While I can see the attraction of this film, it doesn't stand the test of time. It seems more dated than older musicals from the 1950's or even the 1940's. As a modern (i.e. modern for 1961) adaptation of "Romeo and Juliet" it's an attractive story, but it needs retelling today, in a new environment with new music.
Incidentally, what's the five minutes still picture at the beginning about? Is that to help people who arrived too late for the film?
re: the still part at the beginning - wasn't there a trend in the 60's to include a longish beginning not related, only very tangentially, to the movie itself? I'm trying to think of names, and perhaps will come up with some, but I have in my mind a few opening sequences. I do think you are right that it is time to get the people to settle, much like the chorus at the beginning of Romeo and Juliet would have served the same purpose.
ReplyDeleteAs for the movie itself, I am in agreement with you that it has not stood the test of time. A shame really, because the performances, in my opinion, are quite great. Yet, I will not watch this movie over. Even if I happen across it on the net or channel surfing, I feel no desire to watch it again. As a contrast, My Fair Lady (to pick a contemporary musical) grabs my interest every time, even if I don't actually watch it.
There are few movies that I stop what I am doing to watch, if I happen across them, even if I own them on DVD/video. Two such movies are To Kill a Mockingbird (the version with Gregory Peck, though I'm not sure there's been more than one), and Glory.
It's a while since I've watched it, but doesn't "Cleopatra" have a few minutes of music with a totally black screen at the beginning. I doubt they show that on television, but it's on the DVD. I suppose that wouldn't matter much in the cinema.
ReplyDeleteEven the older musicals with Gene Kelly or Fred Astaire seem more modern when I watch them today. I think that the reason is that "West Side Story" tried to be modern when it was made, pegging it in the 1960's. The older musicals were unrelated to the era they were filmed in, so apart from clothing and hair styles they still look new today.
I haven't watched all of Cleopatra ever. *ducks*
ReplyDeleteAs for the 50s musicals, I think the Bollywood industry, which incorporated the 50s musical style, may have assisted in those American movies looking fresher. I myself wouldn't say I think they look modern - rather I think they look of a definite style. I agree that West Side Story is definitely pegged to a period, rather than to a style.
I remember watching "Cleopatra" at least once on television when I was young. I had it in good memory, so I bought the DVD. And I didn't like it any more. Maybe the reason is that I'd recently watched the tv series "Rome", which is a much higher quality portrayal of the story.
ReplyDeleteI quite enjoy Bollywood films, although I can't say that I "understand" them. Someone needs to sit and explain them to me. There's a Buffy episode that starts with them watching a Bollywood film.
XANDER: Is she dying?
BUFFY: I think she's singing.
XANDER: To a telephone in Hindi. Now that's entertainment! Why is she singing?
WILLOW: She's sad because her lover gave her twelve gold coins, but then the wizard cut open the bag of salt, and now the dancing minions have nowhere to put their big maypole... fish thing.
XANDER: Uh-huh. Why is she singing?
BUFFY: Her lover? I thought that was her chiropractor.
WILLOW: Because of that thing he did with her feet? No, that was personal.
XANDER: Hmm. And we thought just because we didn't have any money or anyplace to go this would be a lackluster evening.