Queen Cleopatra VII of Egypt experiences both triumph and tragedy as she attempts to resist the imperial ambitions of Rome.Queen Cleopatra VII of Egypt experiences both triumph and tragedy as she attempts to resist the imperial ambitions of Rome.Queen Cleopatra VII of Egypt experiences both triumph and tragedy as she attempts to resist the imperial ambitions of Rome.
- Won 4 Oscars
- 6 wins & 13 nominations total
Grégoire Aslan
- Pothinus
- (as Gregoire Aslan)
Jacqueline Chan
- Lotos
- (as Jacqui Chan)
Featured reviews
There will never be a movie quite like CLEOPATRA again when you consider when it was made. While James Cameron has given us TITANIC and AVATAR which surpassed CLEOPATRA in expense and certainly in box office and Peter Jackson has mined the works of J. R. R. Tolkein with great success, CLEOPATRA was the green light for that type of film and it's still shining brightly after 60 years. In fact the film looks better today than it did in 1963. Part of the reason for that is the fact that now we can see it in the version which is close to what writer-director Joseph L. Manciewicz (ALL ABOUT EVE) wanted us to see.
Two separate love stories contained in two 2 hour films. Part 1 - CAESAR & CLEOPATRA and Part 2 - ANTONY & CLEOPATRA. Manciewicz certainly didn't lack chutzpah for taking on George Bernard Shaw in the first film and Shakespeare in the second. With the help of a once in a lifetime cast of American and British actors, Elizabeth Taylor at her loveliest, Rex Harrison at his most regal, and Richard Burton at his most powerful, the film manages to both entertain and enthrall in equal measure.
After seeing this 50th Anniversary Edition, I was surprised at how compelling it was. Unbelievable grandeur, eye-popping costumes, magnificent widescreen photography, an effective music score, and at least a dozen memorable performances that bring the literate script to life. After CLEOPATRA's premiere at 248 minutes, Fox cut the film to 192 minutes to increase showings and a lot of important details were lost. Today a two or even three part release would have been pre-ordained (think LORD OF THE RINGS or THE HOBBIT).
This 50th Anniversary DVD (and Blu-Ray) restores the premiere version and shows Elizabeth Taylor at the top of her game. People always complain how she dragged Burton down but I think it was the other way around for she was rarely this good again and never as beautiful as she is here. If you've never seen CLEOPATRA uncut then you really need to. It comes from an age when Hollywood epics had something to say as well as something to show off. While the Blu-Ray is a knockout, this DVD is a close second and can be played on more devices. It's also usually available at a better price and loaded with special features as well...For more reviews visit The Capsule Critic.
Two separate love stories contained in two 2 hour films. Part 1 - CAESAR & CLEOPATRA and Part 2 - ANTONY & CLEOPATRA. Manciewicz certainly didn't lack chutzpah for taking on George Bernard Shaw in the first film and Shakespeare in the second. With the help of a once in a lifetime cast of American and British actors, Elizabeth Taylor at her loveliest, Rex Harrison at his most regal, and Richard Burton at his most powerful, the film manages to both entertain and enthrall in equal measure.
After seeing this 50th Anniversary Edition, I was surprised at how compelling it was. Unbelievable grandeur, eye-popping costumes, magnificent widescreen photography, an effective music score, and at least a dozen memorable performances that bring the literate script to life. After CLEOPATRA's premiere at 248 minutes, Fox cut the film to 192 minutes to increase showings and a lot of important details were lost. Today a two or even three part release would have been pre-ordained (think LORD OF THE RINGS or THE HOBBIT).
This 50th Anniversary DVD (and Blu-Ray) restores the premiere version and shows Elizabeth Taylor at the top of her game. People always complain how she dragged Burton down but I think it was the other way around for she was rarely this good again and never as beautiful as she is here. If you've never seen CLEOPATRA uncut then you really need to. It comes from an age when Hollywood epics had something to say as well as something to show off. While the Blu-Ray is a knockout, this DVD is a close second and can be played on more devices. It's also usually available at a better price and loaded with special features as well...For more reviews visit The Capsule Critic.
Once again I have watched the complete Cleopatra (or at least the complete Cleopatra available). In addition, because I watched the DVD version of the movie, I also was able to view the outstanding documentary "Cleopatra: The Film that Changed Hollywood". And, once again, I am all but overwhelmed by the movie. Elizabeth Taylor may very well be one of the most under-rated actresses of the last fifty years; her public private life has always overshadowed her acting ability. But it is not her notoriety that puts her in the same league with other two time Oscar winners like Jane Fonda, Sally Field, Tom Hanks, etc. In Cleopatra, as in George Stevens' Giant, she runs the gamut from adolescent to matriarch, from calculating queen to devastated lover, and rings every bell in between. But her performance alone does not make the movie. Not only is she supported by Burton, in one of his best screen performances, and Rex Harrison, in one of his best, Taylor's old friend Roddy McDowall gives the performace of his lifetime (how sad that a clerical error cost him his Oscar); we see a young Martin Landau, a young Carroll O'Connor, a young Jean Marsh, give performances worthy of anything they've ever put on screen since. The documentary points out that the original Mankiewicz cut of the film was 6 1/2 hours long and that Fox is currently trying to reassemble the film as originally cut. If they ever succeed in doing so, I would stand in line to see it in theatres and buy it on DVD the first chance I got. As a history freak, it more than satisfies; as a fan of brilliant acting, it wows! Everyone should see it at least once!
I'm pleased to read all the positive reviews of this film, which I first saw when it was released and have seen perhaps five times since. In 1963 the movie was almost universally condemned by critics, and I was just about the only person who admitted that I loved it. Part of that, though, had to do with the Taylor/Burton affair and the scandal it created. Liz Taylor in 1963 was not only considered the most beautiful woman in America, she was also thought of as a serial home-breaker and a real threat to the morals of the American Republic.
Why? I don't agree with many positive comments about the acting. Taylor and Burton were not too bad, but they didn't handle the pompous dialogue as well as Rex Harrison, Hume Cromyn, Martin Landau and especially Roddy McDowell, who was perfection itself and, I believe, accurately portrayed as the very young, ambitious and unscrupulous, but brilliantly intelligent Octavian (later the emperor Augustus).
Sure, some of the dialogue stinks, and the movie seems too long (perhaps because so much of it was cut to fit into fours hours). Nevertheless, for sheer magnificence and recreation of a most critical time in the history of two vanished high civilizations it has never been, and probably never will be, surpassed.
Why? I don't agree with many positive comments about the acting. Taylor and Burton were not too bad, but they didn't handle the pompous dialogue as well as Rex Harrison, Hume Cromyn, Martin Landau and especially Roddy McDowell, who was perfection itself and, I believe, accurately portrayed as the very young, ambitious and unscrupulous, but brilliantly intelligent Octavian (later the emperor Augustus).
Sure, some of the dialogue stinks, and the movie seems too long (perhaps because so much of it was cut to fit into fours hours). Nevertheless, for sheer magnificence and recreation of a most critical time in the history of two vanished high civilizations it has never been, and probably never will be, surpassed.
Cleopatra is a film of myths.
A massively troubled production combined with the extraordinary love affair between Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton made for plenty of hype.
But what really matters nearly 40 years on is the film itself.
At this distance it is possible to see the film for what it is. A grand example of the final flowering of Hollywood.
In 1963 it seemed old fashioned compared to the excitement of European cinema and what the critics perceived as new (many of their favourite films of that era now just seem dated and pretentious).
But Cleopatra grows in stature with time.
It is far from flawless. And certainly the second half is somehow not right. Whether the missing two hours will reclaim this part of the film is yet to be seen.
But compared with Gladiator or similar modern epics, Cleopatra is a brilliant film with an intelligent script, stunning design, masterly and beautiful cinematography in 70mm (which sure beats 35mm and does justice to the intricate sets and design), an evocative and effective musical score and superb costumes and makeup.
The big three, Taylor, Burton and Harrison are extremely good and in the case of Harrison, who has many of the best lines, brilliant.
The supporting cast and especially Roddy McDowall are equally excellent.
Cleopatra may not be a masterpiece but it is a superbly crafted and beautiful film.
If it fails, it fails because of our expectations.
Sit back, put your feet up and luxuriate in a quality of film-making that you simply don't see today! .... but I have always wondered what Miss Taylor thinks of this extraordinary film?
A massively troubled production combined with the extraordinary love affair between Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton made for plenty of hype.
But what really matters nearly 40 years on is the film itself.
At this distance it is possible to see the film for what it is. A grand example of the final flowering of Hollywood.
In 1963 it seemed old fashioned compared to the excitement of European cinema and what the critics perceived as new (many of their favourite films of that era now just seem dated and pretentious).
But Cleopatra grows in stature with time.
It is far from flawless. And certainly the second half is somehow not right. Whether the missing two hours will reclaim this part of the film is yet to be seen.
But compared with Gladiator or similar modern epics, Cleopatra is a brilliant film with an intelligent script, stunning design, masterly and beautiful cinematography in 70mm (which sure beats 35mm and does justice to the intricate sets and design), an evocative and effective musical score and superb costumes and makeup.
The big three, Taylor, Burton and Harrison are extremely good and in the case of Harrison, who has many of the best lines, brilliant.
The supporting cast and especially Roddy McDowall are equally excellent.
Cleopatra may not be a masterpiece but it is a superbly crafted and beautiful film.
If it fails, it fails because of our expectations.
Sit back, put your feet up and luxuriate in a quality of film-making that you simply don't see today! .... but I have always wondered what Miss Taylor thinks of this extraordinary film?
I wasn't familiar with the fates of the famous figures Julius Caesar, Cleopatra and Mark-Antony so watching this served as an entertaining history lesson!
I chose to watch it as I enjoy the massive productions of the 50's/60's Hollywood Epics so am going through them all, and in that regard it didn't disappoint: Cleopatra's entrance into Rome a particular highlight.
Aside from the impressive production Rex Harrison & Liz Taylor were both a highly-watchable delight during the first two hours of this movie: charming, intelligent, commanding, and with a bite of agreeable humour. Their alliance, and the wider politics, were easy to follow. We got a dramatic ending to that first-half...I then waited a night before embarking on the last two hours...
...unfortunately the film then loses some steam: the heavy focus on Mark-Antony is a burden as his character doesn't make sense: he doesn't have the presence of Caesar so it's difficult for the viewer to be sold on his apparent grand reputation, and near every decision he makes is the wrong one. There's no sense this character is particularly special, only that we're told he is. Richard Burton himself seems confused as to how to play him. There's also too much focus on soap-opera love between him & Cleopatra, which badly affects pacing and dilutes the impressive character Cleopatra had in the first-half. Liz Taylor has less to work with, as now she's just playing a forlorn damsel rather than the quick-witted and clear-headed leader of the first-half.
The intention of the script may be to show Mark-Antony as a poor Caesar substitute, but this it turns out is to the detriment of the character the movie is named after.
Another issue the film's latter-half has is an unclear narrative: in one scene Cleopatra & Mark-Antony will be in bed together whispering sweet nothings, in the next it's years later, they're a thousand miles apart and Mark-Antony has married someone else. The rise & motives of Octavian are also not presented with clarity yet he is instrumental to the fates of the main characters.
The ending had potential to be powerful but felt underwhelming: Richard Burton dialled the ham up to 11, and for Cleopatra one scene was too ambiguous (regarding Cleopatra's son, a blink-and-you'll-miss-it scene of him in a cart, and a glimpse of a certain ring) for the viewer to then readily accept her fate. An additional, or clearer, scene or dialogue would've polished that up and improved the impact of the ending.
I'd score the first-half with Caesar & Cleopatra a good 7/10: both interesting characters who make sense, and this half has the entrance into Rome: the movie's strongest scene. The second-half is a 5/10: a bit of a slog with a diluted Cleopatra, an unimpressive Mark-Antony, and inconsistent pacing. But still fairly watchable with a few strong scenes involving boats!
Overall 6/10: recommended only for those interested in the Epic productions of the 50's/60's, or for Roman/Cleopatra history nerds. There's not much in the way of egyptology here, and for general movie fans looking for an entertaining historical 'Romp 'n Romance' this movie may be too sluggish and illogical to enjoy.
I chose to watch it as I enjoy the massive productions of the 50's/60's Hollywood Epics so am going through them all, and in that regard it didn't disappoint: Cleopatra's entrance into Rome a particular highlight.
Aside from the impressive production Rex Harrison & Liz Taylor were both a highly-watchable delight during the first two hours of this movie: charming, intelligent, commanding, and with a bite of agreeable humour. Their alliance, and the wider politics, were easy to follow. We got a dramatic ending to that first-half...I then waited a night before embarking on the last two hours...
...unfortunately the film then loses some steam: the heavy focus on Mark-Antony is a burden as his character doesn't make sense: he doesn't have the presence of Caesar so it's difficult for the viewer to be sold on his apparent grand reputation, and near every decision he makes is the wrong one. There's no sense this character is particularly special, only that we're told he is. Richard Burton himself seems confused as to how to play him. There's also too much focus on soap-opera love between him & Cleopatra, which badly affects pacing and dilutes the impressive character Cleopatra had in the first-half. Liz Taylor has less to work with, as now she's just playing a forlorn damsel rather than the quick-witted and clear-headed leader of the first-half.
The intention of the script may be to show Mark-Antony as a poor Caesar substitute, but this it turns out is to the detriment of the character the movie is named after.
Another issue the film's latter-half has is an unclear narrative: in one scene Cleopatra & Mark-Antony will be in bed together whispering sweet nothings, in the next it's years later, they're a thousand miles apart and Mark-Antony has married someone else. The rise & motives of Octavian are also not presented with clarity yet he is instrumental to the fates of the main characters.
The ending had potential to be powerful but felt underwhelming: Richard Burton dialled the ham up to 11, and for Cleopatra one scene was too ambiguous (regarding Cleopatra's son, a blink-and-you'll-miss-it scene of him in a cart, and a glimpse of a certain ring) for the viewer to then readily accept her fate. An additional, or clearer, scene or dialogue would've polished that up and improved the impact of the ending.
I'd score the first-half with Caesar & Cleopatra a good 7/10: both interesting characters who make sense, and this half has the entrance into Rome: the movie's strongest scene. The second-half is a 5/10: a bit of a slog with a diluted Cleopatra, an unimpressive Mark-Antony, and inconsistent pacing. But still fairly watchable with a few strong scenes involving boats!
Overall 6/10: recommended only for those interested in the Epic productions of the 50's/60's, or for Roman/Cleopatra history nerds. There's not much in the way of egyptology here, and for general movie fans looking for an entertaining historical 'Romp 'n Romance' this movie may be too sluggish and illogical to enjoy.
Did you know
- TriviaWriter and director Joseph L. Mankiewicz was fired during post-production, due to the quarrels with the then-newly reinstalled Fox President Darryl F. Zanuck over the nature of editing the movie's length. Since he wrote the script as he was shooting, Twentieth Century Fox soon realized that only Mankiewicz knew how the story fit together. He was then brought back to complete the project.
- GoofsWhen Caesar is saying goodbye to Cleopatra in Alexandria before sailing back to Rome, one of his aides hurries him by warning, "Caesar, I'm afraid the tides will soon be against you." In fact, the Mediterranean Sea has no tides, or, more precisely, its tides are so minimal that they don't affect navigation. No ship sailing from a Mediterranean port would have to worry about catching a tide.
- Alternate versionsPremiered at a length of 243 minutes. A week after the premiere, the film was reduced to 222 minutes, and edited further to 194 minutes for general release. The 194-minute version was the default broadcast television version for years; home video and cable television releases are of the full-length cut.
- ConnectionsEdited into Marilyn: Something's Got to Give (1990)
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Cleopatra
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $44,000,000 (estimated)
- Gross US & Canada
- $57,777,778
- Gross worldwide
- $57,780,433
- Runtime
- 5h 20m(320 min)
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.39 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content