Just what I expected

Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Blistering performances.

Already renowned as a master sculptor, Michelangelo is commanded by Pope Julius II to paint the ceiling of his Sistine Chapel, and he reluctantly accepts the commission. Based on Irving Stone's best-selling novel, "The Agony and the Ecstasy" is a thin retelling of the artist's creative struggle and his verbal sparring with the Pope. Carol Reed's lavish production is shamelessly padded with a documentary prologue about Michelangelo's sculpture, an intermission little more than an hour into the movie, exit music, and numerous atmospheric shots that add little but running time to the story. However, the padding and extras provided enough perceived value to warrant a reserved-seat roadshow presentation at higher ticket prices, which was a popular venue for prestige films in the 1950's and 1960's. Unfortunately, this obviously big-budget production exemplifies the old adage that the whole is less than the sum of its parts.Charlton Heston has a granite face and monumental physique that suggests one of Michelangelo's sculptures, and, while he has on-screen presence, his acting range falls short of the demanding role of a tortured artist. Rex Harrison, on the other hand, is outstanding as the warrior pope, a complex man balancing spiritual and worldly ambitions. Fresh from an Academy Award nomination for his Julius Caesar in "Cleopatra" and a second nomination and the Oscar for his Henry Higgins in "My Fair Lady," Harrison deserved a least a third nod for this film. The rest of the cast is adequate, although Diane Cilento, who does the best she can with a thankless role, is little more than a bone thrown to the female audience in what is essentially a male-centric drama. Michelangelo is among the world's most famous historical gay men, and, while Philip Dunne's screenplay alludes to the artist's sexuality, the script blurs the issue and sidesteps a direct confrontation; Cilento's ambiguous relationship with the artist was likely intended to throw off all but the most knowledgeable viewers.Aside from Harrison's performance, "The Agony and the Ecstasy" is worthy viewing as a visual feast. Fresh from Oscar-winning work on "Cleopatra," the Twentieth Century Fox design team of John DeCuir and Jack Martin Smith stunningly recreated the ecclesiastical glory of 16th century Rome. Among other Oscar winners for "Cleopatra" were Vittorio Nino Novarese, whose costumes glow in reds, crimsons, and golds; and Leon Shamroy, whose color cinematography gloriously captures the period detail. A fine score by Alex North, another veteran of "Cleopatra," further enhances the visuals. Carol Reed's adaptation of "The Agony and the Ecstasy" is eye, and some times ear, candy, especially for those interested in art history; the scenes that detail the creation of the Sistine Chapel ceiling are particularly fascinating. However, beyond the visuals and an award-worthy performance by Rex Harrison, the film is thin on drama and weak on historical accuracy.

I like historical films. Recently I watched three historical films all made in the early 1960s. These are 'El Cid', 'The Spartacus' and 'The Agony and The Ecstasy'. Of the three, I rate The Agony and the Ecstasy as the best. This film is based on the eponymous novel written by Irving Stone. I had read the book nearly a decade back and it was nice to see the film finally. The film is about the circumstances under which Michelangelo came to compose his famous frescoes in the Sistine Chapel of Rome in the 16th century. The Sistine fresco, the 'creation of man' has become almost an emblem for the artist. But not many know that Michelangelo painted the Sistine frescoes reluctantly, only because he was forced to do so by his patron, Pope Julius II. The film is about the war of wits between these two great men Pope Julius II is a warrior pope, a worldly Pope. His concern is to protect the papal states from being over run by warring European powers. For this he is willing to take up arms. The pope knows that the posterity wont remember him for his spiritual prowess or leadership. Therefore he want to leave great works of art as his legacy. He therefore hires Michelangelo to paint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel. The artist is not very keen on painting and considers sculpture to be his true calling. He is also not willing to conform to the prevailing canons of artistic excellence. He feels constrained by the limits of time and money that is set. All the great moments of the film occur when the Pope and the Artist clash. It is a clash of ideas and world views: (1) Whether sculpture is a superior form of art as compared to painting; (2) Whether it is appropriate depict biblical figures in their raw humanity; (3) Whether it is moral for a man of god to take arms for his principles and so on. For me the finest scene in the film is where the Pope and the Cardinals come to see the frescoes and judge it as lacking in good taste. The Artist is forced to give a strong rebuttal and in the process he expounds the humanist philosophy of art. Shot in beautiful Technicolor, the film still looks spectacular. It is a visual and intellectual treat.

The film is an epic grandeur feature of a interpersonal tug-of-war between the maestro Michelangelo and Pope Julius II.I cannot help being shell-shocked to see the reconstruction of the magnificent ceiling though recognizably most of which is the trickery of montage (not in the real the Sistine Chapel, the location was inside Cinecitta Italy instead), but bathing under the glamour and solemnness of the visual wonders, I am stunned to exude my admiration and awe!The two leads conspicuously stimulate a Moses versus Caesar confrontation, Charlton Heston seems to be more boorish than artistic to manifest a struggled Michelangelo, may God doesn't distinguish his people by their looks. The "agony and ecstasy" is watered down to an underwhelming stalemate thanks to Charlton's outlandish incarnation as the most eminent artist of that time. Rex Harrison, is by far and large worthy another Oscar nomination for his arresting devotedness, which is apt to impress the audience with a mind-blowing bi-polar characterization while good and evil coexist at the same time.The film was a grave box office fiasco when it came out in 1965, however, judging by my appraisement, its merits still can be appreciated by our generation (a well-balanced script, the haunting original score and all the props and settings). However, the film entirely skipped Michelangelo's sexual orientation and awkwardly ploys a portentous conversation between Michelangelo and his admirer Contessina de'Medici (a over-wise Diane Cilento), which unveiled its cowardliness and helplessness.My final remark is that as time goes by ruthlessly, art stands still and never fades away, so lucky enough cinema is yet a part of it.

Okay, okay, it's not that bad, I just had to use that joke... Then again, it's a close thing in the early days. It begins with a 10-minute rushed bio of Michelangelo narrated by an American who's no Kenneth Clark... it sounds like those awful Disney documentaries. Lots of shots of Michelangelo's sculpture and so on...Then the movie gets underway and it's Heston as the artist and Harrison as the Pope. Except they always play the same types mostly, so it sort of lacks credibility. Harry Andrews wasted in a support role. Adolfo Celi, who played Largo in Thunderball one year earlier, is dubbed (badly) into American. Diane Cilento, Sean Connery's then-wife, is a not very attractive harpy type, a kind of love interest/shoulder to cry on. During one awful moment she bucks up the distraught artist, saying, "And get that ceiling finished!" sounding for all the world like some nagging housewife. "And then you're to fix the garden gate and call round my mother-in-law's!" It gets better as it goes on, after the interval. And it's good to see Harrison playing a more devout type, rather a rascally self-centred rogue. But much of it seems to be about conflict and argument for the sake of it, to create a drama of some kind.