CLEOPATRA (1963)
A Colossal Achievement In Movie Making Yeah, I know this one's a reach for a review on the CHFB forum, but try to stretch to see it at least as a qualifier in the Sword and Sandal genre... After over...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
Casey62 I agreed about 100 per cent with your review of Mystery of the Wax Museum and posted so, thus I feel less guilty about saying I disagree quite a bit about this one. It is not a complete...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
Speaking of Octavian's weak image, whether it's correct or not, the scene where Hume Cronyn "conveniently" arrives during his speech and Octavian kills him with a javelin clashes with that image. Even...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
Well, I don't think I'll ever be able to finish CLEOPATRA. I'm not that taken with Taylor, Burton, or Harrison. Mankowitz was an excellent filmmaker, a writer, director, and producer. He is easy to...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
atenolol wrote:A weak drunkard and his power-tripping mistress striving to impose an Eastern despotism on Rome with both ending up well-deserved losers is an uninteresting foundation to build a four...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
"Don't mix business with pleasure." I would put it sort of like "He who would rule others best himself be ruled by his brain rather than his hormones." The movie though is far harder on the guy who is...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
atenolol wrote: I would put it sort of like "He who would rule others best himself be ruled by his brain rather than his hormones." Isn't that how it often goes? Unfortunately lots of people are ruled...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
The movie made no bones about his supposed cowardice in battle. To some extent, I think he was portrayed as the usual campy, mincing villain that one finds so often in historical epics, right up to...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
Well, I think Octavian's portrayal as a villain is because he's shown through the eyes of Antony and Cleopatra who considered him a major obstacle in their political strategy. So, to me it seems to be...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
As I recall, in DeMille's 1934 version, Ian Keith's portrayal of Octavian doesn't contain any hints of weakness or cowardice.
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
I think we have to agree to disagree on how well it succeeds as drama, or for that matter as a love story. It does not succeed at all as history. *in all fairness, few movies succeed as good history....
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
Casey62 wrote:As I recall, in DeMille's 1934 version, Ian Keith's portrayal of Octavian doesn't contain any hints of weakness or cowardice. Been a long time since I've seen that one,this is off long...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
I believe Octavian was the 'bad guy' in DeMille's film, but again, only as a force that posed a threat to Antony and Cleopatra's plans. He's shown as acting out of an interest in preserving Roman...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
Here's a quote from Wikipedia: "On the whole the film followed the history of the period fairly closely, and took fewer liberties with historical accuracy than several other epics. However there are a...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
"Wikipedia" Okay. I gave my reasons in post #23 above. I personally have doubts about that source versus historians such as W. W. Tarn or J. F. C. Fuller. "took fewer liberties with historical...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
I'm also somewhat dubious of these info-sites which tend to contradict, but in this case they're all of the same opinion that the 1963 film stayed fairly accurate to the historical account.
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
The first part of CLEO is terrific; post-intermission (and minus Harrison's Caesar), the film becomes a dreary slog.LAWRENCE OF ARABIA shares this problem, to a lesser extent. While the second half...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
CLEO's no classic, but it's far from The Dog Champion it was branded. Sometimes, just getting years away from the hype and flackery (in both directions) helps a film.
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
Rapfred wrote:The first part of CLEO is terrific; post-intermission (and minus Harrison's Caesar), the film becomes a dreary slog.LAWRENCE OF ARABIA shares this problem, to a lesser extent. While the...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
A little off the direction the thread has gone,but I would have cast Sophia Loren (if it were possible) as Cleopatra rather than Taylor. I thought the mix of accents was just odd, and Taylor with her...
View ArticleRe: CLEOPATRA (1963)
atenolol wrote:A little off the direction the thread has gone, but I would have cast Sophia Loren (if it were possible) as Cleopatra rather than Taylor. I thought the mix of accents was just odd, and...
View Article
