it's significance being at best eclectic, and perhaps confused. When any movie character does anything, you have to ask why. Here, you shrug your shoulders and wistfully wonder, why not? Luscious landscapes are more for painters. The images here needed more cohesion and purpose behind them. But they are images to enhance your spirituality, eventually providing a warm glow, even in an ultimately dismal context.

I agree that this film is very under rated. I have seen this film 3 times. Once at the Chicago Film Festival, Second in General release, and third on Laser Disc. I have to say that the version that was shown at the Chicago Film Festival was about 30 minutes longer than the general release version, and the Laser disc version. (I am assuming that the tape and DVD Version are the same as the Laser disc version and general release version) I think it would be great if there could be a Directors Cut version released that included all of the parts of the film that was cut from the general release version. The cinematography was just great and the acting was superior! It should have won an Oscar or two!