I did rewatch Jarmon's WITTGENSTEIN to consider Oscar's statement that it's his best film. It is good, very intelligent, and I like the schematic, Brechtian presentation. It seems like something that might be presented on a very much more intelligent kind of television than one gets in the USA. Cinematically I still prefer Caravaggio, though. I don't so much see that he has a "best film." Caravaggio is the best known one, the one that got the most commercial distribution, and books about its making. And its making is fascinating, a feverish, inventive process Jarmon chronicled in notebooks.

Yes indeed Wittgenstein was a protege of Bertrand Russell. But he surpassed him and has become in pure philosophy now a more famous figure than Russell. Russell was a great man though, and crusader for just causes, particularly pacifism, who was hugely important in his time.

One should bear in mind that one of the important reasons why Derek Jarmon chose to make a film about Wittgenstein was the man's homosexuality, which was something that had not been talked about widely during W's lifetime or immediately after.. This is also a reason why Jarmon made a film about Shakespeare's sonnets, and about Caravaggio; Satint Sebastian, Edward II. He was all about gayness. He likes flamboyant figures like Caravaggio and Edward II. Wittgestein is so un-flamboyant, Jarmon has go focus on other characters in his story who ARE flamboyant.