Julius Caesar

Starring: Louis Calhern, Marlon Brando, James Mason, John Gielgud, Edmond O'Brien, Greer Garson, Deborah Kerr, George Macready, Michael Pate, Richard Hale, Alan Napier, Douglass Watson, 'Snub' Pollard (uncredited)
Directed by: Joseph L. Mankiewicz
Rating: Not Rated
Genre: Drama
1953

Times Seen:
Tim: 1

Summary: Roman Senators plot against the growing ambition of Julius Caesar.

Review:

Tim: I'm always intrigued by silver screen adaptations of William Shakespeare's plays. He's undoubtedly the premier writer in the history of humanity (my opinion, of course), and to hear his words come to life, to see the sets and his stories on screen, it's always a delight. It helps when the adaptation is directed by Joseph L. Mankiewicz, features a talented cast giving incredible performances, and manages to entertain from beginning to end. Julius Caesar is a thoroughly rousing movie and while it might not quite be great, it gets awfully close.

The story of Julius Caesar is a fascinating one, especially in the hands of Shakespeare. It's a classic tale of ambition and betrayal. We see Caesar's ascension to near godhood, we see the growing concern and jealousy of Brutus, Cassius, and others. We see the loyalty of Mark Antony. This tale is told in larger-than-life fashion, with some of the greatest dialogue ever written. It's all staged in a wonderful production that feels authentic and compelling. This is a movie that holds your attention, even when you're not 100% certain what the actors are talking about (Shakespeare is brilliant, but difficult).

In a filmed version of a play, it all comes down to the actors. Marlon Brando emerges as perhaps the most memorable cast member. It was a bit of an ambitious casting- he'd been blossoming in his career, but was known as a "mumbler" due to his previous work. I admit, I felt trepidation going into this film- could Brando really pull off Shakespeare? It felt like it might be too much. I was sorely mistaken. Brando is stunning in his portrayal of Mark Antony. He delivers the film's best scene, a long, rousing speech to the Roman crowd. His delivery is exceptional- clear, compelling, powerful, emotional. His delivery of, "Friends, Romans, countrymen! Lend me your ears" is absolutely perfect. He rose to the occasion of a difficult part and I was transfixed, watching him in this role. He was excellent in the role and it significantly increased my appreciation for him as an actor.

Louis Calhern is solid as Julius Caesar. I had no issues with his performance, although it didn't quite inspire me as much as I'd have hoped. James Mason is wonderful as Brutus. He brings a bit of complexity and added humanity to this character. I wish the movie/play would have explored his character a bit deeper, but Mason delivers every line flawlessly. He's so good in the role. Mason carries much of the movie. Brando gets his incredible moment on stage, but Mason is required to continually drive the movie forward, and he does so exceptionally well. John Gielgud was effective as Cassius. It was difficult to see most of his scenes opposite Mason. Gielgud is really good, but Mason just seemed better. Still, the scene near the end with these two men is one of the highlights. Edmond O'Brien manages to be a total scene stealer as Casca. He doesn't get much to do, but he attacks his lines with energy and charisma. I found myself wishing his role was significantly bigger. O'Brien has always been an underrated talent and I loved what he did on screen here. It was wonderful seeing Greer Garson and Deborah Kerr here. They are both so talented and they make the movie better with their performances. The problem is this is a play written by a man, about manly men, directed by a man, and there's just so little room for women here. Garson nor Kerr has much to do. So, while they were solid, they're too limited on screen. As a whole, I have to admit the cast was so impressive. They're even better on screen than on paper. That doesn't always happen.

Mankiewicz directs a technically strong film, too. The movie did get 1 acting Academy Award nomination- Marlon Brando for Best Actor (although he feels like Supporting to me). That was deserved, although the category felt questionable. Outside of that, the film was nominated for Best Picture, Best Cinematography B&W, Best Music, and it won 1 Academy Award, for Best Art Direction-Set Direction, B&W. That win felt well-deserved. The production design throughout the film is wonderful- from the scenes in Rome, the threatening mob, the conspiring under cover of darkness, the meetings in the tents on the battlefield, it's all quite stunning to behold. The film's production deserved recognition. The one major complaint I have about this is the totally ineffective battle sequence. The whole movie is building towards some big moment and then what we get is horribly underwhelming. I was stunned watching the film. I remember saying, "Wait, that's it?" It was so poorly shot and underdeveloped. Later, I read that budget constraints limited what and how they could film and Mankiewicz thought it was the weakest segment of the film. He's 100% correct. It stands out as an oddity, by far less effective than everything else. It's jarring to see such a good movie have such an inexplicably weak sequence towards the end.

Despite that, I'm a still a huge fan of Julius Caesar. I love Shakespeare adaptations and this is certainly one of the better ones. It took me a long time to finally see this film, but it's one I wouldn't miss for the world. I had a really enjoyable time watching this expertly made film, it's definitely worth seeing.

Rating 1-10
Tim's Rating: 7.5



If You Enjoyed This Movie, We Recommend: Cleopatra, Hamlet