The Fall of the Roman Empire (1964)

Action-packed look at the beginnings of the fall of the Roman Empire. Here is the glory, the greed and grandeur that was Rome. Here is the story of personal lust for power, and the ... See full summary »

Director:

Anthony Mann

Writers:

Ben Barzman (screenplay), Basilio Franchina (screenplay),

Stars:

Sophia Loren, Stephen Boyd, Alec Guinness

Nominated for 1 Oscar. Another 1 win.

Cast

Cast overview, first billed only:
Sophia Loren	...	Lucilla
Stephen Boyd	...	Livius
Alec Guinness	...	Marcus Aurelius
James Mason	...	Timonides
Christopher Plummer	...	Commodus
Anthony Quayle	...	Verulus
John Ireland	...	Ballomar
Omar Sharif	...	Sohamus
Mel Ferrer	...	Cleander
Eric Porter	...	Julianus
Finlay Currie	...	Senator
Andrew Keir	...	Polybius
Douglas Wilmer	...	Niger
George Murcell	...	Victorinus
Norman Wooland	...	Virgilianus

Storyline

Action-packed look at the beginnings of the fall of the Roman Empire. Here is the glory, the greed and grandeur that was Rome. Here is the story of personal lust for power, and the shattering effects of that power's loss. Here is the tale of the plight of a people living on the brink of a political abyss.

---

Plot Keywords:

roman empire | emperor | cavalry | infantry | hand to hand combat | 

---

Taglines:

The Most Magnificent Re-Creation . . . Of An Ancient Empire . . . Launches A New Epoch In Motion Pictures . . .

---

Genres:

Drama | History | War

---

Certificate:

Unrated

Details

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Release Date:

26 March 1964 (USA)

Also Known As:

A Queda do Império Romano

Filming Locations:

Comunidad Valenciana, Spain

Box Office

Budget:

$19,000,000 (estimated)

Company Credits

Production Co:

Samuel Bronston Productions

Technical Specs

Runtime:

188 min 172 min (1970 re-release)

Sound Mix:

Mono (35 mm optical prints) 70 mm 6-Track (Westrex Recording System)

Color:

Color (Technicolor)

Aspect Ratio:

2.20 : 1

Did You Know?

Trivia

The film was originally intended to be made after El Cid and to reunite Charlton Heston and Sophia Loren. The set for the Forum Romanum was actually being built when Heston rejected the script but expressed an interest in '55 Days at Peking' instead. Samuel Bronston immediately ordered that the work on the Forum be stopped and the landscaping and foundation work be adapted for the Peking set. After filming, the Peking set was torn down and replaced by the Forum. If you look carefully, both sets share a very similar topography.

---

Goofs

During the funeral pyre of Marcus Aurelius, which Commodus and Livius are holding the torch, their hands move further away from the flame between shots.

---

Quotes

Livius: A few days longer, Caesar, we'll bring you his head.
Marcus Aurelius: No Livius, please don't bring me his head. I wouldn't know what to do with it.

---

Connections

Featured in Gladiators: Bloodsport of the Colisseum (2000)

User Reviews

Short review of a long movie

FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE is one of the last big budgeted Sandal epics of which started in the 1950s (QUO VADIS, THE ROBE) and lasted a good 15 years before dying a quick death. 1964 seems to be the year when the genre died, whether in the big Biblical style or the pulpy Sword & Sandal genre. And it's not surprising FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE failed so miserably. It's not a bad movie. It's a meticulously well mounted film based on a dire script. The actual historical events were too complex to cover in one film, even in a 3 hour film, but the script for FOTRE is so bad that it was almost impossible for anyone to make something palatable out of it.

In the first 45 minutes, we watch Alec Guiness, as Marcus Aurelius, dying. That's it. What a dreary and long start. And then for the next 2 hours we see everyone debating the end of Rome. Again, fun viewing. I love serious movies but the screenplay and direction was ill-conceived here: who wants to watch an old man dying for the first 45 minutes of a 3 hour film, only to be followed by more moaning and groaning? The length of the movie already demanded a lot from viewers and the dour, dark tone of the movie was too much for them to sustain interest. After the first deathly dull 45 minutes, the film never recovered afterwards.

Other things like miscast actors: no one and I mean no one seems to be related. Alec is Sophia's father? Sophia and Christopher Plummer are siblings? Stephen Boyd was a befuddled looking actor. Boyd and Sophia have no chemistry whatsoever. There's a certain amount of predictability to everything, certainly in regards to the James Mason character and what happens with the Barbarians. If a film is predictable in its direction and it's 3 hours long, the film suddenly feels like 5 hours. And as a fan of big scores, the music in FOTRE is not memorable at all and this is during one of the best decades for film scores. All these elements create a film that falls resolutely flat. It's unfortunate because the resources were there. The sets in Rome are stunning and there is one good battle scene. The tone, certainly at the end, is effectively Apocalyptic but it's too little, too late. The passion seen at the end should have been present from the start.

There's no doubt that Ridley Scott was, eh, "inspired" by this film when he made the overrated GLADIATOR. The whole beginning of GLADIATOR is almost a scene by scene copy of the beginning in FOTRE. Though more visually pleasing than the dreary FOTRE, GLADIATOR is kid's stuff compared to the Anthony Mann film. The 1964 film respected the intelligence of its audience while the Russell Crowe flick is mere junk food. Oscar winning junk food that is.

All in all, THE FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE is a somewhat fascinating misfire. It could also be called THE FALL OF THE ROMAN INSPIRED MOVIES. It's sad that this film killed the Sword & Sandal genre back in the 1960s.