Édipo Rei: A Tragédia de um Rei

Christopher Plummer is Oedipus in this English-language version of Sophocles' play about fate fate and the cruelty of the Gods.

Plummer gives an intense performance as the man who murdered his father in what may be the earliest recorded instance of road rage, then married his mother unawares and thus became king of Thebes, carrying out willy-nilly the prophecy made at his birth. For more than two millennia this has been considered the greatest tragedy ever written, and under the direction of Philip Savile, with a cast that includes Lili Palmer, Cyril Cusack, Orson Welles, Roger Livesey, and Donald Sutherland, it remains a warning that we cannot evade our fate. DP Walter Lassally photographs Epirus as the plague-stricken city with a slow camera speed that bleaches the landscape near the limits of endurance.

An adaptation gifted with so many and precious virtues, from Christopher Plummer as powerful and , in same measure, so vulnerable Oedip, to monumental Tiresias proposed by Orson Welles and a Donald Sutherland as leader of choir , being a profound pleasant surprise.

But the top of film is the performance of trully inspired Lilli Pamer as impressive Jocasta.

It is a play known from childhood, who, starting with sophocles and the work of George Enescu, was one of sources of questions, doubts and games of perspectives about life from my early ages.

This play, including for location and for admirabe scenes of death of Laius, is just a gem.

Some critics of this movie denigrated the stylised performances and ancient setting, but the producers were trying to faithfully portray a play which is 2,500 years old. It is an important movie and I think the correct decision was made not to modernise it for contemporary audiences. I thought that Christopher Plummer did a superb job of portraying the doomed hero. His big dramatic acting style perfectly fitted the setting. We use the phrase "it's not a Greek tragedy" when someone is overdoing a drama in real life. We use that expression for a reason, Greek tragedies were epic stories of Gods and men not everyday episodes in a domestic soap opera. Therefore the acting style has to be appropriate to the subject. The entire cast were mostly excellent in their parts; Cyril Cussak, Orson Welles and Lilli Palmer were outstanding. As others have commented, why did they overdub Donald Sutherland's voice with Patrick Allen's? It was a distraction.

The most rewarding quality of this film is the fact that Sophocles is left untouched - there has been no cuts in the text, as the film follows the drama closely with meticulous fidelity. Another great asset is the stylishness, which is just perfect - bringing the spectator back to very ancient times of Greece, with a rugged landscape and no spectacular additions to the basics of Greek drama.

The actors are all outstanding. Lilli Palmer as the only woman makes perhaps the greatest impression, but all the others are perfect also, like Christopher Plummmer as Oidipus, Donald Sutherland as the chorus leader, Orson Welles as the blind prophet Teiresias and several others. It is very seldom you get the chance to see a Greek drama on film so perfectly genuine and faithful to the ancient genre of Greek tragedy.

Sophocles' ancient play "Oedipus Rex" is brought to the screen in this 1968 version, "Oedipus the King". The language is rather modern...which makes sense because the ancient Greek play was translated into English. However, the style of the film is much like an ancient Greek play...with choruses, stilted language and a dramatic style which has long passed. I know that some might be shocked to hear this, but I'd MUCH rather see a version of the story of Oedipus with a modern style and language...one which seems less like a 2500 year-old play. To heighten this ancient look, it was actually filmed at an ancient Greek ampitheater! This was cool BUT I think most others would feel the same way about wanting a more modern production, as the play is for a small, select sort of audience.

The film started poorly, with a blurry set of slide appearing on the screen along with the credits. It just looked cheap. As for the story itself, it is incredible that so many great actors are in it...with Christopher Plummer in the lead. Oddly, a young Donald Sutherland is in the film BUT he's dubbed with someone else's voice! Folks back in 1968 might not have noticed but the weird voice is jarring for folks watching today.

In some ways, this 1968 film is admirable, as they obviously tried to make something special. But it's also SLOW and DULL...which shouldn't be since the actually story itself if pretty cool. Only for select folks...and a film I did not particularly enjoy watching.