SPARTACUS
A film review by Wayne Citrin
Copyright 1991 Wayne Citrin
As most of you know by now, SPARTACUS is a three-and-a-half hour restoration of a 1960 film directed by Stanley Kubrick. It concerns one Spartacus (Kirk Douglas), a gladiator-slave who leads a rebellion in the ancient Rome of 72 BC. There's romance (with Jean Simmons), and friendship (with Tony "I also taught da classics to da children of my mastuh" Curtis). All this is played out against a backdrop of intrigue between two powerful Romans, played by Laurence Olivier and Charles Laughton. Peter Ustinov, John Gavin, and Herbert Lom also play major roles as powerful Romans.
There are numerous problems with SPARTACUS, one of them moral, the rest or them dramatic. I'll get the moral one out of the way first. Big Hollywood epics, it seems to me, are the Roman circuses of our time. I felt very funny watching such an entertainment and, at the same time, disapproving of those decadent Romans. Perhaps the filmmakers actually intended to put the viewer in such a dilemma. Probably not.
The dramatic flaws are more easily addressed. There's nothing really special about SPARTACUS. As Stanley Kauffman put it in his New Republic review, it's "Product." This somehow isn't an accusation that could be made about LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (the film with which this restoration invites comparison). The romance, the sentiments, and even the grating background music, are all pure Hollywood, and the larger scale doesn't seem to make things any better. Even the big battle scene, which could have benefited from the larger scale, is surprisingly feeble.
SPARTACUS has two giants in it: Olivier and Laughton. But the words that the script puts in their mouths are so small and trivial that the actors shrink into insignificance. Laughton fares slightly better, due to his distinctive physiognomy, but Olivier is almost unrecognizable (and the part could have been played by anyone). Great actors really do need to speak great words, especially great actors playing great Roman patricians.
In its defense, one can say that SPARTACUS moved quickly. The three and a half hours passed lightly, and I rarely felt that the action dragged. However, if Hollywood executives feel that the heritage of Hollywood should be restored and brought to the attention of a new generation of moviegoers, I wish they would spend the effort on something not so overblown and yet banal as this film.
What films would I rather see revived and restored? Well, to test an idea of mine, I went and rented a film last night. It was also directed by Stanley Kubrick. It also stars Kirk Douglas. It's about half as long as SPARTACUS. The film is called PATHS OF GLORY, and watching it confirmed my feeling that it's the most perfect film ever made. At an hour and a half, it doesn't have a single unnecessary scene, and it's full of perfect film moments. Unfortunately, I know many people who have never heard of the film. MGM/UA would do the public a great service by striking a new print and re-releasing it, instead of forcing people to catch it on video or late-night TV. One PATHS OF GLORY would be worth three SPARTACUSes.
Wayne Citrin citrin@soglio.colorado.edu citrin@boulder.colorado.edu
.
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews