Spartacus

Rating:
Summary: An Epic Masterpiece
Review: Stanley Kubrick has given us many memorable films, but this is my personal favorite. It is hard to imagine that he was not even nominated for best director in 1960. I suppose his final satisfaction must have come in the endurance of this film's popularity after all the other nominees faded into obscurity.

'Spartacus' is one of the great Hollywood epics and Kirk Douglas' defining role. It is a brilliantly written screenplay that combines the struggle for freedom from oppression with a compelling love story in a setting that accurately depicts the majesty as well as the corruption of the Roman Empire. The scenes depicting the political maneuvering of the Senate were priceless.

Kubrick's work was nothing short of brilliant. His attention to the details of the period was wonderful. The orchestration of tens of thousands of extras in the battle scenes was phenomenal. His presentation of the love scenes between Varinia and Spartacus were sensitive and compelling. I was most impressed with his treatment of the slave army. He put a human face on the slaves by showing mothers with their children and scenes of Spartacus walking among the people. This completely wins the affections of the viewer. His pacing was perfect and despite the film's length at over three hours, it did not seem to drag since there was always something fascinating on the screen.

Kirk Douglas gave a powerful performance and created a character that was bigger than life. He was strong and inspirational while simultaneously being gentle and kind. Laurence Olivier gave a riveting performance as Crassus. He was cunning, imperious, consumed by ambition and utterly heartless. It is hard to imagine a more nefarious bad guy.

Jean Simmons has had an impressive acting career that has spanned more than 50 years. She is both a great beauty and an enchanting actress. She gave Varinia dignity, strength of character and a quiet seductiveness that played well off the power exuded from Douglas. Their screen chemistry was both passionate and touching.

Rounding out a great cast were Peter Ustinov who was terrific as the sniveling and cowardly Batiatius always conniving to profit from someone else's misfortunes, and Charles Laughton as the astute and duplicitous Gracchus, manipulating the Roman senate to his best advantage.

This is among the best epics ever made and certainly among the top three films about the Roman Empire. I rated it a 10/10. This film should be on every film buff's list of required viewing and is highly recommended for its moving story to anyone who hasn't seen it.

Rating:
Summary: Eyes to Die For
Review: When I first saw this movie, I was young enough to fall in love with Jean Simmons. Her eyes were enough to drown in. Surely Spartacus would fall in love with such a woman. Those who watch the DVD will miss the effect of the overture played with cutains closed or the true visual size of the movie, but will be captured by an intelligent script, outstanding actors, and battle sequences that inspired "Braveheart". When you finish the film, read about Dalton Trumball and the blacklist to further appreciate the significance of the film and the courage shown by Douglas. Not as action filled as much as today's summer films, unless you account for action of the mind. A great movie.

Rating:
Summary: I'm sorry, but this movie is boring
Review: I know no one will like this review, simply because it is blasphemy to criticize one of the "classics." But I really think this movie is ultimately dull and overlong. It's the kind of film you could literally fall asleep during it for two hours, and the movie's still on when you wake up.

However, there are some great things about this movie. The visuals are incredible. The sets, production design, costumes are all first rate. This has to be seen in widescreen. The soundtrack was done well, particularly the love theme.

But then there are the cons, which undoubtedly outweigh the pros. The story is uninteresting. It's pretty straightforward. The pacing is horrendous. Scenes are drawn out for way too long. Some of the characters aren't bad, but Spartacus himself is bland and dull. While there is an impressive battle toward the end, the actual fighting is very stiff and staged.

This movie is simply not as good as everyone says it is.

Rating:
Summary: Good for a rainy day
Review: My history teacher had my class view this film to go along with our unit on ancient Rome. It is quite good, although sometimes the sets are tacky and some of the acting is rather, um, ludicrous. But overall it a very entertaining film that, while it may not give an accurate portrait of ancient Rome, is rather stirring. That last scene packs a pretty hefty emotional punch.

Rating:
Summary: Hmmm ... will the real Spartacus please stand up?
Review: I have very fond memories of this movie from when I first discovered it some 5 years ago. But on recently viewing it for a second time, somehow the lustre had come off. I'm not absolutely clear why, but I'll take a crack at it.

It's a good story, but of course it is seriously out of sync with what we know of the period. That certainly wouldn't be enough to condemn it outright, but in this particular case the divergence is rather marked. The movie paints in broad, black-and-white strokes a historical period and event that was decidedly grey, and does so with a characteristicly American lack of introspection. Perhaps because it is so obviously "souped-up" history, the plot and characters by themselves are not as vivid as they might be (although most of the acting is absolutely first-rate throughout, with the possible exception of Kirk Douglas himself). If you want an anti-Slavery military epic, Edward Zwick's Glory is much more compelling, not to mention true, and has an American-ness that is an asset rather than a liability.

Still, it's sad that they don't make movies like this anymore. It has a grand sweep and historical flavor that is easy to watch and even at 3+ hours, doesn't drag. If the plot lacks serious historical grounding, they make it up in some of the details. Watching the checkerboard legions form up and perform the manipular extension is remarkable in its authenticity. That Hollywood managed to get this part right is extrordinary (and, to be honest, makes you wonder why they didn't apply the same attention to detail to, say, the character of Spartacus - a rather complex and mysterious historical figure).

So I'm not sure. Which Spartacus is the real Spartacus, the one I enjoyed the first time or found somewhat disappointing 5 years later? Probably the latter, but regardless I'd reccomend it as excellent value as a rental but not a movie you need to own.

Rating:
Summary: Timeless
Review: Spartacus isn't a movie about the Romans. this is story that reflects the generation and it's beliefs. It's a look at a generation ( the late 50's) that was beginning to change it's attitudes towards race and the sexes. but it wasn't yet ready for a story set in the present. In Spartacus they found a setting so far removed that nobody would feel offended. Gladiator reflects the worries and feeling of our generation not the Romans of the first century A.D. and the same is true of Spartacus. The Romans are portrayed not as the monsters that some reviewers seem to think is required. They are shown as a powerful, ruthless, but ultimately Human.To them slaves are simply property and when one's property acts up then action is required. No I found this movie to be very effective in it's message as well as for its entertainment value. It's the timeless tale of the struggle for human dignity and freedom in the face of overwhelming odds. In Spartacus it isn't yet time and the army of Slaves are defeated. It's a marvelous movie with the sweeping grandeur and larger then life performances required of all the great hollywood epics. But unlike so many of the Sand and Sandal epics this movie is free of the hipocriscy that came out of so many of the other fifties epics. I can see much of Spartacus in the new Roman epic Gladiator and I enjoyed that movie equally.

Rating:
Summary: Kubrick's Film Making Genius
Review: This movie is worth viewing just for the long shot near the conclusion, showing a seemingly endless row of crucified slaves stretching for miles along the road. An incredible, unforgettable, startling image. Although Kubrick detested the way this movie was edited (and there ARE some cornball 50s cliches in it) shots like the aforementioned prove that there's still a lot of Kubrick's film making genius on display in Spartacus.

Rating:
Summary: The Original "Gladiator" Movie Still Rules!
Review: This lavish and well-photographed and produced spectacular was filmed in the wake of a number of similar Hollywood blockbuster epics like "Ben-Hur", yet wound up becoming a much more popular success with much more enduring appeal than its predecessors. One can safely shelf the series of formula flicks that followed in its wake (especially after the success of "Hercules", with Steve Reeves)in favor of this much more substantial and much more painstakingly produced effort. Kirk Douglas is simply magnificent as the slave/gladiator turned by circumstance into a revolutionary leader, and the rest of the cast is stellar, as well, in this loosely-adapted paen to the epic legends of Spartacus, legends having some basis in historical fact. This particular epic, wonderfully directed by Stanley Kubrick, marked the beginning of a rather stormy and uneven relationship with Douglas, who in fact provided Kubrick with some much needed breaks in route to his stellar career. They also collaborated on "Paths of Glory". The movie is well acted and well scripted, the cinematography is absolutely wonderful. The net effect of the movie is to masterfully recreate the world of long ago and far away in the best movie tradition, and as well as been accomplished either before or since. I highly recommend the movie, although the sound in this DVD version is less than perfect, you will be so enthralled by the views and action you will hardly notice the just passable quality of the sound. Enjoy!

Rating:
Summary: MOVING, MAJESTIC
Review: Forget the trumped up digital hocus pocus of the empty-headed Gladiator...this Roman epic, directed with care and detail by Kubrick, packs a powerful emotional wallop, and will linger in your heart and mind for a long time after you enter its world. The recreation of time and place is so real you can smell it, and the performances are uniformly superb and heart-wrenching, particularly the matinee idol masculinity of Kirk Douglas. The musical score sweeps you away. I love this movie for all of its daring, its powerful message and its human spirit. This one will last forever.

Rating:
Summary: Not typical Kubrick, but good
Review: Its really not a bad film, but after watching I can see , compared with the rest of his films, why he disowned this film. I mean working with actors like Douglas and Olivier, and their respective egos, Kubrick at this unproven point in his career had very little chance of making this film truly his own. This is a Kirk Douglas movie, not Kubrick (which has been often pointed out) I thought the story was basically good and kept me interested the whole 3+ hours. The weaknesses were the many over acted mushy scenes with Spartacus and Verinia, and a few other scenes that obviously tried to portray goodness and decency, but sometimes its SO corny you just have to shake your head and take a quick, deep breath. I mean come one, there's a limit to how moral you can be when fighting a war! And, despite what people say I thought the music score was not that good. It was a bit TOO dramatic. I mean, Spartacus could stub his pinky, and we'd get BA DA DUUUMMMM, DA DA DUMMM! But, it is still deserving of repeated viewings, just dont expect 2001 or Clockwork Orange, expect a 40 year old Braveheart shot within the film codes and technology of the time.