lukechong "Cleopatra" isn't the worst motion picture ever made, but it came mighty close to bankrupting Twentieth Century Fox, and is now more remembered for its elaborate sets, turgid script, sturdy but less than inspired directing of Mankiewicz and for extravagant budget overruns. Costing US$44 million at the time of release, it was undoubtedly the most expensive film then made. A director-commissioned cut was said to have existed as two three-hour features, but the present movie, at 4 hours and 8 minutes, is still far too long. The second half is almost unwatchable, RIchard Burton being the chief culprit. His Marc Antony has the charisma of a desert camel, and convinces as the greatest nincompoop in Roman history.The rest of the cast is competent professionally. Elizabeth Taylor dons a black wig and black graphic eyeliner, but her acting here doesn't flatter her. Rex Harrison is I suppose decent enough but lacks romantic ardor; while Roddy McDowall is gratingly effete--a good or bad thing depending on your perspective. The movie's first half is watchable while tension drops significantly in the second; perhaps the best scene comes right at the end, at the death of Cleopatra, much pilfered from Shakespeare. As costume period epics go "Cleopatra" is worth watching, if only for its lavish sets and fine 70mm cinematography--but be forewarned, much of the second half comes across as bloated and soporific.

elvircorhodzic CLEOPATRA is an epic historical drama as a kind of group of non-complementary film segments, which are building an attractive epic story. The plot follows the eighteen tumultuous years that led to the founding of the Roman Empire. Cleopatra seduces Julius Caesar in order to forge an alliance with Rome so that she may hold on to her Egyptian empire. However, her plans crumble when Caesar is stabbed to death in the Roman Senate. Cleopatra is left without an ally, and Egypt is up for grabs. However, she seduces the Roman general Mark Antony in order to make him over into her new protector, but, a powerful general becomes dissolute drunk under her influence. He is defeated in a decisive battle, then the fate of Egypt, Cleopatra and his life come into danger...Film runs a few minutes more than four hours, excluding the intermission. It is difficult to follow, especially if there is no cohesion between the constant conflicts, political intrigue and erotic romance. Of course, some will say that this is an adventurous tragedy of historical dimensions. I think, this film constantly loses its point, realism, motives and passions and becomes a vulgar soap opera of epic proportions.The costumes are superbly designed. The scenery is very poor. Soundtrack is impermanent, despite epic overtones. Characters are not developed to the end, despite the duration of this film. Mr. Mankiewicz is focused on a visual excitement to the detriment of the direction and melodrama. Well, Cleopatra's entrance into Rome is truly spectacular, but an epilogue is too theatrical.Elizabeth Taylor as Cleopatra is one of the most erotic phenomena in the history of cinema. However, I think that it was not the ultimate goal. She is a strong and capable woman, who is poisoned by her own ambition to rule the world or maybe just a few powerful men. The arrogance and pride in her character are truly impressive. However, her performance is nothing special.Rex Harrison as Julius Caesar is a wise and generous ruler, who fell in love with a clever woman. He is torn between his duty, ambitions and desires. When the ruler loses his head .... we all know what's coming .... Mr. Harrison has offered a good performance.Richard Burton as Mark Antony is an exciting, emotional and arrogant general or lover. His character, in addition to a lack of self-confidence, corresponds to the character of Cleopatra. However, he can not follow her ambitions.This is a sumptuous, attractive and, unfortunately, boring experience.

LeonLouisRicci The Biggest Box Hit of 1963, Nominated for 9 Academy Awards (winning 4), and one of the Largest Money Makers of All Time, Nearly Bankrupted the Studio (Fox). A Conundrum You Say. Well No. The Movie Cost so much that the Revenue could Not be Recovered, at least until a Future Date, too Late to Salvage the Studio System and Fox's Lingering Time "In the Red".Truth be Told, Nothing could have saved the Studio System. By the Mid-Sixties the Cultural Changes were Virtually Clueless to Major Motion Picture Studios that were being Exposed as Bloated, Myopic, Greedy, Dictatorial Dinosaurs and were being Out Performed at the Box-Office by Inexpensive Independent Movies that were Cutting Edge and Culturally Hip.So the Studio System Died of "Future Shock" and a Lack of Insight about Expanding Consciousness and Art as Commerce.Forget all the Misplaced Blame put on this Gorgeous, Eye-Candy of a Film. It also Tickles the Ear and Tweaks Intellectual Cravings about Empires of Antiquity and the Politics and People who Ruled these Gargantuan Conglomerates of Defeated People and Their Assimilation into what was then a "Practical" Notion of World Domination.The Movie is Infamous for its "Liz and Dick" Tabloid Tussles and Scandal Sheet Salaciousness and the Cost Overrides and Daily Troubles on the Set, mostly because of the Enormity of Everything.What is Impressive, along with the Obvious Beauty of it All, is that the Movie was Made with Organics. Living, Breathing, Actors, Costumed by Needle and Thread Designers, on Sets Constructed by Sweat with Artistic Hubris that was Pushed to the Limit of Physical Applications.Elizabeth Taylor, borders on "too old for the part", Manages enough Natural Beauty with the Help of Make-Up, Costumes, and Camera Angles to make the Part of Egypt's Last Pharaoh Enticingly Attractive, using Her Wits as well as Her Wiles to Seduce and Manipulate Rome's Caesar and General. Rex Harrison (Caesar) Out Performs Liz, but Not So for Richard Burton (Antony) who seems Lost in the Part, or at least too Drunk to Care.Roddy Mcdowell makes an Impression in a Supporting Role, as do Others. But the Biggest Impression of All is the Technicolor Production that Peaks with Cleopatra's Entrance into Rome. The Film cannot Top That and the Second Half is Flaccid and makes the Film Feel like it had a Premature Money Shot.

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.