- Awards
- 5
I rewatched Cleopatra this Easter, after last seeing it when Liz died which is a long time ago now. I have to say it was a thoroughly enjoyable night and the epic 4 hours did not feel like a drag. I tried to make the evening an event, using the Intermission to stock up on cake and sodas. 
Such a grand movie calls for it.
I agree the movie itself gets so much trashing because of the disastrous epic filming and all the drama behind the scenes. Even Liz was too harsh in her statements, saying she had to vomit during the premiere or something like that. Why? What exactly was so bad about the movie? It's not Ben Hur, but it sure is better than many other religious epics of the era.
Speaking of casting, I do have to say I don't find Burton very attractive in this. I even wonder what Taylor saw in him at this moment in time. I find Rex Harrison to be somehow sexier and his performance was the only one nominated for an Academy Award for a reason. But then again, Burton looks absolutely dashing in The VIPs, made in 1963. I can imagine Brando as Mark Antony once again strutting around in Roman outfits which would be a treat. He was at his peak, looks wise, in early 60s and would do a fine acting job I'm sure. I love him in both Mutiny on the Bounty and One-Eyed Jacks, from this period.
I would love to see the 6 hour version, with all the cut dialogue and scenes it would probably make the film even better. BUT, even if Cleopatra was a truly terrible movie, dialogue, story and acting wise, it would still be worth seeing because of the sheer effort it took to film such an epic, grand movie, with all the locations, sets, costumes, extras and all the lives, nerves and sanity that went into it. They truly don't make them like this anymore.
Such a grand movie calls for it.I agree the movie itself gets so much trashing because of the disastrous epic filming and all the drama behind the scenes. Even Liz was too harsh in her statements, saying she had to vomit during the premiere or something like that. Why? What exactly was so bad about the movie? It's not Ben Hur, but it sure is better than many other religious epics of the era.
Speaking of casting, I do have to say I don't find Burton very attractive in this. I even wonder what Taylor saw in him at this moment in time. I find Rex Harrison to be somehow sexier and his performance was the only one nominated for an Academy Award for a reason. But then again, Burton looks absolutely dashing in The VIPs, made in 1963. I can imagine Brando as Mark Antony once again strutting around in Roman outfits which would be a treat. He was at his peak, looks wise, in early 60s and would do a fine acting job I'm sure. I love him in both Mutiny on the Bounty and One-Eyed Jacks, from this period.
I would love to see the 6 hour version, with all the cut dialogue and scenes it would probably make the film even better. BUT, even if Cleopatra was a truly terrible movie, dialogue, story and acting wise, it would still be worth seeing because of the sheer effort it took to film such an epic, grand movie, with all the locations, sets, costumes, extras and all the lives, nerves and sanity that went into it. They truly don't make them like this anymore.
