Modi: Three Days on the Wing of Madness

Loved this film from start to finish. Great acting from the cast and although was only Depps second directorial role, I think he did great with this one. And without going into the movie as to not give any spoilers, it's a must see. It's action packed, beautiful and in places a little sad with some added humour.

The long-awaited Johnny Depp movie Modi. Three days on the wings of madness. Amadeo Modigliani is at the center, accompanied by Caim Soutine and Maurice Utrillo. The movie is rogged, grotesque, deeply personal, and Depp-esque. At one point, Tom Waits sings in Paris 1916. Everything is fine, the performance of the actors is wonderful, they make a great ensemble, but the feeling that this is a concert of old, prosperous rockers does not let go. The 32-year-old Modigliani is played by 45-year-old Ricardo Scamarcio, with two other actors to match. They all play like seasoned musicians would play the songs of their hungry youth. If they were ten years older, it would be more believable.

With Modi, from the very beginning it was clear how much of himself Johnny Depp put into this project. Despite it being based on Amedeo Modigliani, I recognized the same speech pattern, topics, irreverence, and also profoundly deep questions posed by the characters as I have seen come from Johnny in either his films as an actor or from himself. It's not a bad thing; it's a style, a personality, a directorial trait - if you will.

The film reminded me a little of "The Rum Diary" (and Hunter S. Thompson of course).

I've heard talk about the wild structure and confusing storyline. It's not typical, but if you're paying attention, it's just fine. I found the film interesting, funny, and heartfelt.

If you enjoy Hunter S. Thompson's work (another film based on one of his novels: "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas"), Guy Ritchie, Wes Anderson, Captain Jack Sparrow, Johnny Depp himself, artists, and early twentieth century France, you'll likely enjoy this film as well.

It is a different kind of film. No real character descriptions, arcs or story. OK, it is chaotic and crazy. I think a lot of journalists have reviewed it as an ordinary film, and therefore been disappointed. But if you take it for what is,you will feel invigorated and cleaner afterwards.

But I think Depp should have a voiceover in the beginning describing Modigliani in some way before that superchaotic beginning, which would be more impactful if the film starts out in a more neutral way. It is difficult to feel for Modigliani otherwise. Even if it is chaotic, you need to feel for Mondigliani to care what happens to him. Plus hearing Depp's sexy voice would be nice.

Do you know that guy from school or college who cycled through every "dark and edgy" music subgenre, from EMO to black metal, industrial, dark ambient, Power Electronics, Harsh noise, and even UNGA BUNGA BESTIAL war metal, all for show or to fit in, only to bail halfway? Classic poseur move, right?

That's Johnny Depp's "Modi: Three Days on the Wings of Madness" in a nutshell. It's a passion project with raw, sprawling ambition that often fumbles. Yet, the soundtrack slaps harder than the script deserves. Honestly, what did you expect from Depp-a sophisticated, art-house drama worthy of Locarno, MAX OPHÜLS PREIS, Edinburgh, Sitges, or Rotterdam? Seriously.

But it's not all bad! It has genuinely cool moments and flashes of fiction with visual artistry, rather than adhering strictly to a traditional biographical genre film. Depp, stepping back into the director's chair, throws Riccardo Scamarcio as Modi-a chaotic, sick chain-smoker constantly coughing-into a wild romp through war-torn Paris. He dodges cops, debates quitting art, and navigates a romance with Beatrice, all while his perpetually tipsy pals try to keep him grounded. It shouldn't succeed, but somehow, it manages.

Things really kick off before the climax when Modi squares off with the big-shot art dealer, Mr. Gangnat (Al Pacino). Modi, known for breaking rules (he even breaks a café window and is kinda forced into this meeting), flat-out refuses to sell his sculptor masterpiece, no matter the ludicrous offers. Earlier in the film, some bourgeois types had scoffed, telling Modi to "look at something less depressing" when he paints. But the man's a walking middle finger to compromise; the purist, he tells Gangnat to shove it, choosing art over money.

Just when I was ready to call this whole thing as below average, the finale hits. After all the "Jack Sparrow coded" antics, drunken brawls, silent-film homages, romantic bullfighting, Modi does the only thing left: he starts over. He trashes everything out his window (his pals scattering), his girl bails, and he returns to sculpting. As he starts from scratch, molding his vision, amplified by "Cathedrals" by Jump Little Children-one of my favorite songs (Trust me, if you get a chance, check out Jump Little Children's Magazine album)-it's just beautiful. A moment of pure redemption. That song alone probably bumped my rating from 2.5 to 3 stars. So, a masterpiece? Nah. But a fascinating, infuriating, occasionally good trainwreck? Mamma mia, absolutely.

If you watch it with preconceived notions about the actor or his personal life, you'll find more to complain about. But JD's directorial return is a wild, self-indulgent journey into bohemian Paris that's flawed, yet oddly unforgettable! It's by no means as terrible as the reviews claim, and while a bit generic, it still provides entertainment.