2hotFeature one of my absolute favorites!

Hayleigh Joseph This is ultimately a movie about the very bad things that can happen when we don't address our unease, when we just try to brush it off, whether that's to fit in or to preserve our self-image.

Geraldine The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

Haven Kaycee It is encouraging that the film ends so strongly.Otherwise, it wouldn't have been a particularly memorable film

ferdinand1932 This is Shakespeare lite in the sense that the play has been cut to fit a movie, not a play. It has been done quite well and the balance between movie and classic play is well proportioned.Where the movie excels is in the locations, the epic battles and the camera work. It is a very strong production in the Hollywood way. It serves as a fine introduction should anyone wish to experience the original text.The actors are all in good form and make the lines serve their character. The conditional here is Chuck Heston. He is of the Olivier 'ham' school of acting. Each line is painfully rendered, the jaw clenches, the syllables come as if Heston may then expire. There are some parts where he is just fine: the battles, especially but he seems ill at ease compared to the other actors.

Andre Raymond Heston managed to "open up" the play without losing the intimacy of the love story. The stately epic lives side by side with the intense love story. When the wounded Antony looks up to Cleopatra's tomb and cries "I am dying Egypte, dying!" I got it. The passions of such great leaders shake nations to their core.This one is about Heston, on the verge of losing his matinée idol status by 1974 but with the acting seasoning of more than two decades. He tackles Shakespeare and brings his own experiences of filming Julius Ceasar, El Cid and Ben Hur to the table.It is a labour of love indeed, but also one of determination. Bravo! Still waiting for the DVD with plenty of extras. This film deserves to be re-visited by scholars.

Xlegion When I first saw this film I liked it very much except for Hildegard Neils performance as Cleopatra. I guess the Liz Taylor version is hard to forget. But this is Shakespeare and Ms. Neil handles the part very well.After repeated viewings, I have come around. Mr. Heston was correct in his casting. Neils Cleopatra is convincing. You can't have Antony interested in a wimpy love sick girl. This Cleopatra "acts" and gets angry, sullen and has a range of emotions. You could see why Antony would be attracted to her over the sedate but beautiful Octavia.This is a terrific film and grossly under rated. It was restored by Fraser Heston's company in 2005 but I have yet to see it's release on DVD.What happened?

jer33_3 I am a huge Charlton Heston fan. He is without a doubt one of the greatest actors of all time, but what was he thinking when he made this movie. Normally if he made a bad movie I could blame it on the screenwriter or director, but in this case it's all him. The suckiness of this movie is all his fault. It proves that not even Heston can make a Shakespeare story interesting. I wasted 2 and a half hours of my life on this snooze fest and I'll never get that time back. This is by far THE WORST Heston movie that I've ever seen. If you are a Shakespeare fan maybe you'll find this movie entertaining, but if you're not don't waste your time, you'll regret it in the long run.