Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews24
EW-3's rating
A long time ago, I remember my high school English teacher telling us about this film, saying it was a very expensive bomb. Not having seen it at the time, I was under unable to understand why he said this; I just took his word for it. Now, finally, for the first time, I mustered the patience to watch this film from start to finish, and having seen it, I can fully appreciate what my teacher was talking about.
I gave it three stars because, on the positive side, is beautiful to look at. Specifically, the cinematography is very good. The sets are gorgeous (I especially liked the view of the Alexandria port), although there's so many spectacular sets that it becomes a distraction. The costumes are also beautiful, although again, there are too many of them (In one scene, Taylor and Burton change costumes three times. Isn't that overdoing it?).
Speaking of costumes, let me be blunt about something: Yes, Liz has got a great a chest. But is it necessary to show off her cleavage so many times in so many provocative outfits? That also becomes distracting, and helps to make this film into a parody. By the way, for those of us familiar with the legend of how Cleopatra died, and just where on her anatomy that deadly asp supposedly bit her, why aren't Liz's considerable assets shown off at that last critical moment? They are entirely ignored in that scene, and considering the "build up" we are treated to throughout the whole film, the climax comes as a let-down (puns intended).
My biggest gripe with this movie is that it is horribly acted, with performances that are much, much too over-the-top. The best performance is that of Harrison, who seems to restrain himself from displaying unnecessary emotions and presents us with a character that is at least SOMEWHAT convincing.
Not so with many of the other cast members. The two other principle actors (Taylor and Burton), and even some of the lesser characters (e.g., Martin Landau), engage in so much screaming and yelling in this film, and at least half of the time, I can't even decipher exactly what they are yelling about. The movie surely wants us to get caught up in the actors' emotions, but it's impossible to do so, as the story and the dialogue are not at all believable.
That brings me to another big problem with Cleopatra, which is the script. It's all over the damn place. Right from the very first scene, the dialogue is hard to follow. The writers (and I understand there were a lot of them) seem intent to cover every detail they can imagine connected with this story. But failing to separate what we need to know from what we can do without, we are forced to wade through a talkative mess in order to follow the story.
And that leads to a third big problem with Cleopatra: It's long, talky, and downright boring. If you have four plus hours to kill (and I will add that I had to spend considerably more time than that, as I kept falling asleep and had to back it up to the places where I would nod off) you might want to watch this. But if you have something much more important to do like scrubbing the floors or mowing the lawn, you're better off doing that. Sorry, Taylor and Burton fans, but that's how I see it.
I gave it three stars because, on the positive side, is beautiful to look at. Specifically, the cinematography is very good. The sets are gorgeous (I especially liked the view of the Alexandria port), although there's so many spectacular sets that it becomes a distraction. The costumes are also beautiful, although again, there are too many of them (In one scene, Taylor and Burton change costumes three times. Isn't that overdoing it?).
Speaking of costumes, let me be blunt about something: Yes, Liz has got a great a chest. But is it necessary to show off her cleavage so many times in so many provocative outfits? That also becomes distracting, and helps to make this film into a parody. By the way, for those of us familiar with the legend of how Cleopatra died, and just where on her anatomy that deadly asp supposedly bit her, why aren't Liz's considerable assets shown off at that last critical moment? They are entirely ignored in that scene, and considering the "build up" we are treated to throughout the whole film, the climax comes as a let-down (puns intended).
My biggest gripe with this movie is that it is horribly acted, with performances that are much, much too over-the-top. The best performance is that of Harrison, who seems to restrain himself from displaying unnecessary emotions and presents us with a character that is at least SOMEWHAT convincing.
Not so with many of the other cast members. The two other principle actors (Taylor and Burton), and even some of the lesser characters (e.g., Martin Landau), engage in so much screaming and yelling in this film, and at least half of the time, I can't even decipher exactly what they are yelling about. The movie surely wants us to get caught up in the actors' emotions, but it's impossible to do so, as the story and the dialogue are not at all believable.
That brings me to another big problem with Cleopatra, which is the script. It's all over the damn place. Right from the very first scene, the dialogue is hard to follow. The writers (and I understand there were a lot of them) seem intent to cover every detail they can imagine connected with this story. But failing to separate what we need to know from what we can do without, we are forced to wade through a talkative mess in order to follow the story.
And that leads to a third big problem with Cleopatra: It's long, talky, and downright boring. If you have four plus hours to kill (and I will add that I had to spend considerably more time than that, as I kept falling asleep and had to back it up to the places where I would nod off) you might want to watch this. But if you have something much more important to do like scrubbing the floors or mowing the lawn, you're better off doing that. Sorry, Taylor and Burton fans, but that's how I see it.
Just saw this for the first time, and thought it was well done. I was raised a Catholic, but stopped going to mass in my early 20s. I later converted to the Episcopal Church ("Catholic Lite" as it is sometimes known) in my 30s, when our children were born. I like the Episcopal Church very much because it has all the trappings of the RCC, but does not seem to be a cesspool of mean nuns or (at least I've never seen it) child-abusing priests.
I can very much relate to this documentary, as it is 100% right in how the RCC indoctrinates children from a very young age about how they have the monopoly on virtue, and how you have no chance at salvation without them, even though there is not one word in the Bible to support such an idea. I must add, however, that it took me a long time to get past that "One True Church" mantra we would hear in Sunday school. The RCC is a very well-established institution that preys on naïve and dependent people. Walking away from it is not easy.
I believe that is how the abuse starts. The RCC parishioners (mostly working class) learn to be obedient to the Church and clergy. From there, it's easy for clergy with the tendency for pedophilia and ill intent to find their victims.
I myself never experienced such abuse (thank God), but there WAS a priest in my parish who years later was charged with abusing several boys. Once at around age 14 or so, I was at a party with family and some other parishioners, and this priest happened to be there. At one point, he playfully poked me in the belly and say "Hey, good-looking!". It was a harmless gesture, but upon reflection, it was not surprising to learn years later that this same priest would be charged with sexually abusing minors.
I very much like how this documentary revealed this ugly story, and I very much hope and pray the main subject of this documentary finds peace with himself.
I can very much relate to this documentary, as it is 100% right in how the RCC indoctrinates children from a very young age about how they have the monopoly on virtue, and how you have no chance at salvation without them, even though there is not one word in the Bible to support such an idea. I must add, however, that it took me a long time to get past that "One True Church" mantra we would hear in Sunday school. The RCC is a very well-established institution that preys on naïve and dependent people. Walking away from it is not easy.
I believe that is how the abuse starts. The RCC parishioners (mostly working class) learn to be obedient to the Church and clergy. From there, it's easy for clergy with the tendency for pedophilia and ill intent to find their victims.
I myself never experienced such abuse (thank God), but there WAS a priest in my parish who years later was charged with abusing several boys. Once at around age 14 or so, I was at a party with family and some other parishioners, and this priest happened to be there. At one point, he playfully poked me in the belly and say "Hey, good-looking!". It was a harmless gesture, but upon reflection, it was not surprising to learn years later that this same priest would be charged with sexually abusing minors.
I very much like how this documentary revealed this ugly story, and I very much hope and pray the main subject of this documentary finds peace with himself.
Very interesting film, and wonderful performances by Philip Seymour Hoffman, Viola Davis, and Amy Adams. But the real kudos have to go to Meryl Streep (raised as a Presbyterian, BTW), who must have summoned into her body the spirits of 3 or 4 nuns I had known during my childhood. In a word, she had complete command of that role, right down to the very last rosary bead. Anyone who has been raised a Roman Catholic like I was will know precisely what I'm talking about. Everything she said and did - her demeanor, her tone of voice, her take-charge attitude, her occasional fury, her sauciness, her sense of suspicion, her intimidating stares, her righteousness, even her sardonic humor - reminded one of a real nun. I haven't read anything on how she prepared for this film but I'm going to guess she closely observed several clergy at length; she must have done so in order to get her role down so accurately. What a terrific actress she is!
But I have one small complaint about this movie, and that has to do with the costumes. Where in the world did they get the idea that nuns wore bonnets? I've never seen that, not once. Perhaps that might have been the case 150 years ago or in some places in Europe, I really don't even know, but definitely not in NYC during the 1960s, which was where and when this film supposedly took place. Someone should have done a little more research on that one.
But I have one small complaint about this movie, and that has to do with the costumes. Where in the world did they get the idea that nuns wore bonnets? I've never seen that, not once. Perhaps that might have been the case 150 years ago or in some places in Europe, I really don't even know, but definitely not in NYC during the 1960s, which was where and when this film supposedly took place. Someone should have done a little more research on that one.