Oedipus Rex (1967)

In pre-war Italy, a young couple have a baby boy. The father, however, is jealous of his son - and the scene moves to antiquity, where the baby is taken into the desert to be killed. He is ... See full summary »

Director:

Pier Paolo Pasolini

Writer:

Pier Paolo Pasolini

Stars:

Silvana Mangano, Franco Citti, Alida Valli

4 wins & 4 nominations.

Cast

Complete credited cast:
Silvana Mangano	...	Giocasta
Franco Citti	...	Edipo
Alida Valli	...	Merope
Carmelo Bene	...	Creonte
Julian Beck	...	Tiresia
Luciano Bartoli	...	Laio
Francesco Leonetti	...	Servo di Laio
Ahmed Belhachmi	...	Polibo
Giovanni Ivan Scratuglia	...	Sacerdote (as Ivan Scratuglia)
Giandomenico Davoli	...	Pastore di Polibo
Ninetto Davoli	...	Angelo

Storyline

In pre-war Italy, a young couple have a baby boy. The father, however, is jealous of his son - and the scene moves to antiquity, where the baby is taken into the desert to be killed. He is rescued, given the name Edipo (Oedipus), and brought up by the King and Queen of Corinth as their son. One day an oracle informs Edipo that he is destined to kill his father and marry his mother. Horrified, he flees Corinth and his supposed parents - only to get into a fight and kill an older man on the road...

---

Plot Keywords:

child abandonment | son marries mother | patricide | incest | parricide | 

---

Genres:

Drama

---

Certificate:

Not Rated

Details

Country:

Italy Morocco

Language:

Italian Romanian

Release Date:

1968 (France)

Also Known As:

Oedipus Rex

Filming Locations:

Basilica of San Petronio, Bologna, Emilia-Romagna, Italy

Company Credits

Production Co:

Arco Film,Somafis

Technical Specs

Runtime:

104 min

Sound Mix:

Mono

Color:

Color (Technicolor)

Aspect Ratio:

1.85 : 1

Did You Know?

Trivia

First part of Pier Paolo Pasolini's "Mythical Cycle" also including Teorema (1968), Porcile (1969) and Medea (1969).

---

Connections

Referenced in Funeral Parade of Roses (1969)

User Reviews

Authenticity is not the issue

We do ourselves no favour by fixating on how well a film uses every little detail and line in an original text. Certainly, by those standards this is a mediocre, and possibly lazy, film at best. But at the same time there is the problem of being so liberal in one's adaptation that every goes sour, the latest attempt at "Vanity Fair" is a perfect example. But this film, along with Bresson's "Pickpocket," should stand as the rules of adaptation for every young director. Both films are very interpretative, but the directors aren't so naive as to think that mere plot details can constitute a film. So what pushes this film beyond a mere surface-level adaptation? In this case, it takes a deep insight into the nature of Greek tragedy itself. Tragedy's dualism (the representational and the chaotic) is prevalent in all Pasolini's works, it was especially essential in his "Gospel," and I was excited to see how it played out in its own source, and the results are absolutely fantastic. Visually imaginative and so intellectually superior to its contemporaries it seems out of place in film.

5 out of 5 - Essential