Just a few short days ago, I was writing a review on a film that was a period drama that could be seen as an allegory to the current political climate in America had the movie not predated that climate. It seems only fitting that another politically charged drama come so soon after it, another one that can be seen as commenting on our modern political crisis. Parallels can be seen with the current leaders in America complete with the accusations against, and the assassination attempts of, the standing President who is painted as wanting to seize power and abolish the democratic republic. This film is, of course, the 1953 adaptation of William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar.
Julius Caesar is, of course, the telling of Caesar’s (Louis Calhern) betrayal after returning home to Rome from defeating the sons of his military rival, Pompey. His return brings with it concerns, though, as some high in authority see Caesar as a challenge to the republic of Rome, fearing he will declare himself a dictator over the great nation. A group of conspirators, led by Cassius (John Gielgud), attempt to convince Brutus (James Mason) to join the conspiracy to kill Caesar. Brutus, who is friendly towards Caesar, is hesitant to kill him but agrees that he may be abusing his power.
Despite warnings from his wife, Calpurnia (Greer Garson), as well as from the soothsayer, Caesar goes to the Senate and is confronted by a fake petition they knowingly put before him, knowing he will reject it. When he does just that, the Senate, one by one, stab Caesar to death with the final blow coming from Brutus himself. With his dying breath, Caesar utters the famous words: “Et tu, Brute?”
The conspirators attempt to prove they acted for the good of Rome by not fleeing the scene but demonstrating to the crowd that they were preventing an autocrat. Brutus joins them, defending his actions, and for the moment, the crowd is on their side. This changes, though, when Mark Antony (Marlon Brando) speaks, manipulating the crowd with reminders of how Caesar refused the crown multiple times, contradicting Brutus’ assertion that he was ambitious. He also reminds the people of the good Caesar did for Rome, his sympathy for the poor, and his refusal of the crown.
Conspiracies come to light, wars are fought, and eventually many of the conspirators fall, either in battle or by their own hands. Brutus, who takes his own life, is paid tribute by Mark Antony for being the only one of the conspirators who acted, in his mind, for the good of Rome and not for his own selfish aspirations.
Shakespeare initially viewed this play as one of his tragedies before relocating it to the alternative category of history. Quite honestly, it falls into both categories well, telling the events of Brutus, Caesar, and Mark Antony while letting us experience the tragic fall of Brutus, who was manipulated into killing his friend and eventually takes his own life. Brutus is often seen as a weak man easily strung along by those around him, making him a bit of a tragic figure in history. However, Joseph L. Mankiewicz, writer and director of this version of the play, didn’t see him quite like that. Instead, coupled with the powerful performance by James Mason, a different side of Brutus can be seen. In this film, Brutus, while still being manipulated by those around him, makes up his own mind and is more resolute, though when it comes time to stick the knife in, he is hesitant.
While Julius Caesar has been adapted more than once to film, the 1953 version has been held up as the gold standard in large part because of the strength of its cast. James Mason, as I mentioned above, brings a level of conflict and resolution to Brutus that is largely absent from most versions of the play. John Gielgud is likewise a strong choice for Cassius. His conversations with Brutus are convincing, though subtle, convincing Brutus over time that what he speaks is the truth, for the betterment of Rome. Gielgud would also star in the 70s adaptation, this time in the role of Caesar, but that is a prime example of miscasting with a competent actor. He makes a poor Caesar whereas he is great as the conspirator Cassius.
Leading them all, though, is Marlon Brando, who was not the first choice for the role of Mark Antony. He was coming off the role of Stanley in A Streetcar Named Desire and had a reputation for mumbling his lines of dialogue. None of that is present here. When he stands before the crowds and shouts: “Friends, Roman’s Countrymen, lend me your ears,” we sit up and pay attention because he is commanding the stage. When Brando wants to be there, he can be absolutely effective, and that is in evidence throughout this production. So effective was he that James Mason feared the sympathy was being taken from his own character and petitioned the director to shift that focus back his way. This caused a tug of war between the three men. The final result speaks for itself, and if any of that frustration or animosity made it on screen, it works within the context of the drama.
Your enjoyment of this film will largely be dependent on how you feel about the Shakespearean play in the first place. This production will not convert you if you are not already a fan, nor will it turn you on to Shakespeare if you don’t already appreciate the bard. It is largely word for word how it was originally written with little alteration—this even causes some issues when the words don’t quite match the actions seen—so purists will mostly be pleased with it. But the caveat is that if you aren’t already tuned in to the language Shakespeare uses, you may have problems with this film. It is a very dialogue-driven picture which can make it hard to get through, especially if you struggle with the fanciful language.
It has been said that a good movie is one that has three great scenes and no bad ones. This, for sure, has two stand-out scenes, maybe three, but two for sure. The first is Caesar’s assassination, filmed in such a brutal fashion that it’s impressive it got through the Hays Code censorship. The other is the Mark Antony speech that is just so commandingly delivered by Brando. These moments bring an energy to the film that otherwise gets tamped down by scene after scene of dialogue. Fans of Shakespeare, and of this play in particular, will not mind that, but for the rest of us, it will make watching this a bit more of a struggle.
Academy Award Nominations:
Best Motion Picture: John Houseman
Best Actor: Marlon Brando
Best Music (Music Score of a Dramatic or Comedy Picture): Miklós Rózsa
Best Art Direction (Black-and-White): Cedric Gibbons, Edward Carfagno, Edwin B. Willis, and Hugh Hunt (won)
Best Cinematography (Black-and-White): Joseph Ruttenberg
____________________________________________________
Release Date: June 3, 1953
Running Time: 121 minutes
Not Rated
Starring: Marlon Brando, James Mason, John Gielgud, Louis Calhern, Edmund O’Brien, Greer Garson, and Deborah Kerr
Directed by: Joseph L. Mankiewicz
Comments
Post a Comment