Quo vadis
- 2001
- 2h 45m
IMDb RATING
5.7/10
2.4K
YOUR RATING
Marcus Vinicius falls in love with Lygia, but she's Christian. Marcus kidnaps her, but Ursus captures him. After meeting Nero, he returns to Rome to find Lygia.Marcus Vinicius falls in love with Lygia, but she's Christian. Marcus kidnaps her, but Ursus captures him. After meeting Nero, he returns to Rome to find Lygia.Marcus Vinicius falls in love with Lygia, but she's Christian. Marcus kidnaps her, but Ursus captures him. After meeting Nero, he returns to Rome to find Lygia.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 4 wins & 2 nominations total
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Like summary states Polish is out of my leauge....but this quite wonderful movie isn't for me or any epic movie fan. VERY well done..with great sets,costumes and visuals. (I think the cinematography is beautifully done) The main characters look right and knowing the 1951 version of "Quo" as I do, I can follow their actions easily. In fact their appearance seems to make them more believable than previous versions of the movie.Sequences set in the "Circus" are realistic and in final scene closer to the novel. The entire movie is pretty wonderful and I think it's $18 million dollar budget shows. It's lavishly done. A worthy successor to MGM's version. Best, Mike M.
Inevitably, this film begs comparison to the three other recent Polish historical "super-productions", Ogniem i Mieczem, Pan Tadeusz, and Przedwiosnie. Quo Vadis isn't made with quite the elegance and visual grace of Pan Tadeusz, nor is it quite as dynamic and classy as Przedwiosnie, although it is elegant, visually graceful, and dynamic. It shares similarities, unfortunately, with Ogniem i Mieczem as well: at times it reverts to Hollywood-style kitsch, such as with close-ups that take themselves too seriously, and tacky, forced, over-dramatic music. However, these elements are both less frequent and less pronounced than in Ogniem i Mieczem; and - if you allow yourself to ignore them - are overpowered by many positive elements.
Boguslaw Linda is great as Petroniusz. This is, I think, one of his best roles for years, and he produces the grace and dignity of a Roman gentleman very well. Michal Bajor's characterisation of the naive, vain Nero, at once contemptible and likeable, was for me one of the nice surprises of the film.
The scene where lions tear Christians apart in the circus is shocking and heart-wrenching, and looks almost as realistic as I could imagine is possible. The famous scene where Ursus battles the bull in the circus is, if not as spectacular as the lions, similarly effective.
Not a masterpiece, but a very good film. 8/10
Boguslaw Linda is great as Petroniusz. This is, I think, one of his best roles for years, and he produces the grace and dignity of a Roman gentleman very well. Michal Bajor's characterisation of the naive, vain Nero, at once contemptible and likeable, was for me one of the nice surprises of the film.
The scene where lions tear Christians apart in the circus is shocking and heart-wrenching, and looks almost as realistic as I could imagine is possible. The famous scene where Ursus battles the bull in the circus is, if not as spectacular as the lions, similarly effective.
Not a masterpiece, but a very good film. 8/10
I have found great pleasure in reading the book and I must say that I really enjoyed watching the movie too. Great performance, great actors and especially a great sensibility. Unless the old movie I really felt like I was watching the 'book'. I liked most the performance of the actors that interpreted Petronius and Marcus Vinicius. Boguslaw Linda is an exceptional actor or at least in this movie his performance was perfect. The settings gave me the impression of reallied not fakes like most of the Hollywood 'masterpieces'. I felt like the movie was the 'sequel' of the book, no alterations, no personal interpretations. Jerzi Kawalerowicz is a great director and producer and his showed this in the high quality of this movie.
This new Polish version of a Polish novel, written in the 1890's by Henryk Sienkiewicz (who won the Nobel prize), is an excellent movie, gripping, exciting and deeply moving. Unlike the 1951 MGM version, which was a costume epic typical for its time, this new film seems to be about real people caught in the maelstrom that was Nero's Rome, in the struggle between decadent paganism and the emerging new faith of the Christians. The book is a favorite of mine and the screenplay's fidelity to the novel is highly commendable. The actors are vivid in their portrayals. This Nero, for instance, seems like a real madman, not a fine actor hamming it up (as did Ustinov in the 1951 film). The Petronius is excellent, the two leads both young and handsome. The conversion of Vinicius and Chilon are convincing and moving. This nearly-three-hour film moves quickly and covers a lot of ground. The ending gave me pause, and it's a stunner. The movie deserves a much wider audience than it's going to get in the US, because, face it, most people who go see foreign language films are not the same people who go to see religious, historical epics. I hope it gets a video release, at least. Hollywood would have given this film costlier and better special effects - the burning of Rome is a bit anemic - but Hollywood could not have filmed this movie as honestly, truthfully and brilliantly.
This movie impressed me greatly. Seeing the grand coliseum scenes, movies like Gladiator feels like cheap imitations.
Excellent acting, pacy, and sensitive, I consider Quo Vadis on par with UNDERGROUND, the Emir Kusturica classic.
Hope a wider audience can catch this in theaters, even a DVD wont pay justice to the wonderful sets, costumes etc. I saw this in the Polish film festival in Chicago.
Excellent acting, pacy, and sensitive, I consider Quo Vadis on par with UNDERGROUND, the Emir Kusturica classic.
Hope a wider audience can catch this in theaters, even a DVD wont pay justice to the wonderful sets, costumes etc. I saw this in the Polish film festival in Chicago.
Did you know
- TriviaNever given a wide release in the U.S., its only engagement (so far) in the U.S. was in Los Angeles, California, in 2002. The film has also never been shown on U.S. cable television.
- GoofsIn the final episode the Emperor Nero is fleeing Rome, afraid of being killed by the mob or the new Emperor Galba. He attempts to hide in a thicket of prickly pear cactus and agave plants, both of which are native to the Americas and unknown in Europe until the 1500s, approximately 1450 years after Nero's death.
- Alternate versionsOn December 25, 2003 the first channel of Polish public television aired first episode of the television version of the movie. It contains of six episodes and is more than 100 minutes than the theatrical edition. Many scenes, previously deleted, were included in the mini-series.
- ConnectionsVersion of Quo Vadis? (1901)
- How long is Quo vadis?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- Quo Vadis Domine
- Filming locations
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $18,000,000 (estimated)
- Runtime
- 2h 45m(165 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content