Home :: DVD :: Action & Adventure :: Science Fiction  

Animal Action
Blackmail, Murder & Mayhem
Blaxploitation
Classics
Comic Action
Crime
Cult Classics
Disaster Films
Espionage
Futuristic
General
Hong Kong Action
Jungle Action
Kids & Teens
Martial Arts
Military & War
Romantic Adventure
Science Fiction

Sea Adventure
Series & Sequels
Superheroes
Swashbucklers
Television
Thrillers
Spartacus

Spartacus

List Price: $19.98
Your Price: $9.99
Product Info Reviews

<< 1 .. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 >>

Rating: 4 stars
Summary: What ever happened to entertainment for entertainment's sake
Review: In reading the many reviews of this title, I must confess that quite a few disappoint me. What ever happened to the notion of entertainment for entertainment's sake? Must everything be analyzed for political implications and hidden messages? As a child, I found the "larger than life" titles such as Spartacus, The 10 Commandments and Ben Hur to be what brought my family closer together. The thrill of the battles, the tender romance....pure entertainment! Films just aren't made like this now days. For pure, enjoyable family entertainment - don't miss out on Spartacus. (For steamy political debate and hidden agendas, watch the nightly news).

Rating: 4 stars
Summary: Well done BUT.......
Review: Kubrick's Spartacus is a great film I am not saying that. But i personally believe that making a hero out of Spartacus is wrong. Spartacus was a gladiator yes, but he wasn't a slave first, he was a deserting Roman soldier who became a gladiator, and then with his woman, a priestess slew pour Batiatus (Ustinov) in the film and recruited gladiators and slaves to help him raise an army to join Sertorius in Spain, hoping to co-rule Rome.

now the liberal idea yes its good, esp. for the 1960s. so i can overlook the glorifying of Spartacus.

But why? oh why? is Gracchus in this? the Gracchii died seventy years before the events of Spartacus! yet there, in a still wonderful performance by Charles Laughton, there he is! And this movie is another frown i have at Roman epics, why does some moron play Julius Caesar? why? also Crassus (an awesome, true performance by Olivier) was friends with Caesar, and he was Consul of Rome yes, but with Pompey! in the film too, Crassus curses Sulla for marching on Rome as Glaborus suggests. Uh-unh, Crassus owes his massive fortune by buying the auctioned properties that were the victims of the late Sulla's proscriptions! yet it was Crassus who dictator of Rome, making the proscription lists! it just confuses me, i think the film would be better if they concentrated on Crassus versus Spartacus, and forget all the backplot of Gracchus in the senate (who died many years before) oh well.

nonetheless, the costumes, the uniforms, the battle scenes are great that is for sure. i guess Im being nitpicky but well, im still waiting for that one film on The Roman republic that hasnt came out yet. Where we will see the reforms of Marius, the dicatorship of Sulla, and the brilliance of Julius Caesar. -maybe someday.

Rating: 5 stars
Summary: The Last Great Guy Flick!
Review: ... when has Hollywood been known for the exactness of itspresentation of history and social commentary? If this were the case,then Max von Sydow and Jeffrey Hunter would not have been cast as Jesus in "The Greatest Story Every Told" and "King of Kings," respectively. Laurence Olivier would never have played Othello in his own adaptation or a revered Muslim in "Khartoum." Burt Lancaster and Paul Newman would never have played Native Americans and both films about Cleopatra would never have had Claudette Colbert and Elzabeth Taylor in the starring roles. The popularity of the Tarzan films are further examples of the inaccuracies of Hollywood movies.

So, much for the casting errors. As far as story lines are concerned, every major historical figure and event has received the glamorized treatment. Was The Civil War as much "fun" as portrayed in "Gone with the Wind?" Was the American western movement as stylized as it was in the epic "How the West Was Won" or any of the films starring the Duke? Was Joan of Arc that saintly as she has been represented on the celuloid screen? Sure, "Saving Private Ryan" showed the horrors of World War II, but it is not without its flaws.

So, we come to "Spartacus," the film at hand.

This is just one good entertainment featuring vivid performances from not only the stars but the featured actors as well. Kirk Douglas is his usually chiseled face best as the slave who leads a revolt against the Roman establishment. Laurence Olivier brings his Shakespearean skills in the majestic role of Crassus, and Charles Laughton soars as Graccus, Crassus's chief nememis in the Roman Senate. Peter Ustinov, in an Oscar-winning role, nearly steals the show, but there are other fine performances also.

Who can forget Woody Strode as Spartacus's opponent in the arena who betrays the "code" of the arena by refusing to make a kill? Or who can forget Nina Foch and Joanna Barnes as two Roman noblewomen who go "shopping" for contestants in gladitorial combat? Charles McGraw is menacingly effective as Marcellus, chief instructor at the school for gladiators.

Oh, yeah, Jean Simmons is around as the love interest of Spartacus. She is regal as the slave girl whose loyalty to Spartacus is the envy of Oliver's Craccus.

The cinematography is superb. Every inch of the film is a feast to behold. Alex North's score is one of filmdom's best.

Stanley Kubrick brings it all together with his usual stunning direction.

With the recent release of "Gladiator," I am sure that there will be the inevitable comparisons. And, yes, even that one has its flaws.

An Australian playing a Roman? Hey, it's just a movie!

Rating: 5 stars
Summary: Liberal? Conservative? Who cares?
Review: About six years ago the National Review, the most esteemed conservative magazine, had a list of the best conservative films ever made, and "Spartacus" made the list. So is "Spartacus" liberal, Hollywood propeganda at its worst as some reviewers believe? Or is it a stirring story of man's eternal struggle against oppression which is why National Review believe it to be a conservative film? But the question people should really ask themselves is-- does "Spartacus" work as entertainment?

Historical accuracy? It is simply ridiculous to expect movies to be true to the facts of history, they are works of fiction. If, by chance, they use a story to tell us a greater truth about ourselves and our past then they have succeeded as art. If they give us a momentary diversion and make us smile or tug at our heart, then they have succeeded admirably at what they are-- popular entertainment. Personally, I think "Spartacus" triumphs as entertainment. Brilliant performances. Stunning battle sequences. And an extremely moving story of people hoping for better lives for themselves and their children. Unlike many other "sword-and-sandals" epics, "Spartacus" has aged quite well. It still packs a powerful, emotional whallop. (Who isn't moved by the shouting of "I am Spartacus"?) I am a conservative, but I am siding with the National Review and my own personal taste- "Spartacus" is a great film!

Rating: 1 stars
Summary: Liberal Hollywood Propaganda
Review: I agree with the reviewer immediately below, but I should point out that after arguing that race and gender were not significant issues in ancient Rome, the reviewer says that the Romans found issues of race and gender "squelchable." How could these issues be squelchable if they did not exist? Perhaps the reviewer is referring to the Romans as depicted in this film, in which case the reviewer makes an interesting point: Trumbo and Kubrik write a script that trumpets liberal virtues only to have the trumpeters of those virtues squelched by a power (Crassus) who does not appear at all evil. What IS the message here Hollywood? If Kubrik and Trumbo made Crassus a villain, Spartacus and friends would be martyrs (murdering martyrs, but what the help [sic]). Instead, Crassus is a well-intentioned, if egotistical, and loyal Roman citizen. A true patrician. Is this just another example of boisterous but empty scripting or what?

By the way, I apologize to true Liberals (i.e., in the tradition of Burke) for the title of this review. The liberalism found in SPARTACUS is the liberalism of Jane Fonda, Warren Beatty, THE NATION, Oliver Stone, etc.

Rating: 1 stars
Summary: Historically inaccurate, Hollywood liberalism at its worst
Review: I remember loving this film as a child: the fight scenes are vivid; the costumes are convincing enough (although perhaps not as good as those in Ben Hur); and Douglas, Olivier, Simmons, and Ustinov are superb. Watching this film now, however, (I am 21) I find that the historical inaccuracies and political messages (which, when younger and unaware, I doubtless absorbed) are despicable.

We might, perhaps, forgive the historical inaccuracies (e.g., Virinia [Simmons] claims to be from "Britannia" [c. 73-71BC] long before the Roman invasion of Britain [54BC and later]). Kubrik and Trumbo probably did not consider historical accuracy to be of first importance.

The political messages in this film, however, seem to me much more disturbing. Spartacus (Douglas) mixes the arguments of the French-revolution with 1960s civil-rights rhetoric, both of which did not exist in ancient Rome. Spartacus trumpets "liberty," "equality," and "brotherhood" (his younger viewers would probably have to ask their mothers what fraternity means) for all regardless of race and creed--and gender too, if we consider Virinia's feminist quips (which seem more plausible in the context of the script). In ancient Rome, however, race and gender did not signify inequality, division, and hatred as they did in the U.S. at the time this film was made. This film, therefore, tries to make the liberal principles of the last 250 years appear timeless (and thus somehow more credible), when in fact they are modern--and, perhaps, failing constructs.

So, I cannot conclude that this film is a "timeless epic." Issues of race and gender are not timeless, though they may be troublesome, and, as the Romans found, squelchable.

Rating: 4 stars
Summary: Spartacus
Review: The only thing that I would change on this great film is theformat. Letter box is the only was this film should be viewed. It islarger than life in many ways. Squeezing it to fit a TV does it a disservice. In all other ways it is a great lesson in history (as loose as the history is), slavery (yes slaves were of every color, even white) and the fact that life was as cheap as a video rental. But the spirit of Spartacus is the one that inspired the Magna Charta, the Constitution and the human rights challenge to the current Chinese government. It is a timeless story and as simplistic and sometimes almost trite as the dialog is it underscores the fact that Spartacus was a real character and not a scholar. The scholars and philosophers of his time were arguing that slaves WERE NOT HUMAN. He challenged this view with a very real and human response. He is the Moses of the gentiles in his time. END

Rating: 5 stars
Summary: Spartacus Brilliant effort by Douglas, Kubrick
Review: A vivid and well-acted display that is only enhanced by DVD. A controversial film in its day (it was written by blacklisted writers), it survives today as a classic and one of the best films of both Kirk Douglas and Stanley Kubrick.

Based on the true story of a slave rebellion that rocked the foundations of Rome itself, the picture follows the life of slave Spartacus (Douglas) from the rock quarries where he continuously attacks guards to the gladiator arenas to a final battle against a superior Roman army. The supporting cast includes Peter Ustinov (Best Supporting Actor), Anthony Hopkins, Tony Curtis, Jean Simmons, Laurence Olivier and Woody Strode, who provides the films pivotal scene. Strode, as Ethiopian slave Draba, battles Spartacus in the arena, but refuses to kill him, instead choosing to attack the Romans. His sacrifice prompts Spartacus to lead the slaves in rebellion. The fight scene had to be rehearsed for six weeks by Strode and Kubrick. All the hits and bruises are real. Even the scene where Strode cuts Douglas with the tip of his trident is real, requiring Strode to get it just right without opening Douglas up from kidney to kidney.

All in all, a great movie spectacle. Enjoyable on VHS, it is much better on DVD.

Rating: 5 stars
Summary: "My Love, My Life..."
Review: This is one of the last great epics, with superb acting by Douglas, Simmons, Ustinov, Olivier...Ok, I would go a bit overboard naming all of the actors, but there they will stand! Great cinematography, great costumes and music, great stunts...wonderful but sad love story--WATCH THIS FILM AND SOAK IT IN!

Rating: 4 stars
Summary: Definately worth the Amazon price
Review: I've rented this DVD and it has great picture quality and sound. It doesn't have any good extra features, but it is the director's cut. If you don't want to spend for the Criterion release, this edition is nothing to scoff at. Criterion adds commentary by Dalton Trumbo and others. They also have some extras like storyboards and some filmed interviews with some of the stars. However, they aren't going to improve much on the picture or the sound, and this edition is cheaper.


<< 1 .. 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 >>

© 2004, ReviewFocus or its affiliates