User reviews

For me its on of these Films which spend so much time on "meaningful" pictures. It becomes just boring. Also the character doesnt seem to make any progress in this movie. And to just show the Problem over and over explained from different characters and "meaningful" pictures its not enough for me to make a good movie. Instead of trying to work on any development into any direction the film just freezes in the midst of the Probmlem and doesnt move anywhere from or with it. The "solutions" are presented by Narrators or Cut-scenes from some documentary and come in some meta philosophical ways and are not in itself relevant to any of the story. And also dont get integrated into the story. they just stay above everything and thus have no meaning whatsoever. Also they offer little solution but are itself explaining the root cause of the "problem" from another perspective.

I really cant see why people enjoy these Films which only spin themself around the problem and fake to be meaningful when there is no debate or discussion of the problem, solutions or development.

6 stars for the cinematagrophic quality and dafoes acting

Performances were good and it has interesting ideas. But it feels like a jumble of ideas stitched together. It could have been an extremely engaging and interesting movie if it had a tighter script that was more concerned with delivering on its theme.

1) W. Dafoe was astonishing as expected. 2) Way too many random shots of naked zero figured women (girls) 3) Disjointed but that's obviously intended. I wasn't bored & 98% of the credit goes to Dafoe. I didn't find anything else spectacular. The cinematography seemed extremely patchy & distracting. 4) I'm unsure what the final shot meant. I don't do well with religious undertones. 5) This is artsy fartsy, yes.. but has enough saving grace.

If you dig a bit you find this is a semi-autobiographical film of the writer-director's life. In fact the young wife and young daughter are actually his real life wife and daughter.

I really looked forward to seeing this as it has Willem Dafoe in the title role as Tommaso. And he in fact does justice to the role. The problem is the movie in total is not that interesting. It contains lots of stilted language and long monologues but basically is a story of a man, an actor and writer, living in Rome and working to overcome his addictions and balance life with a much younger wife that seems to be losing interest in him.

I suspect this is the kind of movie that film students and critics love but most viewers of mainstream movies will not warm up to.

I managed to find it on the Kanopy streaming movies site via my public library's subscription.

Like another reviewer said, there is no character development,. It seems rather pretentious. What do the disjointed "metaphysical" scenes have to do with anything. Are they suppose to imply that the protaganist,is experiencing some kind of divine madness? I was not convinced.

Interestingly I note that in most of the reviews here, reviewers didn't get that this movie is an autobiography of Ferrara, written and directed by himself, having his good friend Defoe playing his own role, his wife and daughter acting themselves.

Ferrara and Defoe have been living in Rome for years, in the same area in the historical centre ('esquilino') where it happens I live one block away from him!

I often seen him in the street with or without wife and kids, and he actually goes to the shops and bars you see in the movie (caffé Merulana 81, small organic grocery store, etc...) where you see the actual owners acting themselves.

I have never talked to him, but I have always been wondering about his life here and away from here. So I was delighted to see this movie. I found the acting of Defoe stunning, he absolutely hold the movie and its tension, and I am sure his great friendship with Ferrara make it even more transcendent. I found it the very intimate story of a man exposing his sins and weaknesses, embracing them, in the later period of his life.

Photography is minimalistic, probably taken with a very reduced team and preparation. It still serves well the intended pace and ambient of the story.

So to me a very good, original, autobiographical movie, destinated for an informed and prepared audience.

"Tommaso" is far from being one of Abel Ferrara's best films, but thankfully the seasoned filmmaker casted one of the industry's best character actors to keep this film alive; Willem Dafoe.

In this drama, an American living in Italy with his young wife and toddler struggles to find purpose while overcoming addiction and self doubt.

Beautifully shot but a little too slow paced and artsy, "Tommaso" tries hard to be this seminal film for filmmaker Abel Ferrara but never quite gets there. Willem Dafoe is the saviour of this film, making it a worthwhile watch. Dafoe is no stranger to Ferrara as they've worked together countless times, especially in the last five years. "Tommaso" is a troubled film but you could still understand the message the filmmaker is trying to make even if it takes some pondering afterwards.

Follow @snobmedia for more reviews!

Staggering. I think Ferrara shines brightest when he's working with a small scale with a singular viewpoint. This is such a wonderfully intimate and character-driven film that feels self-critical without having an obnoxious mentality. The direction and written is so spectacularly utilized with the structure. Willem Dafoe is phenomenal as always and has such a naturalist approach while still remaining cinematic. It's such a off thing to describe Tommaso but I can unequivocally say it's worth a watch; hopefully I can revisit soon.

This is my first writen review in my 51 Years of life. IT was trigger becouse the movie is the worst I ever see.

This movie felt like life. Everything's so natural and yet so complicated, even delirious, painful. I loved the sensuality of the shooting, the music is magnificent. Dafoe acting is magnetic, you forget that you're watching a movie. There are some brilliant moments, naturalistic parts, like when he yell at the drunk or when he's about to sleep with the blond woman he met at the AA. And ultimately it allowed me to visit Rome again, it brought me beautiful and painful memories.

Very lively and dynamic with an amazing natural atmosphere. The movie just flow, Dafoe carries it with a superb performance. This movie is art. To me it felt like it's kind of a character study, but it doesn't feel like you're out of the picture (atmosphere) and feels like you're there watching them act.

Easy on the eyes, heavy on the heart. Well worth my time, this story continues to give well after viewing and brings up interesting questions in oneself.

There is no story at all. The film consists of snapshots of an American guy's life in Rome. I am not a fan of this type of "authentic" films. I am also bothered by the gratuitous nudity. How can this be right in the post metoo era?

Tommaso will never be / Everyone's cup of tea / Yet it is the best Abel Ferrara movie / Easily

The first Abel Ferrara movie I've seen was Bad Lieutenant (1992). I appreciated Welcome to New York (2014). Just before watching Tommaso I've finished Zeroes and Ones (2021) and wasn't impressed. So you might say I know what to expect from the author. Yet, when I saw the trailer and read the reviews I had to watch Tommaso and was pleasantly surprised.

More than that, Tommaso made me revisit the biography of Abel Ferrara, admittedly on Wikipedia. I'm amazed that so late in his career he would blend all these autobiographical influences in a coherent movie. After all we've seen from him, this movie is radical in it's normality. I've even felt some influence from Woody Allen, albeit in a good way.

Even the final scenes that I found unnecessary didn't bother me, they rather underlined the artistic ambition behind Tommaso.