Scanialara You won't be disappointed!

Freaktana A Major Disappointment

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Jenna Walter The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Jim Colyer Rex Harrison is Julius Caesar with a British accent. Elizabeth Taylor is Cleopatra, and Richard Burton is Marc Antony. Cleopatra gives the first half of this long movie to Caesar and the second half to Antony. It makes use of my 3 years of Latin. I saw it that summer with my first girl friend. Egypt meets Rome! I admit the history was over my head at age 17, but I have since grown into it. Caesar was murdered by his friends, while Cleopatra and Antony committed suicide. We only catch a glimpse of the cobra as it slithers away. In 1963, Hollywood was not yet willing to shock audiences. Wimpy Roddy McDowell plays wimpy Octavian, who went on to inherit the Roman Empire. The summer of 1963 was a season of overblown productions, another of which was How the West Was Won.

Eric Stevenson This film is now the longest movie I have ever seen in my entire life! In fact, the previous record holder was the 1996 "Hamlet" movie and this beat that record by exactly one minute! How awesome! I watched this movie for Shakespeare Month because I heard it was based on "Antony And Cleopatra". The weird thing is that it's kind of hard to really say that because it's based on a true story. It seems more like historical drama than a Shakespeare adaptation. I still think it counts and I'm glad to have checked this out. Hey, I've now seen every movie at the moment that I want to see for 1963! Well, both history and Shakespeare buffs should know the story already. It seems like it's been a long time since I saw an accurate representation of the historical Cleopatra. The funny thing about her is that she became famous for being able to seduce men. Despite being portrayed by the beautiful Elizabeth Taylor here, the actual Cleopatra was actually kind of ugly with a hooked nose. Well, it's been said she at least had a nice voice. The best parts were of course the war and action sequences.I admit it probably is too long and could have been cut in half. Still, we get a lot of really talented actors here and they really are putting a lot of effort into their roles. This is one of the most expensive movies ever made, even adjusted for inflation and actually hit the studio even though it made a good amount of money. My general thought is that it's a good movie, but not a great movie. When you have a film over four hours long, you really have to made it enjoyable. This was a nice big epic film. ***

patroklosmech Cleopatra is one of my favourite movies. The reasons for this are various.THe most superficial aspect about the movie is that of a lavish production. I enormously enjoythe rich, detailed and realistic sets and props, although they feature quite a few anachronisms, especially regarding Cleo's palace.Beyond that, the movie features some very good performances, with Harrison and MacDowall topping the cast, of which only one earned an Academy Award nomination and another lost one for supporting role due to a minor technical formality. Historical realism, including appearances and characters, is not the point of this movie. Otherwise Taylor would not have played the title role. A screenplay composed by historical accounts, those of Plutarch among them, but also a book which I have not read but I deem probably a pseudo-historical novel, the story is supposed to emphasise the struggle of Cleopatra for independence and dignity through any possible means. Her love for Anthony and Ceasar is portrayed as genuine infatuation, which is not known as a historical certainty, but her egotism and Egypt's interests rest also on the top of her priority list. A proof of this is her departure from Actium after learning without verification that Mark Antony is dead, to head to Egypt for regroupment and defense. In general events and guidelines the film is accurate enough to satisfy the reasonable amateur-historian viewers. Several minor or supporting historical figures are omitted probably to create a trio of great role- characters.As for the turbulent history of edits and releases I lament this the most for it is generally believed to have damaged the film and fracturing its continuity and meaning. Though the 250 min version which I have watched recently on Bluray proceeds logically through the plot, small abrupt cuts and connections occur and certain plot details and interconnections are cut. I have only seen photo stills from any cut scenes, among them a scene of the civil war between the Ptolemaic rulers which shows Cleopatra in her battlefield tent. I think that this opulent and well-crafted production deserves to present the viewers with all its magnificence of colours, sets and costumes and performances, for which so much ink, blood and gold has been wasted and nearly made 20th C-Fox sink financially. So, I will always yearn for a director's cut restored, remastered, reedited and re-scored in 1080p perhaps. I would personally sign a contract to buy a set of a 360 CLeopatra BLuray collection even if it cost 100 dollars, because I think that, after all, both the audience and the cast and crew deserve to have their toils fully compensated for having provided an epic which will be, when restored, the best crafted and also nearing the top in performances epic of the pre-CGI film era.So for all the above I give a 9/10, awarded specifically for the director's cut which J.L.M. certainly exchanged his career for.

chaswe-28402 Undeniably spectacular sets and settings, off and on. Amazingly soporific dialogue unimaginatively spoken by miscast actors. Rex Harrison is patrician enough, but he's not my idea of a little, epileptic, balding, battle-hardened veteran who has fought his way from Rome to the British Isles and back; and Miss Taylor is definitely not my idea of Cleopatra. She's more like a chubby housewife from a London suburb, giving herself airs. It's the director and the script that make a movie. They've managed to make more or less nothing here. I'm talking about the first half of the 2 DVD discs, and am taking a few hours off, to recuperate, by scribbling a few thoughts.Back to the sittathon. Contrary to a lot of the opinions on this website, I thought the second disc was slightly better, acting-wise, than the first. Burton was more passionately emotive, and even Liz improved a little. I wouldn't say they were anything special however. Roddy McDowall seemed to me abysmally miscast as Octavian, but I suppose he did his best. There had obviously been an effort to replicate the man's actual appearance, but I can't believe the historical Augustus was quite so fragile looking. In the first disc the entry of Cleopatra's entourage into Rome was definitely spectacular. I can't believe her actual entry was anything remotely like it. In the second disc, the battle of Actium had me lost, I regret to say. I gather the reason this half of the film flowed so badly and was so difficult to follow was because large chunks had been cut from the narrative to reduce the film from 6 hours to 4. If I've got that right. The result was something of a butchered mess. I did wind up feeling sad. But can't bring myself to award more than half marks.