User reviews

My interest was raised as I was flipping through and saw the name Iphigenia. My name is Eugenia so I thought OK, lets see what this is. I am so glad I stayed on the channel. What a wonderful, wonderful story. Drama, sadness, some over the top acting but a wonderful time to be had. I watch this and it makes me sad for all the drivel the movie industry puts out and these beautiful little gems get passed over. Give Iphigenia a try and I hope you will enjoy it as much as I did. I have even gotten my children (27, 25, 20 and 17) to enjoy it. It starts slow, however, the drama builds and you will be drawn in to the story. Watching this lovely film made me want to shroud myself in more Greek tragedy and pathos.

Euripides was called by Aristotle 'the most tragic of poets'. The grittiness, tragic irony and psychological penetration of his plays proved to be of great appeal to director Michael Cacoyannis. He filmed a magnificent 'Electra' in 1961 with Greek actors but his 'Trojan Women' of 1971, despite a starry, international cast, is alas a monumental misfire. Six years later he has favoured once more an all Greek cast for 'Iphigenia' and has scored what can only be described as a palpable hit.

It actually lost out as Best Foreign Film at the Oscars to 'Madame Rosa' but so did 'A Special Day' and 'That Obscure Object of Desire' so no disgrace there.

The excellent screenplay by Cacoyannis has kept the structure of the original but has stripped everything down to the bare essentials. He has simplified the language and solved the eternal problem of how to interpolate the Greek Chorus by pretty well dispensing with it altogether.

The characters are not mythological icons but as played by Kostas Kazakos, Irene Papas and Tatiana Papamoschu we see Agamemnon, Clytaemnestra and Iphigenia depicted as flesh and blood characters buffeted by Fate. Papamoschu is only thirteen here but her performance shows astonishing maturity. The scene where she pleads with her father Agamemnon for her life before nobly accepting that she must be sacrificially slaughtered for the good of Greece is utterly heart-rending.

Cacoyannis has wisely dispensed with a scene in the original manuscript in which a messenger relates how the Goddess Artemis has substituted a deer for Iphigenia on the altar. It has long been considered that this scene has been tacked on by a hand other than that of Euripides and would in any case be unacceptable to a modern audience. The climax that Cacoyannis has devised is absolutely devastating, eminently filmic and heightens the tragic futility of Iphigenia's death. A brilliant conception.

Kazakos is superlative as a King who must sacrifice his beloved daughter in order to appease the 'thousand-headed monster' of the army that he needs to conquer Troy. What can one say of the stunning Irene Papas? Her character's journey from joy, to anguish and finally to hate is brilliantly conceived. Her final close up gives dreadful note of what is to come. In future years she will wreak a terrible revenge on her husband and in turn be murdered by her son. Oh well, every family has its ups and downs!

With Iphigenia, Mikhali Cacoyannis is perhaps the first film director to have successfully brought the feel of ancient Greek theatre to the screen. His own screenplay, an adaptation of Euripides' tragedy, was far from easy, compared to that of the other two films of the trilogy he directed. The story has been very carefully deconstructed from Euripides' version and placed in a logical, strictly chronological framework, better conforming to the modern methods of cinematic story-telling. Cacoyannis also added some characters to his film that do not appear in Euripides' tragedy: Odysseus, Calchas, and the army. This was done in order to make some of Euripides' points regarding war, the Church, and Government clearer. Finally, Cacoyannis' Iphigenia ending is somewhat ambiguous when compared to Euripides'.

The film was shot on location at Aulis. The director of photography, Giorgos Arvanitis, shows us a rugged but beautiful Greece, where since the Homeric days time seems to have stood still. He takes advantage of the bodies, the arid land, the ruins, the intense light and the darkness. The harshness of the landscape is particularly fitting to the souls of the characters. The camera uses the whole gamut of available shots, from the very long, reinforcing the vastness and desolation of the landscape, as well as the human scale involved, to the extreme close-ups, dissecting and probing deep into the soul of the tormented characters. In particular, the film's opening, with a bold, accelerating tracking shot along a line of beached boats, followed by an aerial view of the many thousands of soldiers lying listlessly on the beach, is a very effective means of communicating Agamemnon's awesome political and military responsibility.

No word but "sublime" can describe the stunning performances of Costa Kazakos (Agamemnon), Irene Papas (Clytemnestra), and Tatiana Papamoschou (Iphigenia). Kazakos and Papas embody the sublimity of the classical Greece tragedy. Kazakos' character is extremely down-to-earth, and his powerful look into the camera, more than his words, reveals the unbelievable torment tearing his soul. Irene Papas is the modern quintessence of classic Greek plays. In Iphigenia, she is terrible in her anguish, and even more so for what we know will be her vengeance. Tatiana Papamoskou, in her first role on the screen, is outstanding in her portray of the innocent Iphigenia, which contrasts with Kazakos' austere depiction of her father, Agamemnon.

Cacoyannis is faithful to Euripides in his representation of the other characters: Odysseus is a sly, scheming politician, Achilles, a vain, narcissistic warrior, Menalaus is self centered, obsessed with his honor, eager to be avenged, and to have his wife and property restored.

The costumes and sets are realistic: no Hollywood there. Agamemnon's quarters resembles a barn, he dresses, as do the others, in utilitarian, hand-woven, simple garb. Clytemnestra's royal caravan is made up of rough-hewn wooden carts.

The music is by the prolific contemporary music composer Mikis Theodorakis. Theodorakis' score intensifies the dramatic and cinematographic unfolding, reflects on the psychological aspect of the tragedy, and accentuates its dimensions and actuality.

This film and the story it narrates offer considerable insight into the lost world of ancient Greek thought that was the crucible for so much of our modern civilization. It teaches us much about ourselves as individuals and as social and political creatures. Euripides questions the value of war and patriotism when measured against the simple virtues of family and love, and reflects on woman's vulnerable position in a world of manly violence. In his adaptation of Euripides' tragedy, Cacoyannis revisits all of these themes in a modern, clear, and dramatic fashion.

The relationships governing the political machinations are clearly demonstrated: war corrupts and destroys the human soul to such an extent that neither the individual nor the group can function normally any longer. With the possible exception of Menelaus, whose honor has been tarnished by his own wife's elopement with her lover, everyone else has his own private motivation for going to war with Troy, which has nothing to do with Helen: the thirst for power (Agamemnon), greed (the army, Odysseus), or glory (Achilles). And so in a real sense, Helen became the WMD of the Trojan War. The war, stripped of all Homeric glamor and religious sanctioning, was just an imperialist venture, spurred primarily by the desire for material gain, all else being a convenient pretext.

Another conflict raised in the film is that between the Church and the State. Calchas, who represents the Church, feeling the challenge to his priestly authority and wishing to destroy Agamemnon for the insult to the Goddess he serves, tells him to sacrifice his daughter. In consenting to the sacrifice, the King comes closer to his moral undoing, but in refusing, loses his power over the masses (his army), who are brainwashed by religion. Of course, for Agamemnon, it's a game. The King must go along with the charade whether he honestly believes in the Gods or not, until he realizes, too late, that he has ensnared himself into committing a despicable filicide.

Is it a sacrifice or a murder, and how can we tell the difference between the two? By focusing on the violent and primitive horror of a human sacrifice--and, worst of all, the sacrifice of one's own child--Euripides/Cacoyannis creates a drama that is at once deeply political and agonizingly personal. It touches on a most complex and delicate ethical problem facing any society: the dire conflict between the needs of the individual versus those of the society. In the case of Iphigenia, however, as in the Biblical tale of Abraham and Isaac, the father is asked to kill his own child, by his own hand. What sort of God would insist on such payment? Can it be just or moral, even if divinely inspired? Finally, does the daughter's sacrificial death differ from the deaths of all the sons and daughters who are being sent to war? These are many deep questions raised by a two-hour film.

'Iphigenia' is the great achievement of Michael Cacoyannis. This masterful play is masterfully adapted for the screen and brought to life by a wonderful cast. Cacoyannis achieved the impossible. He managed to film a Greek tragedy to screen without losing its effectiveness and importance. A stellar greek cast helps him in this. Newcomer Tatiana Papamoschou is extremely impressive as Iphigenia. Equally impressive is Irene Papas ,who even though she sometimes seems over the top, it is very realistic. A wonderful Greek film, beautifully adapted and directed by Michael Cacoyannis, with an excellent music score by Mikis Theodorakis which is ideal in every scene.

P.S. Rumours say that the film lost the best foreign language film Oscar by only 1 vote!!!

This film was the first movie I ever saw and cried watching. It's an adaptation of the classic play by Euripides, Iphigenia at Aulis. The cast was wonderful, and the cinemotography was spectacular. The story of a young girl caught between her fears and the country's will, one cannot help but cry.

Although the recent re-telling of part of Homer's epic "Troy" with Brad Pitt was entertaining once, "Iphigenia" with the incandescent Irene Pappas is breathtaking. Unfolding in a natural setting with Greek actors speaking their own language lends such authenticity. A chance encounter with this film on one of DirecTV's many movie channels kept me interested in spite of my concentration problems. There is no glitter or "bling" in this movie, just a fabulously rich story impeccably told by actors so real one feels they are eavesdropping on a real family in turmoil. I think even Homer, if he really existed, would be proud of this telling.

JLH

I went into this without realizing it was a sort of prequel to the same director's THE Trojan WOMEN (1971), which I had just watched the previous day! Interestingly, while the latter details the aftermath of the famous (and much-filmed) war, this one deals with the little-known events that came immediately before the Greeks set sail to lay the city of Troy to waste forever! Despite the earlier effort's stellar cast, it is the inferior movie; actually, one actress appears in both, albeit in different (yet equally strong and emotional) parts: Irene Papas played Helen Of Troy in the first picture and Clytaemnestra, i.e. Helen's sister (and sister-in-law!), in the second. For the record, director and star had prior to these collaborated on ELECTRA (1962), yet another tragic chronicle related to The Trojan War: indeed, all originated as a trilogy of plays by Euripedes. Still, only THE Trojan WOMEN was shot in English, ELECTRA and IPHIGENIA being Greek productions through and through – with both finding themselves competing for the Best Foreign Language Film Oscar (the latter against the marvelous swan-song of my favorite auteur i.e. Luis Bunuel's THAT OBSCURE OBJECT OF DESIRE!).

Basically, the problem with THE Trojan WOMEN was that it had no real plot (and, therefore, did not exactly make for compulsive viewing despite the familiar and intriguing backdrop!) – it was just a succession of scenes in which various characters reflected back on their lives and how they were affected by the conflict that devastated an entire city: the fact that the latter was borne of lust (for a woman on one part and revenge on the other) gave way to much viciousness even between relatives and particularly amongst the ladies, once regal and proud but now reduced to wearing rags and wailing constantly! Conversely, I recall being impressed with ELECTRA, while IPHIGENIA is very much the essence of Greek tragedy – presenting as it does a narrative that involves deception tinged with irony, honor bound by duty, and bravery in the face of sacrifice.

Though, in this case, only Papas' name was known to me (I could not even read the other actors' and technicians' names because they were listed in the traditional Greek font!), all the principal characters were well-served, especially King Agaememnon – fraught with the dilemma of acceding to the will of the Gods (and his battle-hungry men, spurred on by an atypically ruthless Odysseus), which he is expected to placate by having his eldest daughter (the titular figure) killed, an act that would surely throw his domestic situation into turmoil! – and young Iphigenia herself, who grows from carefree girl to hopeful bride (with demi-god Achilles, though no mention of his extraordinary quality is made), goes through disbelief and desperation at what really awaits her, finally to emerge a valiant martyr.

The film – which starts off in a potentially off-putting manner, depicting both full-frontal male nudity and the slaughter of animals – displays a strong sense of place and time, an era marked by beliefs and laws that nowadays would, respectively, be deemed remarkably foolish and inordinately harsh. With respect to the latter, Iphigenia implores with the King to tell her why she must die for Helen's faults: if anything, it is the child that sprung from the latter's union with Menelaus, Agaememnon's brother, that should be forfeited. The ultimate twist, then, has the wind starting to blow (which is what the Greeks were praying for in the first place, so as to enable their fleet to finally sail for Troy) just as the heroine is rising the steps towards her sacrificial altar…but fate still decrees that the father does not reach his daughter in time to stop the needless shedding of innocent blood!

My only regret is that Michael Cacoyannis did not have a large enough budget to give his film the production values that one would expect from a story of such grandiose proportions. He does what he can with the resources available, and that is quite sufficient, but I would have loved to have seen life-size ships instead of small boats as the Greeks are waiting for their departure from Aulis. In the end, however, the artistic quality of his work is so high that nothing else matters. The Euripidean text is more than adequately translated into film. The actors are all superb. My joy at seeing their work is immense. Irene Papas has to be one of the greatest actors in the history of film. Her Clytemnestra makes one understand what lies in the future for Agamemnon. Eugène Ionesco loved this film. I can see why.

There is some great drama, especially in the later part, but this has far too much filler. Especially near the beginning, it is ponderous and boring, with too many long views of the cast of thousands, and long closeups of staring faces.

I fast forwarded over many sections which were nothing but people riding or walking or milling around, with no advancement of the story. The film would benefit with a good editing,

The acting was generally wooden and unconvincing and reminded me of a poor copy of a De Mille sword & sandal epic. Only Iphegenia herself, later in the film was a convincing, moving performance.

Subtle masterpiece and precise recreation of Euripides tragedy.

Delicate art and science of light's exploration. And a great casting.

Same atmosphere of old Greek period, same taste of secret, duty and sacrifice. And the splendid music.

But the power of film consist in Tatiana Papamoschou's androgen's. A delicate acting and form of cult . Noble homage for basic human values. And Irene Papas- part of his character.

Principal merit of film is gentle protection of skill. The tension of silence, the deep force of gestures.

So, "Iphigenia" is more of a beautiful movie. It is a gorgeous "memento mori".

I agree with all the accolades, I went through a box of tissues watching this film. It had a gritty authenticity and rang true in every way.

The question I'm about to raise represents a current sensibility regarding the treatment of animals. I had a very difficult time with the beginning slaughter of sheep and goats, and the dying deer with its pulsing neck and pooling blood as its life drained away was hideous.

This is the age of "no animals were hurt in the production of this move." Iphigenia was made in the late 70's before the advent of computer simulation. Was it possible to fake these animal deaths? Or were these animals slaughtered for art?

Michael Cacoyannis's Academy Award-nominated adaptation of Euripides's play brings out ancient Greece in all its splendor. "Ifigeneia" ("Iphigenia" in English) isn't for those of us with short attention spans. It lets the complexity, profundity and intensity play out every step of the way. Like Cacoyannis's previous adaptations of ancient Greek plays - "Electra" and "The Trojan Women" - this requires a willingness to understand the characters and their motivations. Exactly what a movie should be.

Very fine performances and intelligent direction, memorable photography and music, with only some wordy speeches near the end by the titular character not quite ringing true. But the last ambiguous shot make up for this, and the end restored the films power.

There are some films which you forget almost as soon as you've seen them and then others which seem to burn their way into your brain so that you can't get them off your mind after watching it.

Iphigenia 1977 is a Greek movie which takes a thoroughly grownup approach to it's filmmaking. We feel a sense of unstableness and tension right from the off as an army restlessly awaits the moment to depart from the beach and off to war. This army though seems more a rag tag bunch of hooligans at times, right away you are dropped into a setting that feels so real you could almost reach out and touch it. The film's location on in the arid and rugged country just adds to it's authentic look and the sun-drenched landscape is the perfect backdrop for this drama to unfold against. When the Greeks did comedy they really did comedy and when they did tragedy it was real tragedy. By cruel fate the gods it seems have ordained that in order for the winds to blow again and for the army to sail only the sacrifice of the King's daughter will do. What follows is two hours of agonising for the king and others as the tensions build and build and his army grows more and more impatient. In this one single story really is captured the whole futility of the Trojan War, a fight to recapture a woman now hated and despised anyway by her people in return for the sacrifice of so many so good. Helen is not present in this film but her absence looms large. This is no action film, not even for Achilles it's instead a superbly tense and tragic story played out in words and looks not swords. It puts the 2004 film to shame really with it's American Achilles, CGI boats and Hollywood ending. The acting in Iphigenia is some of the best you'll see. Everything looks so real, the costumes are simply done, mostly in white cloth or wool, it perfectly fits the bronze age setting. This is the kind of film which haunts you once you've seen it.

I love historical epics and mythology-based movies. Do not expect the action filled, romanticized hollywoodesque experience from this one, and it's all the better for it, though I do enjoy some sword fighting with monsters and naked chicks on stone altars.

It doesn't feel the need to over fantasize the setting and events, though it is based on a myth, and despite being a work directly connected to war, warriors and kings, the struggles are almost entirely "interior". In sum, it might be seen as a battle between individual thinking and tribalism, or "the common good". It's the dramatic writing that carries it and probably because it is a very faithful adaptation of the drama written by Euripides.

The characters carry the plot and not the other way around, and they are more dense, realistic and prone to empathy than most modern protagonists we see, even as they stand on opposing sides, which is a shame to say: these characters were written over 2000 years ago, conceptualized even earlier, and we refuse to build upon it, instead going for the tabula rasa protagonists and the one sided side characters. (Ok, maybe not so much with Odysseus in this particular depiction, though his arc in the mythos goes much further both in past and future. Here he's just plain unlikable, but then again, he did nothing good in the Iphigenia arc that I know of).

It's a very moving experience overall and I believe most people who give it a chance won't be indifferent in the end. It really sticks with you.

On a final note, you don't need to be familiar with the Greek Mythos to watch it at all - it might even be a good starting point - with the exception of a particular scene in the beginning. So, know this: Artemis, the goddes of hunting, doesn't like when you hunt her deer's. That being said...

What a great movie, an instant favorite. Go watch it. Now.

This film plays like an early 60s B movie, with poorly executed cinematography, inconsistent pacing, and mediocre acting. The reviews I've read mostly rave about how great the acting is and how beautiful the production, so maybe I expected too much, but even if I'd expected a bad movie, I would have been disappointed. This is not a good film.

I saw this film two years ago in my history class, and have rented it five times since then. Irene Papas leads a strong cast in this adaptation of Euripides' play "Iphigenia at Aulis". The beautiful cinematography adds the perfect tone to Papas' frantic search for clarity in a moral dilemma. Papas displays her great talent as an actress, playing the noble queen, the betrayed wife, and terrified mother. A great film.

I was taken to see this movie by my sister when I was only 7 years old. It's amazing how, at that early age, I was able to sympathize with the plot, the mood, the tragedy...Just now, through IMDb, I was able to find out what was the movie that had so greatly affected my childhood.

it is a masterpiece. sure, it is a subjective word and it is not easy to define it. it is a masterpiece because it has the science to give the emotion and spirit and tension of the play Iphigenia in Aulis. it is a masterpiece for the impressive performance of Irene Pappas. it is a great film for its unique, touching and admirable for the right manner to give life to a classic text. and for transform it in a personal story, beautiful and provocative and wise pledge for the discover of the roots of the right answer. a masterpiece. that is it.