Reviews

This is not a perfect movie. No one has ever suggested it is. That said, it is much better than you may have been led to believe. Technically, it is superb, with sets, costumes, cinematography, music, etc., apparently unattainable by today's filmmakers. If you doubt this, watch "Gladiator" immediately after watching "Cleopatra". The technological weaknesses of the former are stark and unavoidable when compared to this film. The first act, especially, is without equal. Rex Harrison, as Caesar, dominates the screen and gives the performance of his life (Henry Higgins not withstanding). He earned his "Best Actor" Oscar nomination, and then some. The second act suffers, more likely than not due to the merciless re-editing by the studio that saw two hours of film hit the cutting room floor, and major roles like those of Cronyn and McDowall reduced to little more than bit parts (Mankiewicz originally envisioned this as two films, not one), from an occasional lack of cohesion I tend to think was not in Mankiewicz' screenplay. While La Taylor is ravishing throughout, she sometimes appears to be in a bit over her head. Again, this is more apparent in the problemmatic second act. There has been an active search for years by the Mankiewicz estate, and others, to find the missing elements from his original cut and restore "Cleopatra" to what he envisioned. This may yet happen. I hope it does. In the meantime, this newly restored roadshow version is most welcome.

Here is as good an example as any that for a film to be successful, it must be a collaborative effort. "Powder" is engaging, even involving. But upon examination of its parts, one realizes there was no new ground covered, no new insights, nothing that hadn't been done before. No really outstanding performances, except to say that Mary Steenburgen, Lance Henricksen and the under-appreciated (but always busy) Jeff Goldblum are probably incapable of turning in bad performances. And to be fair, Sean Patrick Flanary has the good sense to play what could have been a disastrous part with just the right amounts of simplicity and innocence. To paraphrase Spencer Tracy, he says his lines and doesn't trip over the furniture. This is a role where less is definitely more. He is to be congratulated. The screenplay, which tends to sag in the middle, is well enough written, but nothing more. Sets and costumes are what they need to be. The direction is sufficient. But put the elements all together, and you have a film that is thoroughly watchable and tends to stay with you well after the closing credits. However, I must make two exceptions to the above. Jerzy Zielinski's cinematography is excellent, and veteran composer Jerry Goldsmith contributes a superb score. This film might have suffered greatly without the talents of these two men. Finally, it must be noted that the controversy surrounding the director need not influence your decision to give this film a chance. It will be a well spent 111 minutes.

Obviously, a great deal of time and money was lavished on this project. Producer Selznick intended it to be a vindication of a career that peaked with "Gone With The Wind" in 1939, and then began a long, slow, almost painful decline. By the mid fifties he had become something of a "has-been" in Hollywood. The result? Pretty much a miss. The book is probably unfilmable, of course, but the screenplay still leaves much to be desired. Rock Hudson is far too shallow to make a go at the over-the-top emotionalism this story needs. The usually wonderful Jennifer Jones, for whom this project was conceived, somehow doesn't seem to exhibit the idealism and resolve the part needs, and that she demonstrated with such seemingly effortlessness in many other films. The direction is stilted and sometimes downright awkward, more the fault of producer Selznick, I would bet, who had a reputation for micro-managing his films, than famed director Charles Vidor.

Simply put, I'm never convinced, not even for a moment, that what is happening is real and not just another movie. Too bad.

History has not been kind to this film. It suffered through an extended and sometimes turbulent gestation. It's birth was, at best, painful.

George Stevens, its director, producer, co-writer, and guiding force, spent the better part of a decade bringing this project to the screen. Even with all his considerable experience, it seems he was unable to translate his vision into the cinematic experience it deserved. At times we see flashes of what he must have had in mind. More often we see a film, for all its' moments of brilliance, stumble into exactly the sort of C.B. DeMille pomposity Stevens was surely trying to avoid. Much has been made of his "who's who of Hollywood" approach to the casting of smaller roles, which led to a "who's that" reaction in the theater. However, that approach to casting has been used before and since to positive effect. So the fault doesn't lie there. The fault lies, it seems, in an embarrassment of riches. Mr. Stevens simply had too much. Too much money. Too much talent. Too much time. Too much control. And too little willingness, it would seem, to accept input from others. Is the film a total failure? Of course not. There is much greatness in "The Greatest Story Ever Told". The cinematography is breathtaking. The Alfred Newman score, at least the portions Stevens left unadulterated in the film, is magnificent. Some of the individual performances are compelling. Could it have been better? Should it have been better? Absolutely.

It has always been my belief that there was a successful movie made, called "The Greatest Story Ever Told". Sadly no one ever saw it. Worst of all is the absolutely dreadful version of this movie currently on videocassette. It is nearly an hour shorter than the original road-show presentation, and, while letterboxed, is in the incorrect 2.35x1 "scope" aspect ratio rather than the correct 2.75x1 ratio the Ultra Panavision-70 cameras filmed in. In addition, regardless of what the box says, the soundtrack is in Hi-Fi Mono! Ken Darby, composer Alfred Newman's long time associate, wrote a book, entitled "Hollywood Holyland", which chronicles his first hand experiences working on this film. It is a "must-read" for anyone interested in the cinematic art.