Customer Reviews

Julius Caesar [ NON-USA FORMAT, PAL, Reg.2 Import - Denmark ]

5 star:		(14)
4 star:		(14)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(6)

 

 

This TNT production on the life of Julius Caesar is a well made attempt to historically portray the life of one of history's greatest leaders. Starring Jeremy Sisto, it follows the life of the future Dictator of Rome from his relative obscurity to his death at the hands of his peers on the Senate floor on the Ides of March in 44BC.

The story covers the highlights of Caesar's life including his exile during the rule of the cruel dictator Sulla, his patronage under the capable General Pompey, his brutal but victorious campaigns against Vercingetorix and the Gauls, and his love affair with the beautiful and scheming Egytian queen Cleopatra. Caesar's great ambition ultimately lead to his own murder by members of the Roman Senate who fear his ascendency, but ironically bring about the rise of the Empire.

There are many political complexities that are touched upon in this film that give a good idea of the kinds of power plays that lead to Caesear's rise and fall, many of them including betrayal and murder. The film depicts the Gallic Wars in good detail and gives an understanding of the turmoil that faced the Roman Republic in its last years before the rise of the Empire. Caesar is portrayed as a intelligent human figure who is struck down by tragedy and overcome with amibition which ultimately leads to his own death. The irony of Caesar's murder is that it was ostensibly to preserve the Republic, but rather hastened the foundation of the Empire. While not a great movie, it is entertaining and provides a good introduction to Roman history as well.

Julius Caesar: His Time Has Come, brings to the screen the rise to power of one of the most well known historical figures.
It is a rather long movie, approximately 3 hours, but that is to be expected considering who the movie is about.

Overall, the acting is above average, with the highlights being Christopher Walken and Chris Noth portraying a Roman Senator and the Roman General Pompeii respectively.
The siege of Alesia and the subsequent battle were also very good as was the portrayal of the Gauls.

On the negative side and as other reviewers have also pointed out, the lead actor, Jeremy Sisto, was not really the best choice for Caesar, as was the case with Marc Anthony who was also a poor choice.
In addition, there are historic discrepancies such as the in case of the Gaul chieftain Vercingentorix who was reportedly strangled, and not stabbed as the movie would have it.
Furthermore, Julius Caesar is to have perished on the Senate steps, not while sitting inside the Senate.

Nevertheless, the setting, the dialogues and the costumes are all wonderful!

In a nutshell, though not a masterpiece, Julius Caesar: His Time Has Come will surely provide for an evening's entertainment. It is a movie definitely worth watching, especially for those with a soft spot for History and all things Roman.

I was pleasantly pleased with the angle from which this film was crafted. Although the play "Julius Caesar" does not cover the historical content covered in the film, it can sometimes be considered "boring" to tenth grade students. This action-packed, contraversial view of Caesar's life was just what I needed in my classroom in order to keep the teenage mind interested. I had the students answer questions regarding the films content as they watched, and they actually enjoyed it...more so than just reading the play or viewing one of the films offered by the school library.

Recently I saw Jeremy Sisto in a film in the cinema, and as my movie-going friend and I were dissecting the film afterward, we both were impressed with Sisto's performance, and tried to recall what we'd seen him in before. I remembered this production of Julius Caesar, but only after a while - Sisto's role in the other film (a light drama with a comedic edge) is very different from the epic, super-serious Julius Caesar.

This production is a good one for a straight-to-television production. It is a four-hour miniseries (the television nomenclature equivalent for `epic'). It plays a bit loose with the historic progression, but keeps many of the broad strokes intact - Rome's trouble under Sulla, Caesar's early difficulties becoming established, his military alliance and familial partnership with Pompey, destined to falter; the conquest of Gaul and the march back to Rome, the fiery oratory of Cato, and the climactic death in the Senate.

Caesar is a complex character, one who defies encapsulation in so short a span as four hours. Given that Caesar was surrounded by many equally intriguing characters, it is little wonder that productions about Caesar often fall victim to a particular interpretation. Sisto's performance, and Edel's direction, makes Caesar in some ways a walking statue - and this is not a necessarily inappropriate style. Caesar was very conscious of appearances and public perceptions, and took great pains to always appear in a certain fashion that would enhance his power and reputation. Sisto's Caesar does show such some emotional range, but this is often mitigated by `events of state'.

Richard Harris, in one of his final performances as Sulla, puts in a much more dynamic performance, however brief; some may recall Harris as the wise emperor Marcus Aurelius in `Gladiator' a few years prior to this production, a very different role indeed from the ambitious, capricious and over-emotional Sulla. Christopher Walken as Cato also turns in an almost over-the-top performance (Cato and Cicero seem to be a combined character here, in some respects). Christopher Noth plays Pompey, but does so at extremes - he is either flat and ineffective, or overly emotional and ineffective. Noth has done good work elsewhere, but this is not one of his better pieces.

The female characters in this production are largely marginalized; even the famous Cleopatra/Caesar affair in minimized. While the role of Cleopatra is often overplayed in the Caesar story, it does have a decided role. Also, the role of Augustus is completely missing.

Filming was done in Malta and in Bulgaria, which brought in lots of locals into the production. A replica of the Roman Forum was constructed, which is an impressive piece of scenery. Also, the Gaul encampment, where Caesar overcomes Celtic warriors, is well constructed and visually powerful. German actor Heino Ferch plays the role of the Celtic leader with aplomb. In scenes where he appears, he steals the show so completely that no Caesar could resist.

It is interesting that the television series, `Rome', is currently enjoying a major success with essentially the same time period. This could have been a great epic / mini-series; instead, it is passing fair. Costumes are great, sets and location good. The story line is interesting, even if out of sync with actual history. The performances are spotty but occasionally effective. The writing takes the story along, but almost as if it were a rendering about Rome and Caesar than a piece for actors to perform in.

Those who like the `sword and sandals' kind of film will find this interesting. Others may find it tolerable. Those who are easily irritated at historical inaccuracies of detail may well find this film infuriating, as lots of bits are rearranged for dramatic effect. Even so, it is an epic that might be worth a rainy day or night's viewing.

There are no real DVD extras to speak of, at least not on the copy I have.

All in all, this version of Julius Caesar's life is somewhat better than the others, once Caesar starts to begin his rise of power. First off, the acting is extraordinary (Christopher Walken as Cato), and is carried through the entire movie, particulary with Chris Noth a Pompey (his look of uncertainty when presented with the command against Caesar is absolutely uncanny).

Likewise, the siege of Alesia in Gaul, Caesar's crowning achievement during the Gallic wars, is well done, though the troubles that Caesar's army faced were somewhat overblown. Historically, Caesar's legions were fanatically loyal to him, chiefly because of his willingness to put himself on their level with daily assignments, so the scene where they are on the verge of mutiny demonstrates a lack of control that the historical Caesar rarely (perhaps twice - the mutiny of the tenth and his assassinaton) experienced. However, chalk this up to poetic license.

There are, of course, some aspects that were a bit lacking: Caesar's travels to Bithinya, his crucifixion of the pirates, and his adulturies with his political enemies' wives are all aspects of his personality that would have enriched an understanding of what made him tick.

Likewise, the selection of Caesar's actions once he was made dictator could have used some work. Too many people believe that Caesar was an opportunistic monster (when his actions condemning men that abused the law and his legislation in the plebeian assembly clearly demonstrate good sense rather than a quest for personal glory). Some more of his political and legal acumen could have been incorporated.

However, all in all, the depection is a good one. It Combines his clemency and compassion for Romans with his casual discarding of barbarians. It shows his grief at Pompey's death in Egypt. It also shows his daring military skill. Each of these presents a picture of a Roman capable of seeking to preserve Rome's pre-eminence and law while simultaneously marching on the city and defeating fellow Romans. If could use some work, but it treads a line between the silly "Caesar was a villian" view and the equally silly "everything Caesar did was wonderful" position. That's something that's rare these days, and this movie is worth seeing simply forthat fact.

This is a remarkably good film about one of history's great men. This film features above-average acting and a storyline that is reasonably true to history, rather than a Hollywood puff piece. The film begins with Caesar's confrontation with the dictator Sulla, and ends of course, with his historic assassination in the Senate.

The thing I liked best about this film is that in my opinion it is a fairly realistic look at Julius Caesar. It mostly does not try to glorify him (as did, for example, Colleen McCullough in her Masters of Rome series of books). Nor does it demonize him. The film shows that Caesar went to Gaul and provoked wars mainly for his own political purposes (to enhance his stature at home) and that when the Senate sought to call him to account, this is what motivated him to turn his army against Rome and essentially overthrow the Roman Republic. These are not necessarily laudable acts, and the film does not gloss over these points. The scenes of Caesar imperiously dictating harsh laws and proscriptions to the Senate show that by the time of his death, absolute power had indeed corrupted Caesar absolutely.

The film has a much better attention to detail concerning Roman parapernalia such as the lictors who attended the Roman Consul, and other similar details. Purists will appreciate this.

Another excellent quality of this film is the casting and acting, both are excellent. The acting is generally good. Jeremy Sisto was criticized for his portrayal of Caesar, but I thought he did a reasonably good job. Richard Harris absolutely nails the role of the Dictator, Lucius Cornelius Sulla. Christopher Walken did fine as Cato, although this was not a major role in the film. Heino Ferch was a very convincing Vercingetorix (the King of the Gauls). I did not think that Jay Rodan was a convincing Mark Antony. Overall, though, this film surprises with the performances that its generally excellent cast turns in. This film is sufficiently good, in fact, that one why it was not a "bigger" film. I have not enjoyed a film as much as this one in several years, causing it to merit 5 stars.

The sets, acting, and DVD reproduction of this film are all excellent. This film will satisfy those of us who seek historical accuracy in a film about one of history's great figures, but the storyline will similarly engage those who simply are interested in good dramatic entertainment. This one is highly recommended.

I, for one, found this movie to be an excellent sort of etertainment, both for the movie enthusiast as well as one interested in Roman History. I must admit, I was a bit worried being that it was a TV miniseries but I queued it up on Netflix regardless. About 14 minutes into the film, I realized what set this apart from other movies based on history or that attempt to portray historical situations. Julius Caesar is not an easy topic, despite the information we have on him, yet this series pulled it off with stars and stripes.

People have claimed, in these reviews, that Jeremy Sisto did not do that great of job. I believe I am a more critical...critic in that I had high expectations considering that I would never want to see him outside his role in Six Feet Under as the crazed Billy. Nonetheless, his performance grew from miniseries appropriate to bigscreen legend. In the beginning, Caesar is played as a humble man who gets in much trouble still trying to find out his destiny yet when he does find his destiny, Sisto conveys everything you'd hope: a passion for Rome and also some bit of grandeur for himself. I would give his performance 5 stars alone.

Not to mentioned Harris, Walken, and Noth who were all very shocking in the performance (in the good way). I had high expectations of all these but especially Noth who I had never imagined in a role other than that of our trusty detective in Law and Order. I was surprised with how well he played the role of Pompeyy.

The only problem I have with this is that there never go into any mention of Octavian (Augustus) as Julius' heir. They do mention him only once near the end of the film but nothing to do with adoption. I can see why this was so, as to not distract from Julius Caesar himself, but it would have been nice regardless.

I recommend to any of those who are interested in a surprisingly good film and who appreciate actors who are not known for their huge blockbuster films, yet still do a better job in some cases.

I have read some earlier reviews that point out the many, many historical "liberties" that were taken in the production of this movie, and they're right. However, if you're not such a historical purist, if you're in it strictly for the entertainment value, I think you'll really enjoy this film. Personally I think the historical critics so far have been unduly harsh with what is otherwise a very admirable production.

Jeremy Sisto was excellent as Caesar, and was very ably supported by Christopher Walken (Cato), Richard Harris (Sulla) and Chris Noth (Pompey). The depiction of the siege of Alesia was very well done, in my opinion. There were quite a few emotionally gripping scenes, not the least of which is the climactic assassination in the Senate. If you don't get too hung up on the history, I think you'll agree that this movie is three hours well spent.

No one expects commercial films to portray ancient history accurately, and this is no exception. However, the film is largely true to the spirit of Rome at the end of the Republic, with outstanding sets and costumes.

As noted by other reviewers, much is condensed or omitted. The central figure of Crassus, whose patronage was essential to Caesar's rise, is entirely absent. In effect, Crassus is merged with Pompey in this film, and the triumvirate of Pompey/Crassus/Caesar is reduced to a partnership between Pompey and Caesar. Also omitted is any direct reference to Spartacus, and here his Slave Revolt is merged with Pompey's campaign to clear the Mediterranean of pirates. At a more personal level, the film omits all references to Caesar's philandering (which included the mother of Brutus) as well as his balding with advancing age. And in this film Caesar is murdered in the old Senate-house in the Forum, not the new complex built by Pompey outside the city walls.

On the positive side, Rome itself as depicted in the sets (mostly constructed in Malta, not digitally generated) is convincing: note that Rome in Caesar's time was largely built of brick and was not endowed with huge buildings or large open spaces. The military are also convincingly depicted, with the exception that the cavalry in the film use stirrups (but it is difficult today to find equestrian actors who can ride without stirrups). And there is much to please the sharp-eyed. For example, although the dialog does not mention Caesar's role as chief priest (Pontifex Maximus) and guardian of the Vestal Virgins, we see the Vestals officiating at his marriage to Calpurnia. And although the office of Consul is not really explained, we see the lectors and other paraphernalia in the background. Such details reward the careful observer.

I do not agree with other reviewers who have written that ancient Rome is better depicted in such blockbuster films as Ben Hur, Quo Vadis and Gladiator. All of these tend toward hyperbole in sets and spectacle. Gladiator is highly accurate in its recreation of the Coliseum, but not in the Forum and other oversized public buildings. Ben Hur and Quo Vadis exaggerate even more: in the time (mid first century CE) when these two films are set, almost none of the great public buildings whose ruins still stand in Rome had yet been constructed. The most accurate film portrayal of the heart of imperial Rome is in The Fall of the Roman Empire, which faithfully follows what we know of the layout of the Forum and the Capitol. But that was the city more than two centuries after Caesar. For a glimpse of the Rome of the first century BCE, I enjoyed this TNT film.

I am a 10th grade English teacher and found the TNT version of Julius Caesar to be both entertaining and educational. Advice to teachers: show this video before reading the play. It will give the students the background they need to better understand what was going on in Rome at the time. Also, they will become more emotionally attached to Caesar with prior knowledge about his rise to power. With that knowledge, they will be better judges of whether or not Brutus and the conspirators were justified in what they did. Caesar is murdered so early in the play. Students rarely care, wondering why the play is even called "Julius Caesar." You'll find that after viewing the TNT version, the students will have an opinion about whether or not it was right to kill Caesar.