marieke_kraaijeveld My son Ruben Kraaijeveld worked on this movie for 4 weeks while we lived in Prague, acting as one of Gaugain's sons. I see all the other kids named in the crew listing: Jan, Emil and Pauline, but his name is missing. That's a real shame, since he worked hard for it and was only 9 (!) at the time. Movie itself I can't rate, we've been trying for years to get a copy but to no avail. Now I am going to look even harder, there must be a way to see my own kid play!!! He's been in a movie before, an Italian one that only showed in Italy and we also couldn't see. So I'd like to get info on both movies, Paradise Found and "The inverse canon" or "Canone Inverso", which was the Italian title of the movie. Anyone out there that can help maybe??? Thanks!

c-bwhit Can anyone tell me of another film on Gauguin's life? While not as passionate as Lust for Life (van Gogh), I enjoyed seeing Paradise Found, and I saved it & have watched it several times now. I wanted it to go on longer.In my 30s I painted several oils, & seeing this has inspired me to get out my brushes again. I wish more artists lives were available. William Blake, Turner, and others. PF was made by Australians, & I bet Hollywood would have changed the story line even more.

david-777 An absolutely dreadful rendition of Gauguin's life on Tahiti.There is no sense of his passion in a wonderful adventure in the South Seas and the real difficulties he faced.Having studied this painters life in some detail I find this biopiic unbelievably innacurate. We even have his wife Mette loving his paintings from Tahiti, which in reality she despised. There is even a scene of her at his exhibition in Paris, an event she refused to attend.She never appreciated any of his work. If a filmmaker or writer embarks on a biopic picture they need to keep the basic facts correct. The Directing and editing is very slow and not very entertaining. It is difficult to blame the actors with such a pedestrian script but I found the casting quite misguided. Gauguin must be quaking in his grave at this effort at portraying his brave and noble life in pursuit of his art.

jaykay-1 A romanticized look at Paul Gauguin's foray into post-impressionism in the late 1880's. As written by screenwriter John Goldsmith, Gauguin doesn't have a great deal happen in his life, cinematically. He gives up his brokerage job to paint, goes to Martinique, returns to France to become a leading artist in the new movement. Spends two years in Tahiti where he paints the islanders to critical acclaim. Back in Paris, he ruminates a few more years before returning to the South Seas for good.Kiefer Sutherland does his best as Gauguin but can do little against a pedestrian plot. We see only a shade of the pain and frustration of an artist driven to create but unable to overcome a painters block. As a result, we cannot share in the exhilaration he feels when finally he achieves his goal. His wife, played by Nastassja Kinski, runs hot and cold to her husband's career choices and while she provides drama, does little to solicit our sympathy.The narrative construction is not linear, which is unfortunate. We are constantly being thrust backwards and forwards in time which means constant mental adjustment and readjustment on the part of the audience. Not a good formula for success for a film of this calibre.Viewed at the American Film Market in February.