BootDigest
Such a frustrating disappointment
Sexyloutak
Absolutely the worst movie.
AshUnow
This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.
aramis-112-804880
"Julius Caesar" is perhaps the most accessible of Shakespeare's plays. Short, direct, pithy. It's a cautionary play about the error of assassination. With a cast of wonderful actors down to the smallest roles, this should have been a classic for the ages.Charlton Heston is a great Marc Antony. Richard Chamberlain is a feisty Octavian. Diana Rigg is perhaps the loveliest ever Portia; and talented as she was as the "Avengers" action star, she does Shakespeare like she was born to it. The real prize of this flick, however, was Robert Vaughn's sly, humorous Casca. It's a shame Shakespeare didn't give him more screen time.Not only is the major cast full of headline stars, aficionados of English actors will recognize the names Preston Lockwood, Andrew Morell, Ron Pember, Michael Gough and others in very minor parts.Unfortunately, what sinks this movie like the Titanic is possibly the worse casting decision in human history, Jason Robards as Brutus. In case you don't know, the star of "Julius Caesar" isn't John Gielgud's Caesar or Heston's powerful Antony. It's Brutus, the man who tries to usher in a republic but who, assassinating an old friend who looks to become a tyrant, inadvertently brings forth the Roman Empire.Robards is TERRIBLE. He walks zombie-like through the early part of the flick. An actor known for his greatness in Eugene O'Neill, Robards seems to have never heard of Shakespeare. His leaden delivery (if one can call it that) of lines shows no distinction between one word and the next. It's not like he thinks every word is as important as the next, but that none of them matter a whit. He might be a foreign actor reading the words phonetically off cue cards.Toward the end Robards shows a bit of life, but by that time we're all asleep. And he's still giving the lines like he never considered what they meant. Robards makes the whole thing look like a high school production put on for extra credit.Another bad casting decision is Richard Johnson as Cassius. A good actor in normal circumstances, Johnson was probably a poor choice as he was not well known to American audiences. The scenes between Cassius and Brutus should be subtle, often delivered with a wry wit. But with Robards seeming to feel he's done his bit by showing up at all, in their mutual scenes Johnson gives the feeling he's a lone reindeer dragging the sleigh by main force.Johnson should have studied Diana Rigg, who gives a subtle and touching performance as Portia, apparently deciding it was best to pretend Robards wasn't in the room.I don't know if this was a period when Robards was hitting the bottle, but he sunk what might have been a masterpiece. One wonders, where was the director? Director Stuart Burge is not well-known. His work consisted mostly of television stuff; but he had done great plays before, juggling temperamental actors like Olivier, Redgrave, Michael Hordern and Jeremy Brett, amongst others. Why was he MIA, instead of telling Robards to snap out of it or he'd hire a real actor? Since Brutus is the central character of the play (which should have been called "The Tragedy of Brutus" . . . well, Robards alone turns the whole enterprise into a disaster. It's like watching a train wreck. You can see the tragedy coming but there's not a darn thing you can do to stop it.It's not a total waste of talent. Johnson and Chamberlain try to take too much upon themselves, but some of the stars are worth watching, including Heston, Vaughn and Rigg. If you must watch this sluggish mess, keep your thumb on the fast forward.
FilmBuff1994
Julius Caesar is a great movie with a really well developed plot and a terrific cast. I really enjoy the classic William Shakespeare play, and feel like this film honours it to a very high degree. Had film been around in Shakespeare's time, I would imagine this being exactly how he would want the film to look, presented on a very grand scale, with dazzling set pieces, but always staying through to the relationship between characters and their dialogue. There was a few characters that I quite enjoyed in the play that I felt were underused in this film, particularly Christopher Lee as Artemidorus, who only has about two minutes of screen time for a character that could have been stretched much further, and particularly, Richard Chamberlain as Octavius Caesar. The character is not a massive part in the play, but his scenes are significant, and to have cut some of them was an injustice to the film.The performances all shine, and it is clear that these actors understood every word of their dialogue and had a deep understanding of what their character is going through. While he was never my favourite character when having seen and read the play, the undeniable screen presence of the great Charlton Heston made him the character I was most drawn to in this film. He conveys a lot of subtle emotions, as well as a great ability to express rage. It is a piece of work that I believe Shakespeare fans can appreciate. Well acted and very tense, Julius Caesar is a great ride that I would recommend to anyone looking for a good drama. Brutus and Cassius plot to kill Roman Emperor Julius Caesar as a result of his growing arrogance of power. Best Performance: Charlton Heston
ma-cortes
This good rendition of the Shakespeare playwright talks about tragedy, ambition, politics, corruption and wars. The film starts in battle of Munda where Julius Caesar(100-40 b.c.) vanquished Pompeyo and terminates in battle of Filipos where the second triumvirate(Marco Antonio, Lepido and Octavius Augustus: Richard Chamberlain) vanquish Brutus and Cassio. Aristocrat party prepares a conspiracy and March 15, 44 b.c -Idus of March- Julius Caesar was assassinated in senate .Remains surprisingly true to Shakespeare's adaptation and working directly from the original, unlike many other historical movies of the same era. The Caesar killing is originally staged including unexpected frames of the murderous washing their hands in the blood of Julius and below of Pompeyo sculpture.There are magnificent acting from a memorable Charlton Heston as Marco Antonio, an electrifying John Gielgud as Caesar, a sneaky Robert Vaughn as Casca and a splendid Richard Johnson as Cassius, among them. Performances attractive enough extends right down to the minor characters, wealthy of expert character-drawing, as Christopher Lee, Diana Rigg and Andre Morell as Ciceron. Directed with imagination and professionalism by Stuart Burge and well produced by Peter Snell who followed with a sequel also little known 'Marco Antonio and Cleopatra' starred and directed by Charlton Heston.This gripping flick will like to Shakespeare devotees but its spirit is intact in spite of are taken some liberties. It's hard to believe this underrated film did not have success, today is best deemed but contains brilliance of dialogue perfectly played by all-stars. Despite this one turns out to be inferior than classic film 'Julius Caesar(1953)' considered definitely the best version available directed by Joseph L Mankiewicz and starred by top American players as Marlon Brando( similar role Charlton Heston-Marco Antonio), Louis Calhern(John Gielgud-Caesar), Greer Garson(Jill Bennet-Calpurnia),James Mason(Jason Robards-Brutus), Edmond O'Brien(Robert Vaughn-Casca role) among others.
bkoganbing
One of the things that I always thought about Julius Caesar is that in the life of one of the great movers and shakers of the ancient world, he's merely a figure in which all kinds of people at the end are busy weaving their schemes around, be it his death or his conferred immortality. Antony and Brutus are each worried about their place in Caesar's affections and Brutus figures he's lost out to Antony. It makes him an easy mark for Cassius's plots. After the dirty deed of assassination is done, it's Antony and Octavius though they are teaming up against the conspirators, you can tell both in this version and in the better Fifties version that MGM put out that they will soon be at odds.Charlton Heston is a strong Antony here, but unfortunately for the play to succeed you need an equally strong Brutus. That's not what you get in Jason Robards, Jr. For a man who in his time was considered the greatest interpreter of Eugene O'Neill, when it comes to Shakespeare the man was out of his league. No reflection on him, everyone has casting limitations.A real good interpreter of the Bard who played Cassius back in 1954 plays Caesar here. John Gielgud is equally fine in both versions. And Richard Johnson and Robert Vaughn are superb as conspirators Cassius and Casca. And Richard Chamberlain who was trying very hard to shed his Dr. Kildare image is fine as the cunning Octavian who Antony ultimately underestimates.Charlton Heston in his memoirs takes blame for casting Robards and Robards himself realized he was miscast. Oddly enough in that earlier version James Mason as Brutus was the best one in the film.