Édipo Rei: A Tragédia de um Rei

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.

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.

Understandably they wanted big names but movie actors aren't necessarily able to play ancient drama. Plummer and Palmer are struggling here, Welles on the other hand is surprisingly good.

'Oedipus Rex', the first of Sophocles' Theban trilogy, is rightly regarded as one of the masterworks of the human mind in terms of its construction and well-drawn characters.

Bringing Greek drama to the screen is fraught with difficulties not least of which is whether one makes it declamatory thereby alienating a modern audience or keeping it conversational and risking the loss of its grandeur. In this regard I think this version has achieved the perfect balance. The other problem is how to employ the Greek chorus and here alas director Philip Saville has been found wanting. The chorus of Theban elders has been dubbed by English thesps which is totally incongruous and the spectacle of Donald Sutherland speaking with the voice of Patrick Allen is utterly absurd.

There is no faulting the performances of the principals however. Ironically Christopher Plummer had recently worked with Saville on a television film of Hamlet, a character whose behaviour has often been linked to his having an 'Oedipus complex'. The role of Oedipus is extremely demanding and Plummer is splendid as a seemingly confident, self-satisfied ruler whose life begins to unravel when a prophecy made years before by a drunken guest becomes a horrifying reality. His physique and delivery puts one in mind of a younger Olivier. The part of Jocasta is difficult to cast as she has to look young enough to have borne Oedipus two young children but old enough to be his mother! Lili Palmer, still looking great in her late fifties, is ideal in every respect. Incest should definitely be kept in the family! Richard Johnson never disappoints and is excellent as Creon who assumes kingship following Oedipus' fall from grace. In the third play of the trilogy Creon's proud, implacable nature will bring him into conflict with Oedipus' rebellious daughter Antigone. Further gravitas is supplied by Orson Welles who does his thing as Tiresias the blind prophet and Cyril Cusack quietly steals his scenes as the Messenger who brings tidings which aren't altogether welcome. Nice to see Roger Livesey in one of his last film roles as the Shepherd.

The cinematography is by Walter Lassally, certainly no stranger to Greek terrain as he had previously shot 'Electra' and 'Zorba' for Michael Cacoyannis. One cannot but wonder how Cacoyannis himself would have handled this material. Mr. Saville's direction is capable but not particularly inspired and as mentioned earlier, the misjudged use of the chorus is not only aggravating but weakens the film immeasurably.

05/02/2021: Farewell Christopher Plummer. May flights of Angels sing thee to thy rest."