Watch Pavarotti


Pavarotti is a movie starring Luciano Pavarotti, Andrea Griminelli, and Nicoletta Mantovani. Life, works and achievements of opera legend Luciano Pavarotti.

Other Titles
パヴァロッティ 太陽のテノール, Παβαρότι, Pavaroti
Running Time
1 hours 54 minutes
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Biography, Music, Documentary
Ron Howard
Mark Monroe, Cassidy Hartmann
Nicoletta Mantovani, Plácido Domingo, Andrea Griminelli, Luciano Pavarotti
UK, France, Italy, USA
Audio Languages
English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

Born in 1935 in Modena in the worker-class family of a father baker and a mother who worked in a cigar factory, Luciano Pavarotti felt since his childhood the passion by opera due to his father, an amateur tenor. Blessed with a powerful voice and student of the most important Italy's opera teachers of those times, soon the name of Pavarotti turned in a reference of the genre, giving some of the most remembered live performances in the most important theaters across the world, meeting with politicians and world leaders as well as rock and pop singers to bring concerts for humanitarian causes, over-passing any limit when he was part of The Three Tenors with the too opera singers José Carreras and Plácido Domingo. Using archive footage, unreleased material from home videos and photos, and interviewing his closest friends and his family, legendary director Ron Howard reviews the professional carrier of the man who achieved turn opera in a mass phenomenon as never before at the same time that his personal life, discovering the man behind the star.

Comments about biography «Pavarotti» (20)

Nicole F. photo
Nicole F.

These are the only 3 people that I really have ever found, if not in a movie, to be reliable. The film is extremely slow, but that's part of its charm. I've never been to one of these events. The people who watch it are mostly music fans. That alone is worth watching. The movie covers their opinions and opinions of the band's recent music. It seems to be a study of the real musicians, but I found it confusing. There are no true experts on these bands, but the documentary makes them seem like they are the best. And the most of the musicians in the documentary are talking about how much they love music and how they try to make music. This is not the best documentary I've seen, but it does tell me a lot about the real musicians. I found it interesting to see how the bands say they want to work with different producers and producers and how much they love this. I found the documentary interesting, but it is not for me.

Crystal C. photo
Crystal C.

I watched the movie and I think it was a great documentary and should be seen by everyone. I like the idea behind it and how it deals with the gay scene in the 50's and 60's. I am not a historian but I do know about the 50's and I do know that there were gay people in the US and there are now gay people in France and in other countries. However, I do not know how to explain it in a movie. In the movie, the director makes it clear that it is a documentary and not a history lesson. The movie is interesting and entertaining because of its subject matter. The director could have made the movie more interesting and it would have been more interesting and more entertaining. However, the movie was well done. I would recommend it.

Anthony photo

I was recently given the opportunity to view this film, and I must say that I was quite impressed. Yes, the documentary doesn't contain the "raw" feel of an actual concert, but it was certainly very interesting. This movie was the first full length film, and in this time the industry has developed to include these types of stories, and the director has done a great job at telling them. I feel that it is important to not take these stories too seriously, and we should remember that these are real people that are trying to make a living in the music business. One of the best parts of the documentary is how the director uses archive footage to show the stories from people that were interviewed and how they have the experience. For instance, one interviewee was showing the film how he was the primary performer for the band U2, and how he had to live on the road to support the band. We are also shown how the film was shot, and they show how they were able to get these interviews in the first place. Some of the interviews are the same as what we would see on film, but they were able to put them together in a way that the audience would be able to connect with these people. This is something that I think is very important, and the most amazing part is that you don't have to be a fan of any one band to appreciate these stories. The documentary is also interesting in how it was able to connect these people that have gone through this journey with each other. I felt like I was able to relate to a lot of these people, and it was very interesting to see how the various artists had different lives, and had been through this before. I feel like this documentary was very powerful and I was able to get a lot of information that I could not get through any other documentary. I do feel like the documentary is important, and I would recommend it to anyone that is a fan of any one of these artists, but if you have any interest in music or just want to know about the story behind a band that you may have not heard about, then I would highly recommend that you check this film out.

Gregory R. photo
Gregory R.

I had the chance to view this documentary at the San Francisco International Film Festival, and I'm glad I did. This is an extremely long film about a whole lot of things. But what it does, and what it does very well, is to show you, the viewer, the entire process of getting the song, the "performances", the experience, the whole deal. It really does something different, as a documentary, and as an arts documentary. What a great way to tell this story of the long road to success, and the long-suffering time it took. There are a couple of moments when the documentary feels a little slow, but overall, it really does the job. The documentary shows some clips of the group performing their songs in the studio, and while some of the footage is interesting, I'm a bit surprised to see some of the songs, especially "No Vacant Sky" and "One Little Step". But other than that, the documentary is very well done, and I recommend it to anyone who is interested in the music scene of the 70s, 80s, or 90s, or anyone who wants to know what it was like to be in a band, or a band trying to get noticed in the 70s, 80s, or 90s. I think this documentary will be extremely popular, and I can't wait to see it at the 2016 San Francisco International Film Festival.

Christine H. photo
Christine H.

In a very small theater in Naples, the history of Italian rock music will be told and told. And it will be fascinating. I didn't know that there was a movie about Italian rock, or rock music, but I have no reason not to go see it. And, I didn't know that there were so many people interested in it. It is very, very entertaining and very good, which is the only reason I went. But, it is not what I expected, it's not as good as it could be, but it is still a very interesting, very good documentary.

Danielle W. photo
Danielle W.

I was a big fan of James Brown and that is what drove me to watch this movie. But it's a different story than most of the people who have given this movie the praise. I'm just not sure why they are so passionate about it. It's certainly not a documentary and has no sort of celebrity in the way of the likes of Michael Jackson or Mariah Carey. It's just a story about an artist whose life was never really his life. The movie was a lot like "Masters of the Universe" (which I didn't see until it came out on DVD in 1992). That film was a documentary and it had a lot of stars in it but it was about the music and their music was the star. The music was there and it was all the star, the stars were there but the music was the star. When "Masters of the Universe" came out, it was like they were showing the end of the film because they didn't know what they were doing. They could have done the same with "Masters". The movie was a lot like that and had some music. It was just a much more entertaining film than "Masters". Now that's a bad comparison because "Masters" was a real documentary and "Masters" was a musical biography. But "Masters" was a documentary about an artist who wasn't really his life. It was like watching a film about a car accident and you can see the pictures but not the person. He was a genius but he was never really his life. "Masters" was about a musician who died and this guy who was a musician died. And there was no star at the end of it. So, it was a great movie but it wasn't really a documentary.

Amber Hughes photo
Amber Hughes

Just to let you know, my wife and I watched this in a packed theater. It was a great movie, very well done and even though we had some other things to do we didn't get bored. While I enjoyed this movie, I can't say that it was a great movie. We did like some of the songs, but the majority of them were great and didn't leave you singing songs from the radio. However, some of the scenes in this film left me feeling a little uncomfortable, especially when the band members were shot in the same way, and that's because, I thought, there should have been more depth in the stories of the victims, especially when they had to leave behind their families and friends. So overall, I can say that this was a good film and it was very well done. The music was great, the directing was good, and the acting was great, especially the two bands. The performances from some of the bands were also good. I give it a 7 out of 10.

Sara R. photo
Sara R.

Hearing the words "Paul Simon" conjures up images of a singer/songwriter from the late 50's and 60's. What this doc does is chronicle the life of Simon (very much alive), and the struggles he endured in his 40's and 50's to make his music. The doc covers the bands he worked with, the albums he produced, the albums he produced and the people he worked with. It does a great job at exploring his life, and his struggles in doing so. While some of the interviews are pretty superficial, the interviews with his wife, Amy Grant (played by one of Simon's sisters) and his brother, Andy (played by the director's brother, Jeremy Carver) really add a lot to the film. I think the most interesting aspect of this doc is the people he worked with. They were some of the most talented people he had ever worked with. They had a lot of things in common with him, from being record collectors to being fans of Motown. In my opinion, the real joy of this doc is the dialogue, especially the part where he talks to the two people who are most often mentioned in the film. It's a great way to see how the people in this doc affected him, and what they taught him about music. I think one of the things that really made this doc special is the fact that it's done in a very understated way. While you might not find this doc quite as dramatic as some other docs, I think it's worth seeing just to see how Simon worked. It's quite the story.

Teresa photo

I have no idea why this film received so much negative feedback. While it certainly is not a classic, I'm glad I watched it. I'd always heard about this film being a breakthrough in the world of classical music, and I was totally convinced. The performances were superb, the overall atmosphere of the movie was absolutely captivating, and I think anyone that is able to truly appreciate the craft of music will find something to appreciate. The documentary is very well done and will keep you in a good mood. However, I think that some of the people that were so negative towards the film seem to have missed the point. If you are someone that has seen all the recent musical movies and is still looking for something new, then this is the movie for you. If you enjoy music in any way, then you will enjoy this movie. As for me, I'm pleased that the film helped me get to know the "real" jazz. For those that enjoy the music of Miles Davis, this is a great documentary.

Roy Reynolds photo
Roy Reynolds

In 1985, three years before his death from a drug overdose, Paul McCartney had been diagnosed with terminal cancer. His life was already over and he was about to spend a couple of months of his life in a hospital bed. This documentary focuses on the last few days of the life of one of the world's greatest and most famous musicians. The film is told from the point of view of his wife Linda and from the point of view of those closest to him. The music itself is an important part of the documentary and is also very engaging, but in this case it does not come first. It is told through the documentary and through the life of the main character, Paul. There is a lot of music that is both interesting and inspiring and it is very funny to see how his music has changed as he grows older and how his life has changed and he is at the end of his life. As an aside, I would like to say that Paul has been a very good example of what I have tried to do when I have been asked to make a documentary on a famous person. I try to tell a story of the story and not try to tell the story, the only thing I do that is important is to tell the facts and the facts are that Paul McCartney has been the most popular rock and roll musician in the world for the last 20 years. His music is the most popular, his best selling and his most used and in my opinion that is a big and important point. But to the documentary director, a documentary is about telling a story. It is not about telling the facts, not about telling the life, not about telling the story and not about telling the art, it is just about telling a story, one about a person and a story about a person. That is the first thing. When I was looking for a documentary for Paul, I could find nothing about him. But I wanted to find something that would show the change of his life in a way that was the most interesting. I thought about using the best-selling album he made in the 1980s, but that would be an historical mistake, it is just too long and I do not want to waste time on that. But I tried to find a documentary that would tell the story of Paul McCartney. I decided to go with Paul and Linda McCartney and they are not the greatest people in the world. They are not the greatest rock and roll musicians. They are a single mother and an alcoholic. They have a very weak marriage and they have an old son, now grown up, and they have to move away from their home and the McCartney home. They have to make a new life in a different town in England. That is the situation of the main character. But the documentary director, her name is Antony Chiklis, is an outstanding person. She knows the facts, she knows the personality of Paul and she knows the important things about the story and she makes it very clear and very interesting. So I wanted to tell the story of Paul McCartney, but the story is not about the facts, the story is about the

Kelly P. photo
Kelly P.

Gus Purdom was a late 20th century playwright who was the creator of the groundbreaking play "Julius Caesar". He wrote many of the most important plays of the 20th century, such as "Julius Caesar" and "Julius Caesar". He is seen here in a film entitled "The Julius Caesar: A Documentary", about his life and work. He was deeply respected by many and was never portrayed as a man who was a monster. The main idea of the documentary is to show how "the writers" are seen in the eyes of the public and then how that affects how they are perceived. This is the central idea of the documentary. As I said, it was not bad, but it was not great either. It is a good documentary that does it's job and does it well, but the ending is a bit of a letdown. I felt that the main idea of the documentary was accomplished, but the ending was something that I didn't like. I thought that it was a bit too long and it did not show anything that had happened after the documentary was finished. I do not know how much of that came from the directors, but I found it to be a bit excessive and somewhat disappointing. That being said, I still think that the documentary is worth seeing. It is not a perfect documentary but it is still a good documentary. It is more of a documentary about how the writers are seen and how that affects how they are viewed in the public, but that is still a good documentary. I give it a 7 out of 10.

Alice H. photo
Alice H.

This is the best documentary I've ever seen. I found it to be very exciting and it gave me a lot of courage to go out and discover a lot of people in my life. It really makes you think about what you want in life. I found the interviews very personal and funny. I really loved the way they put things into perspective in the documentary. This is a documentary that's really important and worth seeing. My favorite part of this documentary is when the film maker is going to give his presentation to the class and the students are sitting there with their mouths open. You just see them go through it and wonder if they're really going to see the truth of their life. This is a really important documentary that I recommend to people.

Ruth C. photo
Ruth C.

This movie is a masterpiece. The story and the actors are excellent. I recommend it to all music lovers and anybody who likes to learn about Italian music. If you don't know much about Italian music, you will be amazed by the music and the characters. I give it a "9" for being a perfect movie. My favorite is "Persepolis" because of the story, the great acting, and the wonderful costumes. If you don't know much about Italian music, you will like it.

Cheryl May photo
Cheryl May

A very good documentary, and very revealing, and also very sad. I loved the musical interludes and the life story of Robin, who was a hugely talented and passionate guy. I could have gone further, but I felt that the story was a bit too sad, and I wished there was a little more heart in it. It did get to be pretty depressing, though. But still a very good film. And a documentary about a very unusual event, a guy in his early fifties who, as his friend said, "made a lot of noise and caused a lot of problems" - literally, he caused a lot of noise, by dancing. Some people would have felt his actions were mischievous, but he was basically trying to push the boundaries of what he thought was acceptable and acceptable behaviour. And I don't think it was just his behaviour, or even his music that caused these problems. Maybe the police were a little bit too quick to shut down his club, but it would have been a lot more easier to deal with if he had not been that loud and annoying. Anyway, good documentary.

Dylan R. photo
Dylan R.

A documentary on the music of the all-female punk band NWA, which was formed in 1987 by members of the Seattle-based rap group P.O.D. - a group who became famous as being the lead singer of the group. This film is an example of how a documentary should be made, not how many people know how to make a good documentary, as with this film. The documentary is edited with a few elements to help inform the audience. The main thing is to let the audience know the story behind the band and what happened to them, and to make sure we don't forget to be entertained by the presentation. The documentary is done in a way that shows some of the greatest songs from the band, and the interviews are done with the band, the other members of NWA, and other famous people in the scene. We get to see the P.O.D. members get on with their lives, like P.O.D. themselves, as well as interview with members of the NWA crew, including the band's manager, who talks about the problems with the band when they were still famous. It is an entertaining documentary, and an interesting one to watch. I do recommend it.

Mildred photo

A quick review on this movie: I have a friend who is a big fan of Italian Punk and he saw this movie and he fell in love with it. He said it is the best documentary ever. Now, I am not a fan of Italian Punk and the music I heard from the movie is not that good. But it is not bad, I mean, it is a little bit funny. But in my opinion it is not really a documentary. I have seen it before, but I don't remember it very well. But I have to say, the best thing about this movie is it's photography. The music is also good. I think the director and the photographer did a great job. It's really great, it is worth to watch.

Aaron Reyes photo
Aaron Reyes

The fact that Roger Ebert gave this film a "10" is surprising. For me, it's a "7" or a "7.5" in the Rotten Tomatoes. It's not a masterpiece of the cinematic world, but it's worth watching just to see how much the director cares about the subject matter. And it's a lot. Caviezel really is a great artist, the kind of guy who would rather be on stage playing, than on the screen. I admire his dedication to his craft, and it's impressive how much he actually cares about this project. In this regard, he shows how much he's loved performing. This film is almost one long love letter to the music. I love the way he depicts this in his music videos. The visuals are fascinating, and the visuals speak to you. It's great to see the time-lapse videos, because they really capture the spirit of the music. I love how he's included just some of the music videos from the past. I was very interested in the use of the videos as inserts in the film. They are almost the characters themselves, and the video clips help create the characters. The first two were pretty boring, but I thought that the last one was one of the best scenes in the film. It's an extremely powerful scene, and the music is definitely played in the background, but it's not a boring song. I loved the way they used the music. This is a great movie about a great artist. It's a very powerful film, but it's also very emotional and moving. I've never seen an artist so passionately devoted to the craft. It's like watching a documentary about a really important guy, and not only a documentary about him, but about the whole story of his music. It's really cool.

Kyle Guzman photo
Kyle Guzman

I've watched the video documentary for the "Tears of the Sun", the documentary for which this film is based on. It's a very well made film and it includes very good photos. But the documentary is not really about the music but about the struggles that the band faced in the late 60's and early 70's. That's why the documentary was produced and why it was produced well. The documentary is well-made and the interviews of the band members are very interesting. However, as a documentary it is not that great. It has some problems, one of which is that the interviews are in Italian. And also, the documentary doesn't really tell us a lot about the band. The documentary was produced in the early 80's, after the group had split up and the members who made the film made it look like it was all downhill from that point. The band was also at that point making music that was not very good and had a hard time getting together again, so it's not surprising that the interviews are in Italian. In summary, "Tears of the Sun" is not a great film but it is a very well made one and I think that the documentary is a very good one, so I would recommend it to people who want to know more about the early days of The Who.

Helen D. photo
Helen D.

I wasn't familiar with this film prior to seeing it, and I must say, it was a very enjoyable watch. This is an introduction to the ideas and feelings that this film is supposed to portray. I'm not an expert on Rifff, but this film was really, really good. I'm a fan of his music, but I've never been a big fan of his performance on stage, so this film is pretty interesting to me. The performances in this film were really well done. I have to admit that, while watching this film, I was not expecting much of Pavarotti, but it didn't take away from the enjoyment I was having. I recommend this film to anyone who is looking for a good introduction to Rifff. I also recommend this film to anyone who is a fan of music or the artist in question. I'm also glad that this film was made, because it can help people who are familiar with Rifff's music get an appreciation for the man and his work.

Ronald W. photo
Ronald W.

I am a huge Pino Donaggio fan. He is one of my favorite pianists. When I heard that he was going to be performing for the first time, I was excited. I thought he would be perfect for the role of Terence and it was very exciting to hear him. I have to admit that the recording that I was seeing had a small, but notable difference in some of his compositions. There were the three-note piano pieces, which were used in the movie, and I thought they were too short, but what do I know? Terence was a talented pianist, and they were the only real pieces of his that I heard in the movie. The film wasn't bad, but it wasn't good. Terence was a very sympathetic character, and his music was a lot better than in the movie. I think it is a good movie for the whole family to see, but I wouldn't see it on a Sunday morning. I recommend this movie to fans of Terence and his music.