O Colosso de Roma

This Italian sword and sandal film tells a story from the early history of Rome. It's about the transition to the Roman Republic. It was directed by Giorgio FERRONI, who also made WHO BREAKS...PAYS (1975) with Brad HARRIS and Giancarlo PRETE.

In 510 B. C. In the 4th century BC, the Etruscan king Lucius Tarquinius Superbus (Massimo SERATO) is expelled from Rome, which of course he cannot tolerate. He seeks support from his colleague King Porsenna (Roldano LUPI) in order to recapture Rome together. But the Romans are very motivated to defend their new freedom. The hardened fighter Gaius Mucius (Gordon SCOTT) sets out to eliminate the opposing kings. When that goes wrong, he holds his right fist into the fire and is henceforth nicknamed Scaevola (left-handed). Of course, that's not the end of the story, because Mucius, who is only left-handed, is still urgently needed...

After leaving Hollywood, Gordon SCOTT made one sword and sandal film after another at Rome's CINECITTA. This is quite successful in the numerous fight scenes, but offers too few surprises to be remembered for a long time. Gabriella PALLOTTA, Gabriele ANTONINI and Maria Pia CONTE can be seen in other roles.

This film was pretty good, for it's time it has a lot of sword fighting and action. I'm not sure what other reviewers are complaining about. Of course it won't have too much violence as it was made in the 60's and it isn't a horror film. Of course it won't have too much CGI because they didn't have the technology back then. Yes of course they won't have boobs because this isn't a porn film. The story is better than a lot of other Hollywood films made today, and more easy to follow, and makes sense. The costumes are awesome and much went into the armour, The 60's Italian film wasn't big enough to have too much lavish sets and it's fine as it is. A product of it's era. People complaining about the women's costumes are being silly now, because Roman women did used to dress this way and their hairstyles were the most gorgeous.

As far as the story goes, it's another one of those that had the potential to be good but falls flat on it's own script. Cinematography is ordinary, choppy at times. Directing is questionable, some of the shots are really bad. Acting seems okay, I can't hear their real voices it's originally in Italian and it's dubbed it into English but as far as I can tell the acting is fine. The voice actors did okay with the dubbing.

It's just flat, drab. It's not bad at all but really needed a bit more action to "dress it up". What action there is in the film is fine.

Once again we have out of this world costumes for the men, the Roman soldiers mainly (as usual). Standard stuff on the women. There are some cool prop weapons as with all peplum films.

4/10

Among Italian peplums of the period around 1960, there were some concerned with Roman legend, including "Coriolano, eroe senza patria", which was also helmed by Giorgio Ferroni. "Il colosso di Roma" is another example.

After having overthrown their king, Tarquinius Superbus (Massimo Serato), Rome is a young republic. Tarquinius tries to regain his throne with the military assistance of the Etruscan king, Porsenna (Roldano Lupi). Film sets in with Romans suffering from hunger, and top-notch soldier Mucius first securing the arrival of a corn transport, then deciding to kill Porsenna. In the king's camp he kills the wrong man, is captured, but proves his boldness by voluntarily burning his right hand in an open flame. The tiny, but crucial story about Roman bravery, which originally has a noble youngster as the failing killer, is generously embellished and furnished with a muscular experienced military leader as Mucius instead, played by ex-Tarzan Gordon Scott.

As the story progresses, it is interwoven with another heroic character from Latin legend, Cloelia, who is presented as Mucius' fiancée. She is among the hostages produced to secure the peace with Porsenna, but organizes the escape across the River Tiber when they find themselves betrayed. Her rôle is performed by one of the countless second-rate beauties of Italian screens, Gabriella Pallotta.

Although it may be deemed interesting to illustrate a national saga of yore, the film's pathetic hero-worship seems out of date for the mid-sixties. Still, monumental adventures were fashionable, and Italy's writers happy with any adaptable material. It is almost surprising how much of the legend's original idea can be recognized.

Expectations of a grand epic, as nurtured by the heavily orchestrated opening credits of nearly three minutes, are not at all lived up to by the following 82 (in the version I saw) minutes. Achievements are hardly average in all categories, although cinematography (Augusto Tiezzi) and score (Angelo Francesco Lavagnino) come from peplum's most experienced artists. Not even its best-hated villain, Massimo Serato, is really credible as Tarquinius. Fighting scenes are well staged, although some of the material seems to be taken from other films, too.

In the U.S., very few films have been made about Rome that were not set in the time of Julius Caesar or shortly thereafter. Hollywood's sword and sandal epics mostly have a Christian theme, which makes it difficult to get into earlier Roman history (Spartacus was probably the first exception to this rule, and encountered some resistance in Hollywood because it did not have Jesus in it).

It's interesting to see at least one picture that not only takes place before the time of Caesar and Christ, but is set when Rome was only one city among many on the Italian peninsula, and had just ousted the hated King Tarquin and formed the Republic.

However, this is not a historical film; it's peplum, and while the production values aren't rock bottom, the acting and characterizations are cardboard. I can only imagine what the dialogue was like in Italian, but with wooden English dubbing it's very campy. I got a few good laughs out of it at first.

I haven't seen many films of this genre, having missed most of the Hercules movies of the 60s. It's amusing up to a point, but as the film goes on, it gets somewhat boring.

One thing's for sure: if I'd seen this movie when I was ten years old, I would have loved it. At that age, I went for anything with Romans and swordfights in it. So at least, this flick brought back some childhood memories.