leadolphin There are artsy movies, and then there's Titus. Titus was like to the movie "Fountain" directed by Aronofsky. It focused so much on visuals that the plot and substance of it was more of an undertone to the monstrosity that it was. Titus made everything that happened symbolize something greater, which is a horrible offense to a movie. Symbolism, when used sparingly, can convey themes much larger than the medium that they exist in. However, if everything that happens in a movie conveys that symbolism, it makes even the most meaningful parts of the movie meaningless. Another major problem I had with this movie was the pseudo realism. Not only were there roman-style soldiers all over the place in the beginning, but there were also 40s styled cars and motorcycles, along with microphones from the same era. This only adds to confusion, it conveys little meaning to the actual movie. It only succeeds in annoying the viewers- or at least the viewers who aren't into pretentious art- movies. All of the characters seemed flat, even those played by big-name actors like Anthony Hopkins. Part of the problem with this is, admittedly, the script. It takes impeccable acting and directing to create complex characters out of the script that was written by Shakespeare. If the directing and/or acting is poor, then the dialogue will sound awkward, because nobody speaks in Shakespearean English now. As the directing and the acting was poor, the entire movie was just one awkward transition to the next. From what I was told about this movie (I saw it in a Drama class after we finished reading the play) the budget was relatively low, so the visual effects were, as expected, not that great. But the thing is, the only visual effects that you would really need in making this movie would be what it would take for the gore scenes. The beginning choreography with the roman soldiers was unnecessary and confusing, the explosion in the opening scene was confusing, and all of the over-the- top costumes were annoying, especially Saturninus', Tamora's, and Chiron and Demetrius'. Really, this movie would've been so much better if the visuals conveying characters' thought were scratched, and if the director had chosen which time period the movie would take place in. Another huge problem that this movie had was the scene where Marcus finds Lavinia. There was surprisingly little blood (except for when she did this weird thing where she turned around and spat blood at Marcus in slow-motion), and her hands had been replaced by branches. I found this odd, because I don't think that Chiron and Demetrius would bother with doing this. I know hat this is supposed to be a take on the line saying, more or less, that she had been rid of her branches (meaning hands), but if she had lost her hands, and the text says branches, how does it make sense to put actually branches on her arms instead? "Titus" also over-glorified the character of Young Lucius. I've been told by many of my friends who were in the same class that this character is supposed to show how this kind of tragedy affects someone, and to make it less confusing when Young Lucius first shows up, but both are invalid arguments. It only makes things confusing. First of all, I would like to point out that it's not really that weird that Lucius "randomly" shows up halfway through the play. It actually makes sense, because a child would not be present at the ceremonies occurring in scene one of the text, the hunt, or the trial of the other two sons (the ones who were executed, I forgot their names). Young Lucius' omnipresence actually makes thing more confusing, because he doesn't talk until much later, and even the quietest kids would speak after seeing many of the things that happened, especially Lavinia after she's raped. One of my least favourite parts of the movie was the opening scene. When the movie starts, you think you're watching the wrong one, because it's some kid in a 40s or 50s style kitchen, making a mess of things with some action figures that resemble the characters that you meet later on. Then, there's an explosion, and some hulking guy just appears out of nowhere, and carries this kid down this really long staircase that likewise appeared out of nowhere, that leads to the Colosseum. This leaves you wondering as to what had just happened. Is the kid in some kind of coma? Has this actually happened? Is it all a dream? When is the movie going to start? It takes about 7 minutes of opening credits and marching soldiers in pseudo Ancient Roman armour, marching around in a display at, what you find out to be, their return from war against the Goths. I already had taken issue of the sudden switch from 40s/50s to Ancient Rome in such a bizarre way, that the existence of mummies in ancient Rome really annoyed me. I found the entire movie to be filled with annoyances like that. Basically, this was a horrible movie that no one should ever have to see, unless they want a movie filled with bad visuals, "artsy" cello music, and horrible acting and directing.

TheLittleSongbird The play I have never considered one of Shakespeare's best, I give you that there is enough wit and poetry to make Shakespeare's style distinctive and Aaron is the most interesting character, but the story is not the most focused or developed like Shakespeare's later plays. I was worried about the film version Titus, I know that Julie Taymor is an imaginative director, both on film and on stage, but it was whether the film could do anything with the material. Not only does it absolutely do that, but it also improves on the play. The film is perhaps too long, but the story is actually compelling even with some very disturbing moments(then again the idea of men in a pie is that in the play) that doesn't rely heavily on shock value. And the characters especially Titus and Aaron are interesting. Taymor's direction is creative and doesn't swamp the dialogue too much, while the costumes, sets and various sequences are jaw-dropping. The music is rousing and haunting, and the dialogue flows naturally and has the poignant intensity you'd expect from Shakespeare. Titus is not Anthony Hopkins' best role, my favourite is between Frederick Treves(The Elephant Man), CS Lewis(Shadowlands) and Stevens(The Remains of the Day) though Hannibal Lector(The Silence of the Lambs) is probably his most iconic. His turn here is still very authoritative and moving though. Jessica Lange oozes sex appeal and evil and Harry Lennix is radiantly malevolent. Alan Cumming is somewhat off-the-wall but in an endearing way, while Matthew Rhys and Jonathan Rhys Meyers are good as Demetrius and Chiron. All in all, I found this film to be brilliant and while any Shakespeare is worth watching and reading this is the first time that a Shakespearen film adaptation has been better than the play it's based on. 9.5/10 Bethany Cox

ritachouchou the modern version of TA simplifies the story from the declining of an absurd world to the downfall of a Roman general, hence fundamentally subverting the tragic significance. The transformation lies in the introduction of a modern perspective. Titus begins with a boy wearing a paper veil resembling the Klan, eating at a table, while playing a collection of toy soldiers including both Roman warriors and modern troops. He is frightened by a bomb blast, rescued, and whisked away to Ancient Rome. With the boy assuming the character of young Lucius, the film is constantly directed through his angle, from his first surprise at the Terracotta Army, his excitement in welcoming the election, to his witty response after killing the fly (originally done by Marcus). Furthermore, the film ends with him carrying Aaron's child, leaving the coliseum, and walking toward sunrise. Here the film inserts a comparison between the tragic massacre in Titus and the boy's slaughter of toys with milk, cake, and tomato sauce at the very beginning. His final left echoes his sudden arrival, closes the Pandora Box of this anachronistic structure, and actually pushes the timeless violence away into a finished fantasy. Once again, the director voices over Shakespeare by symbolizing the modern boy as "a tentative hope for the future." Inevitably, it defuses brutal violence and beastly humanity that are so intensified in the play. However, one should notice Lucius' succeeding and restoring order are as temporary as Lavinia's writing in the sad. Shakespeare left Aaron with no repenting "I am no baby… Ten thousand worse than ever et I did / Would I perform if I might have my will" (V.iii.184-87) and he casted way Tamora's corpse with "No funeral rite, nor man in mourning weed, / No mournful bell shall ring her burial." (V.iii.194-96) Rome is in deadly silence. Salvation comes where. The text embodies a more profound understanding of the historical setting behind TA tragedy, where the civilized Rome is under the irresistible process of declining, and eventually overrun by the barbarian northerners, the Germanic. Hence, the modern concern upon love and peace within the twentieth century re-evaluation context fundamentally lessens the ultimate desperation and disorder presented by this specific ancient moment, and is likely to be both extravagant and ironic.

tubby1 Titus is a film that does have a certain allure but it alienates just as much with its peculiar segments within the film. For all its gusto and confidence Titus fails to be as poignant as it could be.The period is created with a flurry of modern additions, which at times does not look that far out of context with the overall picture but would have been better to maintain in its intended setting. Indeed the inclusion of Lucius, a young boy who is ignored and then brought into the film (you will understand if you see the film)is rather bizarre and unexplained progression, which I did not like.Harry Felix and Angus MacFadden are the stand out performances with Anthony Hopkins and Alan Cummings giving powerful displays which are both hindered by the over dramatics created in the film. The score is at times too over-the-top to take seriously, and the story is dark and harsh which will quell people's potential enjoyment.Titus for all its art and craft manages to sustained itself through its strong acting but its bravado is too much to be able to palate in reasonable proportions.