Julius Caesar

1971 "No grander Caesar... No greater cast!"
6.1| 1h57m| G| en| More Info
Released: 03 February 1971 Released
Producted By: Commonwealth United Entertainment
Country: United Kingdom
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

All-star cast glamorizes this lavish 1970 remake of the classic William Shakespeare play, which portrays the assassination of Julius Caesar on the Ides of March, and the resulting war between the faction led by the assassins and the faction led by Mark Anthony.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Commonwealth United Entertainment

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Prashast Singh Watching a period film means watching an age unfold in front of your eyes; it's something that brings back the past alive, either in an entertaining or offbeat manner. JULIUS CAESAR, which was shown to me and my classmates in school by our history teacher, turned out to be nothing but just a heavily boring and stage-dramatic period drama which has only its performances as the plus points.Drama doesn't necessarily mean it has to be boring. It can be entertaining as well. JC delivers on the performance front, but fails to serve its purpose in any possible way. Technically too, the film is just average, and with fairly decent yet average battle scenes, the film doesn't hold its ground. Efforts by the actors and makers are appreciable, but as a whole, the film's quite unimpressive.Honestly, the film started well but as it proceeded, it turned out to be a completely disappointing affair which felt too long and overdone at 117 minutes.
judithnelson07 I've seen plenty bum Shakespeare, but Jason Robards as Brutus he takes me the cake. He resembled nothing so much as a barrel with a head on top. The rest of the cast was pretty good, however, especially Richard Johnson as Cassius (why wasn't HE Brutus), Diana Rigg as Portia and Charlton Heston as Antony. John Gielgud as Caesar does his lines beautifully, as always, but does not quite convey the menace and power of Caesar. (He was better as Cassius in the 1953 version.) Interesting here is the contrast in line delivery between Johnson and Robards; it makes you wonder why Cassius isn't the leader and hope of the conspiracy. Production values are sometimes dubious; but battle scenes are better than the cowboys-and-Indians fight in the 1953 version. Of course, the text is shortened, but all essential scenes are kept.
Blueghost Like another reviewer stated, this is a respectable but highly flawed film adaptation of the play "The Tragedy of Julius Caesar". The performances are respectable enough, depending on the actor one references. Charlton Heston does a great job, but Robards performance as Brutus doesn't weigh in until about half way through the drama, and seems to be a little undirected for the first half of the play. It seems like a lot of the money that went into this project went into paying the actors' salaries, for the art direction gets the period wrong in several places, and puts Marc Antony's famous speech on an indoor set instead of an outdoor plaza as was meant.The most jarring for the military afficionados is the inappropriate armor and armament for the soldiers. The generals wear naval hats, and the armor is some kind of mish mash from other periods in history. I can only guess that this was done because the director liked the style (which was common for this period in film making for Hollywood to take such atrocious liberties with history).It's worth it for seeing Chuck Heston's Marc Antony, but the version with Marlon Brando some yhears earlier (shot in black and white) is the one to see.For all it's flaws, and there are many, this 1970 version staring Heston is worth a look. Heston plays Marc Antony as a passionate loyalist who seethes with the angst of betrayal, and does an ecellent job of it. Gielgud's Julius Caesar is solid, but I think the audience deserved someone with more gravitas and "a martial countenance", to borrow from the language of the time.See it once.
mailboypilgrim A magnificent adaptation of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, enhanced by the splendor of Rome at its full glory under Julius Caesar. Charlton Heston is at his best as Marc Anthony and makes you feel as if Shakespeare wrote the part for him. I have mixed feelings about the choice of John Gielgud as Caesar. There are times in the movie that he portrays Caesar well as the aloof dictator and others when he overacts as he does in most of his roles. Jason Robards is a fine actor, but not as Brutus, unless Stuart Burge intended to experiment with this role as a Spaghetti Western. Robard's dialogue is wooden. Robert Vaughn shines as Casca as does Richard Johnson as Cassius. Richard Chamberlain portrays well a self opinionated Octavius Caesar. The opening of the movie is a masterpiece of imagery and impact and one is plunged into the involvement of the triumphal entry of Julius Caesar into Rome and the aftermath. Why on earth there has been no DVD release of this movie beggar's belief.