Review of The Fall of the Roman Empire (1964) by Owen P — 30 Mar 2010

A staggeringly huge film and one of the last great epics of Hollywood's Golden Age. The most expensive film ever made at the time of it's release (about $28 million in 1964 dollars; well over $200 million now when adjusted for inflation), the entire production is beautifully detailed and is without a doubt one of the best-looking films of all time. Even better, the film benefits from a script that is more thoughtful and intelligent than just about any other film of its day.

The plot covers the same historical ground as "Gladiator," beginning in Germany as the dying Emperor Marcus Aurelius (Alec Guinness) reveals that he plans to make his heir not his son Commodus (Christopher Plummer), but instead the loyal general Gaius Livius (Stephen Boyd) who is in love with Aurelius' daughter, Lucilla (Sophia Loren). Commodus and Livius, once close friends, now become bitter rivals as the story unfolds. Boyd, excellent as the villain in "Ben-Hur," gives it his all as Livius but is no match for the genius acting skills of Guinness and Plummer. Guinness is excellent as the wise Aurelius, but the film belongs to Plummer, who gives possibly the best performance of his career as the delightfully unhinged and sadistic Commodus. Also strong is James Mason as Aurelius' Greek philosopher/advisor. Sophia Loren is about as easy on the eyes as they come, and her acting is certainly better than Boyd's.

But the real strength of the film lies in its smart script. It speculates on the various causes of Rome's fall, with heavy emphasis on the corrupt leaders and internal strife. It also offers insight into man's desire to be free and what a government's role should be in ensuring that freedom. In the end it's a very downbeat and depressing film, closing with a sense of pessimism very uncommon in films of the period. "Fall" is very much a film of its time but it still holds weight today, and stands as one of, if not the, greatest epics in all cinema.