The Name of the Rose

The Name of the Rose was released in 1986 and directed by Jean-Jacques Annaud. Rather than simply retelling the plot, the film is worth revisiting for the characters, conflicts and ideas that give its story its identity.

Loss, Mortality and Freedom emerge through what the characters face and the choices they make, giving the story more to explore beyond its immediate plot. William of Baskerville, Bernardo Gui and Adso of Melk do not begin the film seeing one another clearly, and watching those first impressions break down is a big part of why The Name of the Rose still works.

Elsewhere, franciscan friar William of Baskerville and his novice, Adso of Melk, arrive at an early 14th-century Benedictine abbey in Northern Italy.

A mysterious death has occurred ahead of an important theological Church conference—a young illuminator appears to have committed suicide. That detail matters because it shapes the way the characters initially see one another.

William confronts the worried Abbot and gains permission to investigate the death. From there, the film can concentrate less on explaining the setup and more on what happens between the people inside it.

Sean Connery plays William of Baskerville. Franciscan friar William of Baskerville and his novice, Adso of Melk, arrive at an early 14th-century Benedictine abbey in Northern Italy.

William and Adso make the acquaintance of Salvatore, a hunchback who speaks gibberish in various languages, and his handler and protector, Remigio da Varagine.

William deduces from Salvatore's use of the term "penitenziagite" that he had once been a member of a heretical sect and infers that Salvatore and Remigio may have been involved in the killings.

The movie has more on its mind than the basic setup suggests. loss sits close to the centre of the film, but it is explored through the characters rather than treated like a lesson.

mortality matters just as much. The film keeps challenging the assumptions its characters make about one another, which is where much of its emotional weight comes from. There is also plenty here about freedom and mortality and lifespan. Those ideas overlap rather than sitting in separate boxes, which helps the movie feel like a story about people rather than a checklist of themes.

The film could hardly be separated from the decade that produced it. Released in 1986, it carries the attitudes, style and filmmaking rhythms of the 1980s without needing to announce them.

It also sits comfortably within the era's crime, thriller, mystery, horror, drama and medieval filmmaking, even if the movie itself is more interesting than any single genre label suggests.

That is part of why it still appears in conversations about 1980s movies and 1980s crime movies. The film has become tied not only to its own story but to the wider memory of what 1980s movies felt like.

Watching The Name of the Rose now means seeing both what has lasted and what unmistakably belongs to 1986.

What still works best is the human material. Ideas around loss, mortality and freedom have not stopped being relevant simply because the clothes, language and cultural references belong to another era.

Some moments inevitably land differently for a modern audience. Revisiting an older film properly means enjoying what still works without pretending every choice has aged equally well.

A large part of that staying power comes from the characters. William of Baskerville, Bernardo Gui and Adso of Melk are still useful shorthand for the personalities and pressures the film explores.

Carpenter's film has lasted because people continue to recognise something in it. Nostalgia helps, but nostalgia alone does not keep a movie in the conversation for decades.