The Robe (1953) User Reviews

Another Excellent Cross and Sandals Epic!

[ozthegreatat42330 · 7/10 · 3 March 2007]

This film has much that makes it stand out among the cross and sandals epics of the fifties and sixties. based on the best selling novel by Lloyd C. Douglas, helmed by Hollywood first rank director Henry Koster, the work has a string of memorable performances. Richard Burton, admittedly not a favorite actor of mine does a credible turn in the lead role of Marcellus, while the lovely Jean Simmons is incredible as the young woman he loves, Diana. Michael Rennie is a quiet but forceful Peter, while Jay Robinson steals the picture as the depraved Emperor Caligula. The minor roles are also well acted. The cinematography is magnificent, while the film is tied together beautifully by the eerie and haunting musical score of Alfred Newman, a prim film composer of his day. Altogether a very watchable movie that even the most fundamental Christian could not find fault with.

If there is one failing with the story, and it is a minor one, Emperor Tiberias is presented as an honorable ruler and not as the depraved lecher he really was. He only comes off looking as well in history as he was because his grandson Caligula was so much worse.

The Passion of the Robe

[john-ruffle · 7/10 · 17 May 2006]

The Robe (1953) is interesting on at least two counts: (1) the film takes its place as the first ever CinemaScope theatrical release and is therefore worthy of close study by all motion picture students; and (2) the film depicts the Passion of Christ, (as the inciting action that triggers the subsequent plot development), and as such, threads that part of the storyline with a genre stretching back over 1,000 years, where we find the first extant Passion Play scripts (other than the Gospel records themselves, of course). This again makes the film worthy of study by film students and theologians alike.

The story of Christ on film is more important historically than may at first might appear. At either two or three reels, the first ever full "feature film" is arguably claimed to be the "The Passion Play" (1898), filmed in New York in 1897. The 'greatest story ever told' has hit the screen regularly thereafter, perhaps most famously in recent years with Mel Gibson's masterly personal tribute, "The Passion of the Christ" (2004).

I will now comment briefly on some of the technical and visual aspects of "The Robe". The camera work majors on long shots, and it is interesting to analyse how each shot is framed for all that width of screen. The camera is mostly static, and shots have longer than average duration; the compositions really are not designed for a lot of movement. This gives the film that famous "epic" style that goes for the grand sweep, both visually, musically and emotionally. There is not a lot of internalisation within the characterisation - it is the (literal) width and scope of the production that grabs attention. The filmic style is not very personal, however. It really is as if we have the best seats in an outdoor drama on a massive stage.

As you view, you may wish to make a note of the shots that seem to work best to the modern viewer. In the early part of the film, for instance, (just before the "Passion" sequence), Demetrius runs toward the camera in search of Jesus, after he's been beaten down by the Roman guards outside the gates of Jerusalem. An old lady sitting behind him on the cobbled pathway, has just finished tending his wounds. The shot is terrific, and works for modern audiences very well. Unlike a lot of the film, where much of the direction seems to be subjected to the demands of the CinemaScope process, this shot contains a dynamism that beguiles the film's age. Why? Because it uses the three dimensions of the set, along with arresting and dramatic movement, as Demetrius runs diagonally toward the camera and beyond us, toward the Crucifixion, which we see in the next sequence.

Another sequence that really works well is the chase in the second half. It is arguably the most dramatic sequence in the entire picture, and certainly uses CinemaScope to best effect, as the horses thunder toward the audience. Over fifty years later, and it would be hard to better.

By contrast, most of the film is played out in tableaux form, with action taking place across the width of the screen on lavish but shallow sets. The camera is a passive observer, unlike modern 'epics', which usually use very fluid camera set-ups along with computer-generated imagery (CGI). The actual crucifixion (masterful in what it does not show, by the way) is indeed an actual still life tableau, and could have easily been lifted straight out of the Oberammergau passion play. I do not say this to put the film down - this actually is a brilliant move, as it makes the action faithful to the genre of the passion play, which originally was played out exclusively through short tableaux.

In this writing, my aim has been simply to help you consider alternative ways of viewing this, and other, historic motion pictures. Particularly, you may wish to take note of the sometimes unusual way the film uses: (a) framing, (b) shot length, (c) staging, (d) camera movements, (e) the use (or rather, the almost total lack of use) of close ups and 'cut-away' shots, (f) lighting, and the (g) music score and dialogue. Of course, there is much more to note: the use of dissolves and fades, which helps underline the 'epic' grandeur of every sequence. And I've not even touched on the story line or the acting. (Question: how might it have played as a silent movie?)

In today's post-modernist society, the Passion play formula, with its emphasis on objective truth, may well gain renewed importance, since the narrative of Christ's passion may be in danger of becoming yet one more voice crying in a commercial wilderness devoid of ultimate human (and Godly) values of truth, goodness and conviction. The story of Jesus stands out as unique however it is viewed. The simple reason: the story of the Passion indeed IS unique! (Which is one reason why I consider it a 'genre' in its own right.) I contend, therefore, that "The Robe" is an important contribution to American cinema, both theologically and cinematographically; one among a select number of motion pictures, spanning over one hundred years of history, that every student should have opportunity to view and discuss at least once whilst still in full time education.

A sidebar: "The Robe" really needs to be watched in 'letterbox' (i.e. in the original format), which on a small display does not do the picture justice. With HDTV coming along, look out for a digital re-release that will restore the original to its pristine glory. (Also, a side-by-side comparison with the Academy format version - shot at the same time - would be beneficial.) Best of all, of course, arrange to get it screened in your local art house cinema, and see it as it is meant to be viewed: on the big screen.

A half-forgotten landmark

[dinky-4 · 6/10 · 27 April 1999]

There seems to be little interest in this movie today but when originally released in 1953, it created a sensation and threatened, for a while, to replace "Gone With the Wind" as the highest-grossing film in history. And it was the first movie in CinemaScope -- "The Modern Entertainment Miracle You See Without the Use of Glasses!" Its opening half still plays well, even some 50 years later, but the second half tries to convincingly present the religious conversion of Marcellus -- a tricky proposition since it deals with an internal process -- and the result plays like a well-intentioned but rather simplistic Sunday sermon. Richard Burton was Oscar-nominated for his work but is clearly outshone by, of all people, Victor Mature as the slave, Demetrius. The scene of a sweaty, nearly naked Demetrius groaning and writhing under torture in a Roman dungeon helped establish Mature as "the back that launched a thousand whips." (The book "Lash! The Hundred Great Scenes of Men Being Whipped in the Movies" is dedicated to him.) Mature played Demetrius again in one of the rare big-budget sequels of the 1950s, "Demetrius and the Gladiators," which wasn't very good but which was livelier and more "fun" than its pious predecessor.

Inspiring!!

[hennystruijk · 7/10 · 19 April 2019]

I watch this once a year - - usually around Easter. It has everything - - action, love, hate, and a great story! Victor Mature has a moving scene-brilliantly acted. Richard Burton deserved his Oscar nomination. Jean Simmons has a great speech at the end--something applicable to several current world "leaders".The music is haunting.... I don't see how anyone could not appreciate and enjoy this film!!

Reverent and majestic

[barcharlotte · 16 May 2003]

POSSIBLE SPOILERS. This movie, based on the book of the same name, is a fictional account of what might have happened to one of the Roman soldiers who crucified Christ and gambled for his robe. Though yielding on occasion to the Hollywoodisms of the time (e.g., the crack of thunder when Judas reveals his name), it nevertheless still evokes a reverence surrounding the Crucifixion that's never been equaled in any other biblical film, aided in part by the majestic music. The next scene in which Victor Mature, as the slave Demetrius, stands in driving rain and curses Marcellus (Richard Burton) and the Roman Empire, is one of the most powerful scenes in film. The "robe," by the way, is not magical, as another user would tell us, but an ordinary garment that wields "power" only because it is too vivid a reminder of the horror and guilt Marcellus carries for crucifying an innocent man. It is his acknowledgement of this act, and the powerful words of forgiveness from the cross, that change his life. DVD widescreen is magnificent.

Epic and religious story about a Roman tribune who gains the rob of the just-crucified Christ

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 16 March 2012]

This is a dignified portrayal about Ancient Rome from best-selling novel by Lloyd C Douglas adapted by Philip Dunne and Albert Matz's literate screenplay , it deals with dissolute Marcellus Gallio (Richard Burton) , a tribune in the time of Christ and son of a notorious senator (Torin Thacher) , as he's sent to Palestine . There he is in charge of the group that is assigned to crucify Jesus . From his official duties , drunken Marcellus wins Jesus' homespun robe in a dice-game after the crucifixion . He is tormented by delusion and nightmares after the tragic deeds . Hoping to find out a manner to live with what he has done , and still not believing in Jesus, he goes back to Palestine to learn what he can do of the mysterious man he murdered . Later on , he returns Rome and frees the holy-robe-carrying slave named Demetrius (Beefcake Victor Mature) . After that , Caligula (Jay Robinson) takes him prisoner , but his sweetheart (Jean Simmons) takes time out to visit in a dungeon .

This religious mammoth epic focuses a moving Roman pageant dealing with a sponger tribune , following his stirring career , spiritual awakening and reaches an exciting peak at the ending . It has marvelous images , spectacular scenes , enjoyable performances as well as the adequate cast of thousands . Richard Burton and Jean Simmons are both good , though Burton sometimes is a little wooden . Michael Rennie as Peter and Jeff Morrow as Paulus give sensible acting , though brief , which adds more to the reality than anything else . The best acting comes , indeed , from Jay Robinson , the best portrayal of his career , who gives a hammy acting as nasty Caligula . Colorful cinematography by Leon Shamroy and being the first film to be shot in glamorous CinemaScope . Sensitive and lyric musical score by the classic Alfred Newman . The film deservedly won 1953 Academy Award for Art Direction , Set Decoration, Color and Costume Design.

The motion picture is brilliantly directed by Henry Koster , an expert on super-productions and epic biographies , such as he proved in ¨Desiree¨, ¨The Virgin Queen¨, ¨A man called Peter¨, The story of Ruth¨ , ¨The Naked Maja¨ and of course ¨The Robe¨. It's followed by a sequel (1954) titled ¨Demetrius and the gladiators¨ by Delmer Daves with Debra Paget , William Marshall, Richard Egan , Susan Hayward as the trampy empress Messalina and in which the Marcellus's slave , Victor Mature , makes again a surprisingly good acting and reprised diverse characters as Jay Robinson as Caligula and Michael Wilding as apostle Peter.

'There's only one man at whose side I pray to sit.'

[Nazi_Fighter_David · 9/10 · 23 May 2007]

The film opens in Rome in the 18th year of the emperor Tiberius (Ernest Thesiger). Rome's legions stand guard on the boundaries of civilization from the foggy coasts of the northern seas to the ancient rivers of Babylon…

Today the slave market is crowded because the emperor's heir and regent, the young Caligula (Jay Robinson) is coming to buy gladiators… He probably will not be pleased to see Tribune Marcellus Gallio…

Marcellus (Richard Burton) forgot the promise he made to Diana (Jean Simmons) to marry her when they grew up… They were friends many years ago when they were children… Now, since her father death, Diana has been the ward of the emperor and his wife… Empress Julia (Rosalind Ivan) thinks she could be good for Caligula…

At the auction, Caligula leaves the place very angry… Marcellus buys a rebellious Greek with the name of Demetrius (Victor Mature) to be his personal attendant…

Few hours later, Marcellus pays the consequences for humiliating Caligula, and is ordered to the garrison at Jerusalem, the worst pest-hole in the empire where the people are always on the verge of rebellion… Caligula hoped by this order to give Marcellus his death sentence… Senator Gallio (Torin Thatcher) asks his son Marcellus to be above all a Roman and a man of honor…

On the deck before the galley set sail to Palestine, Diana appears to tell Marcellus that she's going back to Capri to ask the emperor to intercede for him… Marcellus didn't believe that a girl of 11 could fall in love and stay in love all these years…

All the spirit of the age is present in Koster's epic: The wilderness of the land of Galilee; the massage relaxing area; the terrifying meeting of Demetrius with one of Jesus' disciples; the Roman procurator of Judea asking to wash his hands more than once; the tribune's first battle trophy, for victory over the king of the Jews; the spectacular sword fight between two officers of the empire; and a lost robe in the hands of a runaway slave...

Richard Burton is the brave Tribune who renews his pledge of loyalty to his emperor and to Rome; Jean Simmons is lovely as the exquisite maiden who stands firmly besides her love; Victor Mature is brave and spirited as the Greek slave; Michael Rennie is serious and profound in thoughts and manners as Simon the Galilean; Jay Robinson is terrific as the vicious, treacherous young Caligula drunk with power; Dean Jagger is full of devotion and reverence as the humble and honest Justus; Ernest Thesiger is efficient enough as the austere Tiberius; Betta St. John is so sweet as the disabled believer Miriam; and Torin Thatcher is too helpless as the proud Senator…

It is notable that Jesus of Nazareth is seen from far away riding a white donkey with all the people around carrying palms and as a tortured figure, impossible to discern lying beneath the heavy cross... Henry Koster restraints with dignity the recreation of the execution carried out at Calvary, outside Jerusalem...

Conscience What Ails Thee!

[TondaCoolwal · 7/10 · 21 December 2019]

In the midst of all the lavish Hollywood hokum there is one scene which always gets to me. Richard Boone plays Pontius Pilate almost in a cameo. The scene opens with a closeup of Pilate washing his hands. Then the camera pulls back to reveal we are actually in Pilate's reception room. He has sent for Marcellus to tell him he has been recalled to Rome, but that he has one last duty; to execute Jesus. Pilate advises Marcellus to take care and dismisses him. Then Pilate calls to his slave to bring him water to wash his hands. "But you just washed them my lord." Says the slave. Pilate looks down at his hands and mutters. "And I did.". A marvellously understated depiction of a man with a tortured conscience.

Another Biblical Tale Around a Peripheral Character

[bkoganbing · 8/10 · 17 May 2006]

The Robe comes from a tradition of historical biblical fiction about a peripheral incident and/or character. It is in the same vein as Ben-Hur and Barabbas, films adapted from a similar source.

In this case it is Jesus's robe that he wore to the crucifixion. It is recorded that while He was on the cross waiting to die, Roman soldiers idled their time away by casting dice for the only possession He took to his death, his robe. The lucky winner turned out to be Richard Burton, a tribune recently sent on assignment because of a running feud with the Emperor to be.

The run in with Caligula was over a slave purchased by Burton, a Greek named Demetrius played by Victor Mature. Both Burton and Mature are exiled to Judea and they arrive just in time to see Jesus enter Jerusalem. Mature becomes converted to Jesus's teachings and Burton is driven mad by the enormity of what he has participated in.

The Robe was written by Lloyd C. Douglas who was an ordained Lutheran minister and who turned to writing at the age of 50 with his first best seller Magnificent Obsession. His writings were of the Christian inspirational variety and he was a very popular American writer right up to his death in 1951.

Richard Burton got one of his Academy Award nominations for his role. Jean Simmons as Diana who was the main source of his rivalry with Caligula gives a good understated performance of the woman who stood by the man she loved and his fate and passed up a chance to be an Empress.

Jay Robinson as Caligula got most of the notice. Although John Hurt in the I Claudius series is probably now the definitive Caligula, Robinson's performance holds up very well indeed. A substance abuse problem curtailed a promising career and though he did come back it was not the same.

The Robe was 20th Century Fox's first film in its new wide screen process of Cinemascope and really should be seen in a letter box version at home. Richard Burton is always good and elevates whatever film he's in.

Though in this case the subject matter is elevated just about as high as it can get.

A story of Jesus'crucifixion

[esteban1747 · 6/10 · 1 April 2002]

This was the first film in Cinemascope, I still remember how the people used to talk about this new system, and I saw the film for the first time few months after its release in USA. From it I learnt for ever that Tiberio came after Augustus, followed by Caligula and Claudio. Good for me in history. However, the film is historically wrong. Jesus developed himself, as he was, during the period of Claudio emperor and not during the Caligula's one. If you have any doubt, I recommend you to read "I Claudius" and "Claudius Emperor" of the writer Robert Greaves. Every year during Easter or Christmas you have the opportunity to see this film in Italy. After seen it so many times (it is always good to see the example of Jesus) one may come to the conclusion that the director, Henry Koster wanted to show how even those who killed Jesus became forgiven and wanted to do good things in favor of the new religion and how the behavior of Pietro and Jesus, already died, influenced the way of thinking of many people even in Imperialistic Rome. So the plot may be historically wrong, but its content is good. Ethics of Christianism have a lot of actual values for present societies.

Satisfactory, but could be so much better.

[filipemanuelneto · 5/10 · 11 March 2017]

This is another biblical epic, one of many that was made in the mid-fifties and sixties. The main character is a Roman officer who witnessed the death of Jesus in the cross, winning Jesus' tunic in a dice game and feeling himself cursed afterwards. After watching, I understood why this movie doesn't have the same fame as other films of that subgenre, like "Ten Commandments" or "Quo Vadis"... it's a bad movie, as it makes a promising idea a failure. The idea of ​​making a story about Jesus' tunic was good, but the story itself was so poor, so forced, so imaginative that it became unbelievable. To make things worse, Richard Burton takes the main role in one of the most theatrical and forced interpretations of his career. Scenarios and costumes are quite reasonable and even look better than other films, such as "King of Kings", but are still far from the truly epic and realistic feel we see in the films I mentioned earlier. Despite all this, its not totally bad and entertains the audience satisfactorily. It just isn't as good as it could have been.

Let this one rip on Good Friday afternoon

[rimnod · 8/10 · 2 March 2005]

This is my pick for Easter. Almost all the objections and criticisms to this film can be waved away with the not so simple explanation that it is, after all, only a Hollywood studio (1953) adaptation of a Lloyd C. Douglas novel. So forgive the clichés and the big set piece sword-fight and the chase scene and the goofy ending where the hero and his girl literally walk up to heaven to the yodeling of a choir of angels. Instead be thankful for wonderful sets --the very fine musical score--the interesting characterizations and the solid photography and direction. (This was the first Cinemascope movie released).

Marcellus Gallio (Richard Burton) is a swaggering, slightly debauched Roman Tribune from a good family who is exiled out to provincial garrison duty after insulting the future Emperor Caligula (Jay Robinson). He lands in the "sinkhole" of Jerusalem for what turns out to be a very short stay. But, before being recalled to Rome he is given orders from Pontius Pilate to carry out the execution of Jesus. Marcellus "loses his reason" after taking part in the crucifixion. The movie then follows his travails as he seeks to regain his sanity by finding and destroying Christ's robe - A relic that he feels is at the root of his affliction.

Richard Burton received an Oscar nomination for this role -though this is clearly not his best work. I like Burton -however he seems to have trouble in this picture in doing much more than projecting a rather sullen-if sometimes eloquent petulance. He doesn't stray very far from this grim pose whether he is the playboy in Rome or the slack and dissolute officer in Palestine or the tortured madman being interviewed by Emperor Tiberius (Ernest Theisger) in Capri. Even his later "rebirth" as a convert to Christianity doesn't serve to "perk" him up very much. Maybe the real problem with his performance is that he often has little to say ..... the best dialogue in the movie is given to some of the fine actors around him.

If you enjoy looking at beautiful young women who personify grace, dignity and intelligence---then watch Jean Simmons as the love interest (Diana). She has several nice speeches throughout the movie -my personal favorite being her sentiments of loyalty for the mad Marcellus as expressed to Tiberius ("When you won a battle Sire -you could expect to receive the admiration of your men...but when you lost...what would you have given then to have the eagles raised in your honor and your name on every man's lips?"). It's disappointing that she gets "preachy" at the end of the film and makes a clumsy conversion to Christianity that yields her only instant martyrdom.

Victor Mature is good as Marcellus' Greek slave (Demetrius). A single wordless glance from Jesus in an encounter on Palm Sunday is enough to set him on the path to Christianity. He attempts to warn Jesus of his impending arrest (stumbling on to the suicidal Judas in the effort) and even begs Marcellus to intercede for the condemned man. He later heaps justifiable abuse on his master and on all that Rome represents. He is afterwards rescued by the "reborn" Marcellus and lives to appear in the uninspired sequel to this movie.

Jeff Morrow (Paulus) is unheralded but great as the grizzled and cynical veteran officer subordinate to Marcellus. Morrow is often allowed expository observations about the passing scenes in Jerusalem -while all Burton can do is listen and frown. Paulus offers Marcellus some practical advice before they go to carry out the execution order against Jesus. He encourages Marcellus to drink his wine and when he hesitates Paulus chides him with "This is your first execution isn't it?--What? Never driven nails into a man's flesh before?" Paulus clashes with Marcellus much later - after the latter has converted --and they engage in a sword fight --but not before Paulus taunts his former superior with: "Make me obey Tribune --you outrank me but I earned my rank- every step of the way in Gaul, Iberia and Africa against the enemies of Rome--Make me obey Tribune. If you're fool enough to try. Oh! You are a fool! I've split more men from head to foot than you see in this square." Needless to say....our lusty Tribune does make him obey.

Thesiger as Tiberius and Robinson as Caligula are excellent. Thesiger dominates the screen with impressive theatrical flair and Robinson projects just the right amount of arrogance, instability and menace as Caligula. I have seen some reviewers complain that Robinson goes "over the top" as Caligula—but let's face it....Caligula did have some "issues" and you would have to scale Everest to go "over the top" on him.

A decent attempt is made in this movie to highlight the virtues of honesty and charity exhibited by the early Christians -- Betta St John is featured as the crippled Miriam- she sings a song of the resurrection.

One thing that I find interesting is the perspective that "The Robe" offers into the political atmosphere of 1950's America. This film was made right at the time of McCarthy. The Cold War was raging. You will notice that while few punches are pulled as to the corruption and brutality of Rome –great care is taken not to turn the hero of the movie (Marcellus) into a direct enemy of the state itself. In fact -he denies the charges of treason against him at the end of the picture and even agrees to renew his allegiance to the monster, Caligula. He is only defiant when ordered to renounce Christ ---otherwise he would –apparently –be satisfied to submit. I believe that this presents to us a glimpse of the paranoia abroad in the land in the early Fifties--- when anything seen to undermined any established order of things--smacked of commie subversion and probably made the studio just a tad nervous.

A young and dashing Richard Burton is too stiff and technical in the lead

[fredrikgunerius · 6/10 · 16 August 2023]

A young and dashing Richard Burton displayed his talent and impeccable line-delivery, but also his theatricality and often stiffness in front of the camera in this historically interesting, but ultimately awkwardly religious twaddle. The first half of the film is easily the best, as the filmmakers present the emergence of Jesus Christ as an insurgent in the eyes of the Romans. The film is at its best depicting Roman culture, way-of-life and - above all - smugness, and Jay Robinson's gaudy performance as Caligula is the epitome of all this. Burton, on the other hand, is more laid-back. He delivers the occasional clever snippets and sexy glances, but once his character is required to have "seen the light", so to speak, his performance becomes painfully technical. It's obvious he was anything but convinced himself, and director Koster and producer Ross ultimately run amok with their supposedly God-given ideas. It's not that the film doesn't stay historically accurate enough, it's more that it cannot help becoming overindulgent in its own relevance - which of course, seen in retrospect - is completely off target.

Great Message, But It Drags

[ccthemovieman-1 · 5/10 · 14 November 2006]

Maybe this was acceptable 50 years ago, but films like this are just too long and too boring for people today. I have nothing against movies over two hours, but this just doesn't have enough life to it, I'm afraid, to attract modern audiences.

I certainly have no objections to the story. It's nice to see a pro-Jesus movie, something almost extinct since the 1960s. Yes, here is a film that unabashedly treats Him with reverence.

Richard Burton plays "Marcellus Gallio," a Roman tribune who takes part in the crucification and then becomes transformed into a Christian. He is won over by the impresses witness of his slave, "Demetrius" (Victor Mature) and other Christians who amaze Burton with their unselfishness and forgiveness. Christ's robe, too, has a profound effect on "Marcellus."

Michael Rennie was well-cast as Peter. I wouldn't be the least surprised if the real-life apostle had that chiseled face that Rennie exhibited. Too bad his role was so short in here. The actor who played the villainous "Calgula, " Jay Robinson, was very good in that his incredibly annoying voice alone made you despise the man!

Even for Believers such as me, this film dragged in too many spots and is not a film I'd watch numerous times. I'm sorry, but I have to be honest.

Grandiose "Cinemascope" but story-wise, not much of a scope...

[ElMaruecan82 · 6/10 · 26 January 2021]

The legacy of "The Robe" is widely associated with a technical advance named "Cinemascope" for it was the first film to use the anamorphic process and used a great deal of imagery that couldn't have been possible before or not without looking abominably flat or distorted. So Joseph Koster, an unknown name to assume, should be commanded for that landmark and his peplum while not the equal of "Ben-Hur" is enjoyable to the degree that we let our eyes being dazzled by the magnificently projected Antique look ... and a few laudable performances, Richard Burton on top of them.

However, I hold rewatchability as an important quality in a film and while "The Robe" does look good -and good is an understatement- it failed to generate a desire to watch it again. I admit I'm not a big fan of swords-and-sandals film to begin with but that it earned Burton his first Oscar nomination was more than an encouragement. Yet even Burton with his hypnotic eyes and Jean Simmons with her delicate beauty couldn't save the film from its rather tedious and predictable script, severely lacking the thrills or subtle detachment that can elevate costume dramas above the made-for-big-screen spectacle. And while I could appreciate "Quo Vadis" for Peter Ustinov's demented and yet pathetically suave portrayal of Nero but the antagonism in "The Robe" is weakly represented in Jay Robinson.

So the film is just feast for the eyes and it's unjust to ignore the visual achievement, but I take it as the quality that Koster embraced with so much zeal that it blinded him. Producers probably believed in the magic of the Cinemascope as fervently as the first Christians and thus the film was afflicted with an obsession to fill the screen as much as possible at the expenses of more introspective and intimate scenes that could be enjoyed on the more modest scale of a television. And so we have crowded Roman streets and overdecorated palaces which instead of being the apparatus to better engage us in the story, actually distract us from it, not even letting room for some face-to-face confrontations. Did we need a complete view on Marcellus' house when he confronted his slave? Did we need the azure coast in the background when Marcellus returned to Diana?

It's sad really for there was a lot to offer in that story and the whole first act is a strong build-up to the whole Christic sequence. We see Burton as Tribune Marcellus Gallo, an irreverent ladies' man who doesn't think much of the Emperor's heir Caligula and demonstrate his impetuousness by challenging him during a slave auction. He buys Demetrius, a strong Greek slave played by Victor Mature and let him free... to join his father's domus, which the slave does indirectly pledging his everlasting loyalty. But Marcellus must pay the price to his insolence and so he's assigned to Jerusalem unknowing that one of his missions will involve perhaps the one whose fate was cast by the clean hands of Pontius Pilate. At that part, characters were fully established; the rebellious hero, the dulcinea, the big guy with a good heart and all it needed was a true momentum.

Unfortunately, Koster is so invigorated by the triumphant trumpets of Rome and the religious chorus that he leaves cinema speaking its own informal language while more was needed to develop the characters. Demetrius is certainly the most important character besides Marcellus and it is important to see his soul shifting from the sworn loyalty to his master to a total obedience to the King of all Kings. But the figure of Christ is shown as a too sacralized figure to even be glimpsed at and so we see the intense eyes of Demetrius telling us what he saw in the Messiah, the question is: is that enough? It's one thing to deify someone but surely some skeptical members of the audience deserved more. Remember the scene in "Ben-Hur", the Christ wasn't just a presence, he was the providential helper, the one who gave Judah water. We needn't see him but we could see his divinity within Charlton Heston's grateful eyes, what we see in Mature's eye is just instinctive deification, not the right material to build the conflict that will drive the protagonist.

This is not a technicality, since the whole power of the film relies on the figure of the Christ and the mounting guilt in Marcellus' heart , it's frustrating that we're not left with some moment that could have explained that change of spirit, the film was rather linear in the treatment, you could sum it up in three distinct parts: Marcellus' faults, his guilt and then his redemption, but how the film goes from one stage to the other is one of the script's failures. Burton has the kind of physicality and expressiveness in the eyes that fit the figure of the antihero but his transition toward Christianity is weakened by a script that only weight his evolution with a few testimonies and one confrontation with Demetrius that deserved more direct dialogues and more screen-time. But time was to be left for action sequences, one involving a duel, a help to escape a jail, a few thrills here and there but these moments seem rather formulaic and end up as flat as if the movie was shot with the old ratio.

The final act is reasonably more efficient and has an awaited confrontation between Marcellus and Caligula, once again, a scene that could have been longer and could go without the rainbows of togas around, I suspect half of Burton's Oscar worthiness lied within that final act and the ending with bells rung and Alleluias sung had a powerful resonance. But such a grand ending needed a more character-driven plot and less grandiosity. Ultimately, "The Cinemascope" process is more known a name than "The Robe" and Burton would be remembered for more powerful roles.

Hope in the Face of Fear

[naught-moses · 6/10 · 9 February 2013]

The =immense= popularity of "The Robe" (and "The Ten Commandments," which followed two years later) speak to the overwhelmingly prevailing values, beliefs, ideals, convictions, attitudes... and fears... of America in the A-bomb, drop drill, Cold War decade that followed the stand of the "greatest generation" against the forces of evil in fascist Europe.

"American" values, beliefs, ideals, convictions and attitudes, as well as anxieties, were so much clearer in an age of certainty about what was right and wrong in a world increasingly threatened with nuclear oblivion. Seen through the framework of that mindset, it's much easier to understand why a tale that seems so orthographically simplistic today struck so many then at a profoundly emotional level.

I was five years old when I began to get up before dawn to watch the A- bomb tests in Nevada on live TV. I was only eight years old when "The Robe" premiered, but I recall many of the adults in my world (which was in Hollywood, by the way) speaking of it in reverential terms, even though many of them went to temple on Saturday. I also recall hearing that it was being shown in this church or that for some years to follow.

1953 was a mere seven years from Jean Simmons' portrayal of Sister Sharon in "Elmer Gantry," but that was part of another epoch. This was an era just on the heels of millions of boys fighting the Good Fight for God & Country. Hundreds of thousands more stood guard in distant Asia and Western Europe against godless communism's cheap labor and state- controlled economic threat to a commercialist leadership striving to identify itself with the moral high ground of bible belt values.

It was also, some will remember, the era of the House Un-American Activities Committee, James Eastland, Dick Nixon, Bill Knowland, Roy Cohn and Joe McCarthy. The studio system was being eaten away by network television, every bit as much as it was running scared in the face of claims by such as the fore-mentioned of "communist infestation." Family films, travelogues, heroic war stories, stylish musicals, adventure tales and bible epics were in. And they made money because they were "too big" for the small screen.

Victor Mature might have done his best work with Henry Fonda in "My Darling Clementine" (1946), but he starred in "Samson & Delilah" (1949). Robert Taylor's last big one was "Quo Vadis" (1951). Charleton Heston built =his= career on "The Ten Commandments" (1955) and cemented it forever in "Ben Hur" (1959). Kirk Douglas did much the same a year later in "Sparticus."

George Stevens's "Greatest Story Ever Told" (1965) was the end of the road, at least in terms of the unquestioningly reverential approach. (John Kennedy had been shot down in front of a thousand extras in Texas, and a Texan was throwing men and money at Vietnam in a way that was testing the cultural tolerance for the white Anglo-Saxon protestant zeitgeist by then.)

Despite Mel Gibson's run at the genre in 2004, reverential religiosity hasn't made a comeback in the current era of fundamentalist revivalism. Some observers suggest we have come full circle back to (emotion-soaked) faith in the last sixty years, but I favor Strauss & Howe's notion in their 1992 best seller, =Generations=, that we're only half-way there. I sense the lingering effects of the assassinations, suspect wars and other suspicions of authority that put an end to films like "The Robe."

But in what may be a future offering challenges as (or even more) monumental than those faced in the 1930s and '40s smack the masses between the eyes, we may again see a return to the sort of unified, anxiety-driven hopefulness that was the common cultural norm when the moguls gave so many green lights to these expensive, but hope-providing cultural manipulations.

I'd love to see reality and rationality win out, but history says the sort of socially approved emotionalism that made "The Robe" work so well in 1953 is the better bet in the face of any "big scare."

Inspiring film

[jpaparozzi · 10/10 · 30 March 2005]

I have probably seen this film over 100 times, and I never tire of it nor does it fail to inspire my love of faith even more. Although the focus is not on Jesus directly, it is through the great talents of the actors, writers and director that the focus IS placed back on Jesus' effect on the lives of the movie characters.

There is not a single performer in this film who is not brilliant. Richard Burton turns in a superb & convincing performance as Marcellus, the Roman tribune whose life is a meaningless series of women and wine until fate gives him faith. And there is no more beautiful actress ever than Jean Simmons as Diana. (I even named my only daughter Diana because of the effect that this character had on me as a child; Diana defined beauty to me.) But my favorite by far was Victor Mature's Demetrius, a role which was so beloved at the time, that the sequel of Demetrius and the Gladiators began filming soon after The Robe was released to critical and popular acclaim. Mr. Mature's portrayal of Demetrius, a Greek slave who would only see Jesus, yet be changed permanently by His glance, helped develop my faith in me as a child.

All of the other performances are excellent and uplifting. It is a great movie to watch with the family and explain all the different ways faith was given to each of the characters. It is a visually stunning film, with beautiful and haunting music (score by Hollywood musical genius Alfred Newman), and one that stands the test of time (I've been watching it for over 40 years.)

Falls a long way short of the really great epics

[JamesHitchcock · 6/10 · 9 August 2012]

The historical epics which were so popular in the fifties and early sixties frequently had a religious theme. Some were based, not always faithfully, on stories from the Bible ("The Ten Commandments", "Solomon and Sheba", "Esther and the King"), while others tried to convey a Christian message indirectly. Thus the central character of "Spartacus" is treated as a metaphorical Christ-figure, and "The Egyptian" draws parallels between Christianity and the monotheistic religion of Atenism which briefly flourished under the heretical Pharaoh Akhnaten. "The Robe" is one of a number of films which deal with the early days of the Christian Church and its persecution by the Roman Emperors. The most famous film of this type is "Ben Hur", but others include "Quo Vadis?" "The Silver Chalice" and "The Fall of the Roman Empire". The stories told by such films were normally fictitious- they were often based upon once-famous novels- but were set against a background of historical fact.

The plot of "The Robe" is essentially similar to that of "The Silver Chalice" which was made the following year. Both concern a sacred relic of Christ; in "The Silver Chalice" this is the cup which He used at the Last Supper, whereas in "The Robe" it is the robe which He wore at His crucifixion. Lloyd Douglas, who wrote the novel "The Robe", said that he did so to answer the question: what happened to the Roman soldier who won Jesus' robe through a dice game? In the story, this soldier is Marcellus Gallio, the military tribune who commands the unit that crucifies Jesus. He is in some respects an unlikely hero for an epic. The heroes of such films were normally strong, confident men of action like Ben-Hur or Spartacus, but Marcellus is not really a career soldier. He is an upper-class playboy, a gambler, drinker and womaniser who owes his exalted military rank to the influence of his father, an important senator. He enjoys little respect among the men he commands, although he gets the better of a centurion who dares to challenge his authority in a memorable swordfight, one of the film's few action sequences. He is only sent to Judaea because he has offended Caligula, heir to the Emperor Tiberius.

After the Crucifixion Marcellus is overcome by feelings of guilt and, haunted by memories of the man he has crucified, loses his reason, believing that Christ's robe has bewitched him. To help him overcome his mental problems, Tiberius sends him back to Judaea, where he meets an idealistic group of early Christians and finds himself drawn to their religion. As one might expect in a fifties epic, Marcellus eventually becomes a Christian himself as do his sweetheart Diana and his servant Demetrius. (Demetrius was to become the hero of his own film, "Demetrius and the Gladiators", a sequel to "The Robe". This sequel was, unusually, based on an original screenplay rather than a novel, although it used some of Douglas's characters. Douglas had in fact written his own sequel, "The Big Fisherman", but the studio did not own the film rights).

The film contains a number of historical inaccuracies. The Roman province of Judaea is referred to anachronistically as "Palestine". The historical Tiberius was a cruel and dissolute tyrant, but is portrayed here as a benevolent elder statesman. His wife appears here as the "Empress Julia", although in fact Tiberius divorced Julia for adultery long before he became Emperor, and by the time the film is set she had been dead for many years. The Jews never believed that the Messiah would be the Son of God; that is a purely Christian concept. Most importantly, the Emperor Caligula, although undoubtedly tyrannical, never persecuted the Christians as he is shown doing here; during his reign, only a few years after the death of Christ, the new religion was far too insignificant to pose any threat to the Roman state. (The first organised persecution of Christians took place under Nero).

The leading role is played by Richard Burton in the first of his three epic films. (The others were "Alexander the Great" and "Cleopatra"). It is scarcely Burton's finest hour, and he did not really deserve his Oscar nomination, but he acquits himself reasonably well as the complex hero Marcellus. There are also decent performances from the lovely Jean Simmons as Diana, Ernest Thesiger as Tiberius, Michael Rennie as St Peter (although it is difficult to imagine this ascetic philosopher-saint ever having worked as a fisherman), and Jay Robinson, playing Caligula as a ranting, carpet-chewing and slightly camp megalomaniac. Victor Mature as Demetrius is impassive but impressive, like a gigantic statue. (Rennie, Robinson and Mature would all get to repeat their roles in "Demetrius and the Gladiators").

"Demetrius and the Gladiators" is, in fact, one of those sequels which is rather better than the film that inspired it. It offers more in the way of spectacle than does "The Robe" and has a more interesting storyline, raising some important moral issues about pacifism, non-violence and Christian forgiveness. With a less stolid actor than Mature in the leading role it could have been a classic. The message of "The Robe", by contrast, never gets much further than "Christians Good, Pagans Bad", and although the conflicted central character of Marcellus does offer some complexity, any attempt at moral depth goes out of the window with the simplistic, sentimental ending to the story. "The Robe" is certainly better than "The Silver Chalice" (I cannot think of an epic which is actually worse than that ridiculous film) but it falls a long way short of the likes of "Ben-Hur" or "Spartacus". 6/10

One of the best sword and Sandals movies

[mercury4 · 10/10 · 27 January 2004]

I am a big fan of these types of movies. I love movies like Ben-Hur, The Greatest Story Ever Told, Samson and Delilah, and Spartacus. The movies that took place in ancient Rome had so much going for them. They had great actors, directors, cinematography, and music. They also never needed to use computer animation. I was always very pleased. Only I can't say I was pleased with the Romans wearing purple and black in Gladiator. But anyway, this movie has it all. There is nothing I can say that's bad about it. It has a great story that pulls you in. When you watch it you feel as if you are there. You feel everything that the actors are feeling and the music helps to set the mood.

Jay Robinson is pretty good as Caligula, but sometimes he is way too over the top. His performance as Caligula was better in Demetrius and the Gladiators. Jean Simmons is a very good actress. I like her a lot in this movie and in Spartacus. I think she deserved some type of recognition. Victor Mature was very good too. Michael Rennie was another good actor in this movie. He seemed so perfect as Peter. The one that stood out was Richard Burton. He did a great job. I could go on and on because the whole cast was great. I read that Tyrone Power was originally approached for the lead. I think he could've pulled it off. He was a very underrated actor.

I have many favorite parts. I love the scene when Victor Mature is trying to find Jesus so he can warn him and he runs into to someone. I won't say who. I like the crucifixion scene. It was very well done and Victor Mature shows his great acting in the scene. I love the scene when Richard Burton finds the robe. He was afraid of it, but when he holds it close it has an effect on him. The ending is outstanding. It is well acted and ends happily. Burton without a doubt deserved his Academy Award nomination. Sometimes he overacts in scenes when he is yelling, but other times he really looks like he belongs in the role. This movie probably didn't win much because there was so much competition. Many other great movies were there. From Here To Eternity, a big favorite of mine, and Shane, another big favorite of mine, were nominated. The actors that were up for it were all favorites of mine too. I can't really decide who deserved it. Burt Lancaster and Montgomery Clift were both great in From Here to Eternity. It's tough for me to choose between those two and Richard Burton.

Everything about this movie is great so be sure to check it out. I can watch it over and over and never get sick of it. Check out this classic, this epic. It has it all. The Robe is a timeless classic. You will not be disappointed.

Has some good scenes, but drowns in its own lack of subtlety

[zetes · 6/10 · 17 August 2002]

No other classic Hollywood genre has aged as badly as the Biblical epic, and the Roman epic in general. Had their directors never heard the word "subtlety"? In The Robe, Demetrius (Victor Mature) is looking for Jesus to warn him that he is about to be arrested. He runs into a man who tells him that it is too late to save him. "Never doubt," the man tells Demetrius. "What is your name?" Demetrius asks. "Judas." BLAM! Lightning and thunder, and Judas walks to a tree visible in the background. I mean, is the lightning and thunder at all necessary? Wouldn't it be more powerful without the overkill? The film isn't generally as bad as that scene. There are several really powerful scenes, and there are a few surprisingly gripping action sequences. The whole film would be a lot better if the actors portrayed any emotion. Judging from this film, Richard Burton, Jean Simmons, and Victor Mature would be perfect for a Robert Bresson film. A couple of the actors try, most notably Jay Robinson as Caligula. I think there should have been more of this character, since the historical Caligula was so interesting. I'm not sure if I liked Robinson's performance, but I appreciated his attempt to put some life into his character. The Robe isn't exactly a bad film, but it's not a good one, either. 6/10.

Slow and ponderous epic, but the acting is decent enough and the CinemaScope is effective

[TheLittleSongbird · 5/10 · 2 April 2010]

I had mixed feelings watching the Robe. By all means it isn't a bad film, but it isn't great either. While there are some good things, there is a lot wrong with it as well.

PROS: The plot about a Roman officer winning Christ's robe in a game of dice during the Crucifixion is a nice idea to work with and comes off decently on screen. The film for its time has nice production values, with lovely costumes and sets. The Robe is best known for the first film to be shot in CinemaScope, which was put to effective use here. The music is very good, and the acting is decent. There have been times when I have found Richard Burton wooden, but there have also been films like Nineteen Eighty Four where he has been remarkably good. Here, he does look handsome in Roman garb. Jean Simmons, rest in peace, has been better, but she looks lovely as Diana and does a decent job acting. Torin Thatcher is a marvellous Senator Gallio, while Jay Robinson is unforgettably melodramatic as Caligula.

CONS: There are things wrong with this film, and unfortunately pacing comes at the top of this list. This is not the first film to suffer from this problem, but The Robe seems to move at only one speed which is slow and ponderous. The film is also very awkwardly directed by Henry Koster, and the dialogue ranges from adequate to laughable, as if the writer was being very careful in order not to offend. Victor Mature has a tendency to take it TOO seriously as Demetrius, and in a rather uneven performance it shows. There are also parts where the action and romantic subplot are a little unconvincing and where some scenes are overlong.

Overall, worth watching in general but I don't necessarily recommend it. 5/10 Bethany Cox

Still Fresh & Alive 50 years later!

[Sylviastel · 8/10 · 7 December 2003]

I got this movie from Blockbuster for $5.00 and it's worth it. It is a classic film with great performances by Richard Burton, Victor Mature, and the always fabulous Jean Simmons. If you're really interested in Christian movies, this is a fabulous film with wonderful scenery and acting. It will make you a believer in great film-making. The Robe is about Jesus Christ and his infamous Robe. The writing could be better but the acting is superb with a first rate cast. The costumes are colorful and the scenery is well done to recreate another era in history. I recommend watching if you are a fan of the above listed actors. I wish Jean well and she is always fabulous to watch again and again. I wish Jean became a Dame because she truly is one.

Jay Robinson -- Great Performance!

[georfra68 · 16 December 2007]

This is a great film. I never get tired of watching it. Richard Burton gives one of his best performances, but it is the character parts that make this film memorable. Michael Rennie as Peter is perfectly suited for the role. He gives a wonderfully ascetic performance. Jeff Morrow as the centurion dominates the scenes he's in with his weary observations and his underlying contempt for the privileged but dissipated Marcellus. But it is Jay Robinson's performance as Caligula that remains unforgettable. His role as the maniacal Roman emperor is one of the most entertaining film performances I have ever seen. Get this film!

biblical epic without the grand action

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 1 April 2024]

It's the 18th year of Roman emperor Tiberius which would make this 32AD. Rome is a land of slaves. Marcellus Gallio (Richard Burton) is a Roman military tribune and a Senator's son. He is entranced by Diana (Jean Simmons) while walking the slave market. It's been 12 years since the childhood friends last met and she is pledged to regent Caligula. In a public spat against Caligula, he outbids the regent to buy slave Demetrius (Victor Mature) from Corinth. Later, he crucifies a religious zealot named Jesus of Nazareth.

It's an old fashion biblical epic. It's early CinemaScope process. It did win Art Direction and Costume but fail to win three bigger Oscars. This is not quite as recognized today as other biblical epics. There are big sets and lots of costumes but it doesn't have the big action sequences. It does show the conversion story pretty well, but that's more character work than thrilling. In a way, this is a more humble Christian film and less flashy Hollywood.

An odd case where the sequel is much better than the original.

[planktonrules · 5/10 · 26 August 2013]

When the filmmakers were making "The Robe", they knew that they'd also be making the sequel "Demetrius and the Gladiators" and filmed them one after the other with no stoppage in between. Now you'd expect that as usual, the first film would be much better than the next, but this is an odd case where this is NOT so. While I really liked "Demetrius and the Gladiators" when I saw it recently, I was very disappointed by "The Robe". And, yes, I watched the films in reverse order!

The film is set near the time of Jesus' death and is told from the point of view of a Roman official, Marcellus Gallio (Richard Burton). He and his slave, Demetrius (Victor Mature) are sent to Judea and his is there at the crucifixion. In fact, as the Roman soldiers are casting dice for Jesus' clothes, Marcellus wins the robe. However, little does he know that this robe seems to have magical properties (huh?!) and through this robe, Marcellus comes to become a Christian--making it among the strangest conversion experiences in Hollywood history. However, the insane Emperor, Caligula (Jay Robinson) is not at all pleased, as he hates Christians and takes great sport in killing them. What's to become of Marcellus and his sweetie, Diana (Jean Simmons) once their conversions come to the attention of the nutty 'ol Emperor?

Of all of Richard Burton's films, according to IMDb he was least proud of this one because of his wooden performance. While I would agree that it was generally wooden, when it wasn't so flat it was hilariously over-acted. I particularly laughed when Marcellus went mad--and Burton did it in a way highly reminiscent of William Shatner in "Impulse"--and this is NOT meant as a compliment for either of them.

Overall, I'd say that the film is, at best, a time-passer. It has lovely sets and nice costumes but it also features some bad acting and a dubious message about Christianity. My advice is so see the sequel--it's something "The Robe" isn't--entertaining. A little bit more subtlety sure would have helped this film, as would an infusion of life and fun. As a result, the film just drags and drags to its conclusion.