Customer Reviews

Scipio Africanus: The Defeat of Hannibal

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Even if this is propaganda the movie provides a handsome production. The viewer can certainly see the attempt to link Moussolini with Scipio. The fascist salute is everywhere, even if the Romans did not actually salute in that fashion themselves. My opinion is that you look at a film like this as a period piece. Both in terms of the time it is portraying as well as the time it was made in. Both are revealing. There is no question that we must regard Scipio as the good hero of the film. From what we know of him he was a considered one of the great generals of antiquity, and he did arouse firece loyalty in his troops. Then again, most Roman generals did, as it was part of the political process to do so. The interesting thing about the movie is the fact that Scipio lived during the time of the early Roman Republic. Moussolini would have more in common with the later imperial Roman State. Still, these are matters which should not concern ourselves with here. There are numerous contrivences in the film. It is doubtful that Scipio's wife was captured and brutalized by the Carthagenians. Hannibal is portrayed as evil, yet likeable at the same time. His dovation to staying in Italy reflects the fact that he had spent 18 years there attempting to subdue Rome. What is admirable is the production value here. There are no computer graphics showing those large armies and giant Triemes! This is a prodction on an epic scale.

The film shows an interesting relationship with queen Sophoasisba, one of the great femme fatals of antiquity if we are to believe Livy! She was involved with both the key Numedian leaders, Syphax and Massinissa. The film shows her attempts to keep both against Rome as she was a Carthagenain princess. The film makes her luridly beautiful, and her fall is all the more likely against the honest Scipio. She drinks her cup of poison just as described by Livy in his accounts. The scene ends dramaitically.

The highlight of this film is the final battle of Zama, 202 BC. Here we have a faithful, large scale recreation of the event, complete with lumbering elephants. The battle scenes are impressive, and the fate of the elephants will be disturbing to some perhaps. I wonder if they actually killed any for this production. The movement of the Roman infantry formations appears quite accurate, and the viewer can get a good idea what the old Legions looked like. The battle shows the ebb and flow of events, massed cavalry action, Elephant attacks, and massed infantry. The battle developed similar to what the film shows.

The massed elephant attack was beaten off by the Romans with relative ease because they had grown accustomed to fighting against them in all their battles against Hannibal. The alliance of the Numideans ensures Scipio a comfortable cavalry superiority which is the decisive factor in winning the battle. After they crush the weak Carthagenain horse, they turn and attack Hannibal's old verterans from behind and crush them. This was not one of Scipios most impressive battles, but since it was against Hannibal it has come down as one of the decisive battles in history. The film does a decent job showing all of this, and is certainly worthwhile for those interested in this period, as well as Fascist cinema.

"Victory or death!" This is one of the principal themes of Carmine Gallone's 1937 film: a superb work in which its collosal production is carried by a brilliant direction, a clever screenplay, a tight script, and good acting. The film is also unprecedented in terms of its incredible historical detail. Released in 1937 and backed by Mussolini's government, this film was the most expensive Italian production of its time with 30,000 extras, 6,000 horses, and 50 elephants. The cinematography is excellent and parallels Reifenstalh's contemporary works under the Nazi regime in Germany. Unlike German propaganda films of that time however, this film is rather unintrusive in terms of propaganda and carries no racist ideology such as with Goebbels' films: the historical setting is simply conducive to fascist Italy's ideology of restoring the nation to the level of its glorious Roman past as desired by Mussolini.

The film is presented from Scipio's point of view and covers the last part of the Second Punic War where Hannibal retreats from Italy to Carthage with haste to defend his home and fight the final battle of Zama. Hannibal is presented as an honorable foe who, like Scipio, is bound to follow his destiny and serve his nation no matter what the cost. Political intrigue arises when Hasdrubal's daughter, Queen Sophonisba, uses her seductive charms to coax her Numidian husband Syphax and his rival Massanisa to fight the Romans. The level of historical detail is probably the most faithful than any other film on Roman history. All of the clothing, architecture, military equipment and tactics are presented with exact accuracy. The legions are shown with the proper uniforms, armaments, and tactics of that period. The tactical maniple formations are shown as opposed to the cohort formations of the Late Republic. The quinquireme galleys were produced to exact scale and made fully functional: they also include the innovative hooked and swiveling boarding ramp (corvus) used during that time. The battle scene of Zama is the most impresive and graphic ever presented in a film on antiquity using 50 elephants and replicated at 1/10 the scale with 30,000 actors. The battle scene is extremely graphic even in comparison to modern films with some very violent close quarter combat. This is probably not a film for animal lovers as, unfortunately, some of the elephants were speared and butchered to add realism to the film: Mussolini felt that historical realism outweighed the lives of these poor animals. The English script, written and dubbed in 1937 by an American company, is also outstanding and as stoic as the speeches recited in Livy's histories on the wars with Hannibal.

Some of the downsides of the film are antiquated acting techniques in which some of the actors are still using theatrical methods prevalent in silent films which don't really work well with sound films. As a result, some scenes come out as over-dramatic, particularly in the minimal romantic subplots which are fortunately and short and sparing. Shortcomings aside, the lavish sets and cinematography are stunning and remained unmatched until later period films such as 'Cleopatra' and 'Spartacus.' As a matter of fact, one can see that both Mankievicz and Kubrick were heavily influenced by Gallone's direction and camera work along with the grandiose sets in this film. This is simply an outstanding film that completely outclasses the later and atrocious 'Hannibal' with Victor Mature. This is an excellent film that is a fine addition to any film lover's collection: particularly for those who are Roman history buffs or scholars of fascism and 20th century propaganda.

On a final note, contrary to the previous reviewer E.R. Curry's claims, the Roman salute is anything but a fascist invention of the 20th century attributed to Ancient Rome. Jaques Louis David portrayed the Roman salute in his 1792 painting "The Oath of the Horatii" showing the legendary Roman Horatii brothers saluting their father with the Roman salute as they go to war. This painting was completed over 200 years before socialism, fascism, or film ever existed. Fascist ideology in principle seeks to apply the Roman concept of the dictator to modern times in which one's full allegiance to the needs of the state is imperative above everything else. It is akin to Cincinnatus accepting his appointment as dictator and leaving his farm to fulfill his sworn patriotic duty no matter what the sacrifice may be. The Nazi or fascist salute is therefore a revivance of what was thought to be the original Roman salute as portrayed in David's painting and other classicist or neo-classicist works of art. Although no one can be certain as to when the Roman salute came into existance and whether it was indeed Roman, it unquestionably came into being long before Mr. Curry claims to have been the case.

It is absurd that this film costs what it does and you can't even get the original Italian language track with subtitles. This version fails entirely as a historical document as a result of the choice to provide only an English dubbed version. Normally this trend goes the other way with American films being butchered by being dubbed into Italian; here, it's entirely unacceptable.

A good movie, with a bad recordind transfer. The video was to dark, lower quality than most low resolution recordings. The outfit that puts this dvd productions, has no shame. The dvd begins, by missing recorded words, like someone began recording seconds after the movie began. The dvd arrived on time. Amazon should look into the way this outfit repackage dvd's.

I for one am anxious to see the movie. While some of the criticisms may be valid "the fascist salute is everywhere"- but of course it is! The fascists copied MANY of the Roman Empire's symbols- like the extended hand salute; the eagle; like the "fasces", which the fascists, and our own U.S. Federal Government prominently use, etc. It's always been a SAD fact of life that the bad guys have had the catchiest songs, snappiest uniforms, and most lasting symbols. But then, they have all been masters of propaganda, haven't they?

The scene where the Carthaginian queen drinks the cup of poison has to be the most glamourous death scene in film. Eventhough it wasn't made in Hollywood it probably defines the decadent/femme fatale motif that is Hollywood. It's almost ritualized the way she takes up the cup -- very Kenneth Anger and very Salome. The rest of the film is a sight as well. For students of history, political science or anyone with a fascination with fascism should watch this movie. The constant Roman salutes and brandishing of the fasces are absolute propoganda spectacle! Oh, and the elephants are actually getting butchered.

This is an interesting movie from an historical perspective. Not much of a plot, the acting and script are very cheesy by todays standards. Before the advent of computers and special effects, all scenes are real and pretty elaborate. Animal lovers should not watch the climactic battle scene.

This is a great and historic film. In fact you should view these four films as a set: the American "Ben-Hur" (1907), the Italian "Nerone" (1908), "Spartaco" (1914), and "Cabiria" (1914). These films were the origin of the "Roman salute" myth because these films show examples of a straight-arm salute. The "Roman salute" myth is the myth that the straight-arm salute was an ancient Roman custom, later borrowed by the long-time socialist Mussolini and by the National Socialist German Workers' Party. The myth arose in part because of the made-up Hollywood portrayals in these films. These films are notable also because they led to the historic discovery by America's leading expert on the Pledge of Allegiance (the author of "Pledge of Allegiance Secrets") that the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance was the origin of the salute of the monstrous National Socialist German Workers' Party. The "Roman Salute" myth grew because the viewing public forgot that the early U.S. Pledge used the straight-arm salute. The creator of the U.S. Pledge of Allegiance was a National Socialist in the U.S. (Francis Bellamy). The salute is not in any Roman art or text. Research posted at the American Philological Association supports the historian who made the discoveries.

On a final note, there is another reviewer who calls himself "Octavious" and not only is he in error but his name alone allows him to hide and removes any credibility from him. He also likes to use the f-word to cover-up for the National Socialist German Workers Party. He is so confused that in his efforts to reference "ancient Rome" he references a 1792 painting by Jaques Louis David: "The Oath of the Horatii." He then shows that he is unaware that the painting is fictional, and also involves a old myth. Also, even fictional, it does not show the Horatii brothers saluting their father with the Roman salute as they go to war, it shows them reaching for weapons. The painting was not completed over 200 years before socialism ever existed, and that was not the point anyway, as Octavius is simply evading because Octavius actually concedes that the earlier comments are correct, as Ocativus does not dispute the actual points made. Even Jacques Louis David did not use the term "Roman salute" and did not say what Octavius is trying to imply.

I had expected to see a great propaganda film, but what I got was a badly done spectacle. There were very little of cinematic, historic, or public relations interest. Even the battle scenes were disappointing. Save your time and money.

this is a very good movie for the era which it was filmed. also makes a good find for silent movie buffs. I hope the remake of HANNIBAL featuring VIN DIESEL will live up to it's billing, (as well as the LEONARDO DiCAPRIO movie about ALEXANDER the GREAT)....
EL