Review of Cleopatra

Cleopatra (1963)
5/10
A Leaden Performance by ET
6 October 2004
I wouldn't presume to question the acting abilities of either Rex Harrison or Richard Burton. Both actors left admirable legacies and deserve the credit they received while living, and continue to receive now. Both Harrison (Caesar) and Burton (Anthony) bring their acting depth to their parts that make us realize why they're revered. More than that, we care about their characters.

On the other hand, or on the other planet, we have the world's most overrated actress, Elizabeth Taylor, bringing a "presence" to the screen that could only be equalled by most high school senior girls in a Spring play. ET plays Cleopatra with all of the consummate woodeness that only years of practice and misguided praise could account for. The film cost millions and millions of dollars in 1963, and gave Burton and Taylor a showcase for their off-screen hijinks, but failed to raise the bar even a little, except for the jaw-dropping sets.

By the time ET's "Cleopatra" finally expires, I was remembering the old 1934 version with Claudette Colbert and wishing for the over-the-top style of Cecil B. DeMille.
4 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed