Julius Caesar
|
Our Price: $49.94 Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $33.84 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of Julius Caesar
Movie Review: The Glory of Rome!
Summary: 5 Stars
I think this is a very wonderful movie. It recreated the story of Juluis Caesar very well. Although I would have chosen different actors, the ones that were used did a very good job. There were a few historical mistakes though. The leader of the Gauls was acctually strangeled, not stabbed. Caesar was killed on the steps of the senate, not inside.
I would have liked to see more on Caesar's love affair with Cleopatra.
Movie Review: Showing this in class.
Summary: 5 Stars
I was happy to see another teacher used this video in class after reading the play with tenth graders. I thought it would be more interesting than watching the play, and the students could compare Caesar's actual life to what they read in Shakespeare's play.Movie Review: Julius Caesar
Summary: 5 Stars
This product was everything I expected! It was a great historical review of Julius Caesar's life before reading Shakespeare's play!Movie Review: Preserves the integrity of Caesar's story
Summary: 4 Stars
This movie is a good partayal of the life of Caesar. It is not as historically innaccurate as some may believe.
Caesar's early life is not well documented in history because he was not important. Granted, his uncle was Marius, but Marius had no plans for Caesar. Caesar's arrest and meeting with Sulla may not be recorded, but it is highly probable that it occurred. His father-in-law fled Sulla's men in Rome and Caesar may have had something to do with it, therefore Sulla would want to know. Crassus' absence is because he played no major role in Caesar's rise to power. His own wealth was more important. Crassus was commissioned to put down the slave revolt, but Pompey was called back anyway. At the final defeat of Spartacus, Crassus had already won the battle when Pompey arrived and killed most of the remaining rebels. He returned to Rome before Crassus, with prisoners, so there was no reason for anyone to beleive Crassus had really won the battle. When Crassus went to conquer Parthia, he was given the Cavalry by Rome, not Caesar.
This movie is not overly violent, unlike most modern depictions of ancient warfare. The filmakers choose to focus on the tactical expertise of Caesar, rather than his physical might. The point is not that his men fought, but rather that he placed them well. This movie portrays the battle order of the romans well. It also shows the difference in the method of waging war between Rome and Gaul. The Romans fight as a unit; well ordered and mobile. The Gauls use the brute force of their men whom, once committed, will either win, or retreat in disorder. This movie shows well the tactical difference between the Romans and Gauls.
The omission of the British campain is probably due to time constraints. This was most likely the time when Caesar realised he could not conquer the known world, as he promised in Cornelia's eulogy, unless he had control of Rome. The movie makes this turning point at Julia's death.
The filmakers did a good job melding the accounts of Plutarch, Caesar, and Shakespere, among others, to make this epic drama. All accounts from this time have their own bias, so one must be prudent in whom one believes. The use of extras to portray the two armies at Alesia is superb. The performance of Christopher Walkin as Cato, the last Republican, is wonderful. The speeches of Mark Antony and Caesar are both very well done. The difference of style is well shown. The deaths of Vercingetorix and Caesar have many historical grey areas, however, these are due to difference in accounts or lack thereof.
Overall this is a wonderful drama that none should miss!
If nothing else, this is Richard Harris' last film. How can you miss it?
Movie Review: Captures the spirit of late Republican Rome
Summary: 4 Stars
No one expects commercial films to portray ancient history accurately, and this is no exception. However, the film is largely true to the spirit of Rome at the end of the Republic, with outstanding sets and costumes.
As noted by other reviewers, much is condensed or omitted. The central figure of Crassus, whose patronage was essential to Caesar's rise, is entirely absent. In effect, Crassus is merged with Pompey in this film, and the triumvirate of Pompey/Crassus/Caesar is reduced to a partnership between Pompey and Caesar. Also omitted is any direct reference to Spartacus, and here his Slave Revolt is merged with Pompey's campaign to clear the Mediterranean of pirates. At a more personal level, the film omits all references to Caesar's philandering (which included the mother of Brutus) as well as his balding with advancing age. And in this film Caesar is murdered in the old Senate-house in the Forum, not the new complex built by Pompey outside the city walls.
On the positive side, Rome itself as depicted in the sets (mostly constructed in Malta, not digitally generated) is convincing: note that Rome in Caesar's time was largely built of brick and was not endowed with huge buildings or large open spaces. The military are also convincingly depicted, with the exception that the cavalry in the film use stirrups (but it is difficult today to find equestrian actors who can ride without stirrups). And there is much to please the sharp-eyed. For example, although the dialog does not mention Caesar's role as chief priest (Pontifex Maximus) and guardian of the Vestal Virgins, we see the Vestals officiating at his marriage to Calpurnia. And although the office of Consul is not really explained, we see the lectors and other paraphernalia in the background. Such details reward the careful observer.
I do not agree with other reviewers who have written that ancient Rome is better depicted in such blockbuster films as Ben Hur, Quo Vadis and Gladiator. All of these tend toward hyperbole in sets and spectacle. Gladiator is highly accurate in its recreation of the Coliseum, but not in the Forum and other oversized public buildings. Ben Hur and Quo Vadis exaggerate even more: in the time (mid first century CE) when these two films are set, almost none of the great public buildings whose ruins still stand in Rome had yet been constructed. The most accurate film portrayal of the heart of imperial Rome is in The Fall of the Roman Empire, which faithfully follows what we know of the layout of the Forum and the Capitol. But that was the city more than two centuries after Caesar. For a glimpse of the Rome of the first century BCE, I enjoyed this TNT film.