Did you people see the same film I saw?

Absolutely the worst movie.

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Based on Trevor Nunn's acclaimed 1972 Royal Shakespeare Company production, this is an excellent adaptation of the Bard's tale of love, duty, war, honour and ambition. The play nicely explores the contrasting values of Ptolemaic Egypt and the Roman Republic, both of which were approaching their final days during the events portrayed for different but related reasons. As with most Shakespearean adaptations, there are some cuts here and there, the most significant being the omission of Sextus Pompey. While many of the references to him are retained as it would be difficult to move the plot along if he were not even mentioned, I felt that it was a mistake to excise Pompey's appearances entirely. He is very conspicuous by his absence, not least because it adversely effects the film's structure in one instance: Mark Antony and Octavius go from being reluctant allies to being at war with each other very suddenly and it is a little jarring. The production is very much a filmed stage play as the sets are minimalist to basically non- existent. However, the director Jon Scoffield handles the material very well and I was surprised to discover that this was the only time that he ever directed Shakespeare for the screen.The film stars Richard Johnson in an excellent performance as Mark Antony, a member of the Second Triumvirate of the Roman Republic who spends most of his time in Alexandria with his beloved Cleopatra. In the wake of Julius Caesar's assassination, she has allied herself with Mark Antony against Caesar's great-nephew and adoptive son Octavius. While it began as a political arrangement, it has transformed into a passionate love affair by the beginning of the play. Antony is so bewitched by Cleopatra that he has come to neglect his onerous duties in Rome and seems almost disinterested in the fact that his wife Fulvia and brother Lucius are waging a revolt against his "official" ally Octavius. In a great moment of self- reflection early in the play, he fears that he is losing himself in dotage but seldom displays the same level of perception afterwards. Antony is not always a sympathetic character but he is always a compelling one and Johnson does a fantastic job at conveying his deeply felt inner conflict between his love for Cleopatra and his responsibilities to Rome. Throughout much of the play, Antony seems desperate to convince himself that he is a honourable man, especially when his often ill-advised actions suggest otherwise. He dies with some degree of contentment, secure in the knowledge that he is "a Roman by a Roman valiantly vanquished."Janet Suzman is suitably theatrical as the Drama Queen of the Nile. Her performance is generally very good but she does have a tendency to go pretty far over the top whenever she has to shout, with Antony's death scene being the best / worst example of this. I imagine that this approach worked better on stage than it does on screen. Cleopatra is a fascinating and complex character. She is self-obsessed, childish, arrogant, quick to anger and likes to indulge in histrionics for the benefit of her audience. Conversely, she is a strong, powerful and fiercely intelligent woman who knows exactly what she wants and is not afraid to get it. At one point, she compares ensnaring Antony to catching a fish. However, she seems to view him not as a prize that she has won but as the love of her life, even if her actions occasionally indicate a lack of loyalty towards him. Her love for him is not quite as self-evidently all- consuming as is his love for her but there is nevertheless a sense that we are witnessing a great love affair for the ages reach its tragic and inevitable conclusion. In one of the play's most memorable moments, Enobarbus claims that "age cannot wither her nor custom stale her infinite variety," which is indicative of the fact that she is not afraid to use her beauty and sexuality to achieve her aims. This leads Octavius to describe her as a "whore" and fuels his desire to lead her through Rome as his prisoner.In one of his first major television appearances, Patrick Stewart is wonderful as Enobarbus, Antony's oldest friend and brother-in-arms throughout many a campaign. In many respects, Enobarbus is the most insightful character in the play as, for instance, he is the first to realise that Antony will return to Cleopatra's side in spite of the fact that he has agreed to marry Octavius' sister Octavia in order to solidify their alliance against the rebellious Pompey. Over time, he loses his faith in Antony and with good reason as his obsession with Cleopatra has come to cloud his judgement, most notably at the crucial Battle of Actium when he makes the grave strategic error of following her when she and her sixty ships retreat. Enobarbus defects to Octavius' forces but he is soon overcome with guilt and regret and dies of a broken heart at having betrayed the man whom he loved like a brother. The always excellent Corin Redgrave is rather smarmy as the mostly unsympathetic antagonist Octavius. I say "mostly" as many of his criticisms of Antony's neglect of his duties in the early part of the play were perfectly justified. That said, he is a ruthless man full of vaulting ambition who proves to be a powerful enemy to the title characters. The film also featured strong performances in roles of varying size from Rosemary McHale as Charmian, Philip Locke as Agrippa, Raymond Westwell as Lepidus, Tim Pigott-Smith as Proculeius, Ben Kingsley as Thidius, Joseph Marcell as Eros, W. Morgan Sheppard as Scarus and Darien Angadi as Alexas, a role which he would reprise in the 1981 BBC version.Overall, this is an extremely effective adaptation of Shakespeare's tragedy.

Though the acting from the Royal Shakespeare company is first rate, this version of Antony and Cleopatra is little more than a photographed stage play. And a bit long for the cinema at that.The title roles are played well by Richard Johnson and Janet Suzman. The story has been told three times in contemporary verse in the cinema by Theda Bara, Claudette Colbert, and Elizabeth Taylor as the seductive Queen of Egypt who tried to bend one too many conquerors to her will by use of her legendary charms.William Shakespeare's Mark Antony was a principal character in two of his plays, Julius Caesar where he skillfully picked up the leadership of his late patriarch Caesar and routed the conspirators who assassinated the legendary conqueror.To give legitimacy to his enterprise, Antony was forced into partnership with Octavian Caesar, Julius's grandnephew and a legion commander Lepidus made the triumvir of three. This play is a story of the dissolution of that partnership caused in no small part by Cleopatra.Sex may have more a part in Antony and Cleopatra than in any other work of Shakespeare. Historians might very well argue that Mark Antony was using Cleopatra as his entrée to gaining alliances with various Roman dependencies in a power play against Octavian. But Shakespeare was no doubt titillating his 16th century audience with the tales of Cleopatra's erotic technique. Ahenobarbus, Antony's good friend played here by Patrick Stewart, says that while Octavia's sister's a pretty thing, when you get entangled with Cleopatra, she's so good that men are never satisfied, they keep hungering for more. So that's the reason why Antony instead of tending to business and keeping an eye on Octavian gradually loses support in Rome where it really counts. The guy who was so shrewd in Julius Caesar in Antony and Cleopatra is just a love struck fool. It's the basis for his tragedy.As for Cleopatra, three times wasn't the charm. Julius Caesar and Mark Antony may have succumbed although there is debate about who was using who. But in Octavian as played here by Corin Redgrave is all about business.I was interested in the difference between Ahenobarbus in Cecil B. DeMille's Cleopatra which starred Claudette Colbert and the way Shakespeare writes him and Stewart plays him. In the DeMille film, Ahenobarbus is played by C. Aubrey Smith as a stout old soldier who finds it a matter of conscience to leave Antony and support his beloved Roman Empire which he sees embodied now in Octavian. Patrick Stewart's Ahenobarbus is far more of an opportunist who makes a calculated move at the right time.The money here was spent on talent with the people mentioned and the others in the cast from the Royal Shakespeare Company. Down the cast list you'll find Ben Kingsley in a minor role. Look also for a very touching performance by Rosemary McHale as Charmian, Cleopatra's faithful handmaiden who makes the last journey with her.This version of Antony and Cleopatra is not a movie per se, it lacks the production values of one. The Elizabeth Taylor Cleopatra had the spectacle to go with the acting. This one succeeds on talent alone.

This movie altogether made me lose faith in humanity. Most movies are set to stun you with good acting,or at least some acting. This movie, however, was set to painfully vaporize the viewer! It wasn't fast, like a good phaser, but slowly tortures anyone hit by it into nonexistence. This movie would be best described as a steaming pile of horse excrement laced with ebola-zaire. Cleopatra terrified me in this film. Not only was Octavia, the one who was supposed to be plain, more attractive than her, but is also a better actor for the simple reason that I didn't have to listen to her for very long. I have just seriously fallen from my chair thinking about having to watch more of this movie! If I was able to give a negative star rating to this movie, all the stars in the cosmos would not express my hatred for this movie.

I was in high school when I saw this version of "Antony and Cleopatra" on the short-lived, occasional "ABC Theatre" on the US ABC television network. I had read Shakespeare in English Literature class, of course, and had even attended some local productions of Shakespeare plays, but seeing this production totally changed my view of the Bard, even theatre in general. This was the first time I ever watched a play and felt as if I was watching something real, viewing snippets of life in progress. The actors weren't mouthing lines and feigning emotions - they were real and they believed, and that made me believe as well.Perhaps the intervening years have affected my memory, dimming the details, but I cannot forget the awe I felt watching Patrick Stewart's Enobarbus. When I had read the play in school, Enobarbus was a minor character, and his speeches weren't important. Stewart's performance changed that. Now the role was central, and his descent from cheer to madness was a mirror of his world. Cleopatra's knowing chuckle as she spoke of her "salad days" was a lament as well a whimsey.At that age, I may have been ripe for a change in my world view, but I cannot deny that it was "Antony and Cleopatra" that provided it. Ever since I have compared my response to a performance to that I felt from this production. Patrick Stewart has certainly gone on to "bigger and better" things in the last quarter century, but for me he'll always be Enobarbus, the man who defined Shakespeare for me.