THE FALL OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE (Samuel Bronston, 1964) Miriam Collection
Produced by maverick film maker, Samuel Bronston at a jaw-dropping cost
of $28 million, Anthony Mann’s The Fall of the Roman Empire (1964) is by
far the most ambitious cinematic trek into Roman antiquity ever undertaken.
With its startlingly contemporary score by Dimitri Tiomkin and its impressive
international roster of stars, from Alec Guinness to Sophia Loren, from James
Mason to Christopher Plummer, and Stephen Boyd, John Ireland, Anthony Quayle,
Mel Ferrer, Findlay Currie (I’ll stop now, but you get my drift), in every way
‘Fall’ was meant to dwarf audiences’ expectations. Only a
fly-by-the-seat-of-his-pants showman like Samuel Bronston could have pulled off
such a feat, and only Bronston, it seems, would be made to pay the price for
endeavoring to scale such heights so fast. It should be remembered that Samuel
Bronston produced virtually one spectacle per annum for an uninterrupted run
beginning in 1961 with El Cid and ending a scant three years later with Circus
World (1965). Regrettably, The Fall of the Roman Empire catches
Bronston’s ambition on his way down. The gargantuan Roman Forum set alone –
designed by Veniero Moore and Peter Colasanti - covered a staggering third of a
mile with 27 three-dimensional structures – able to function as free-standing
buildings rather than false fronts. These were augmented by 350 plaster cast
statues, utilizing over 33,000 gallons of paint. That the real ‘fall’ on
display became the astonishing implosion of Bronston’s independently managed
studio in Madrid seems to prove an old axiom about never allowing a ‘true
creative’ his freedom, lest he run both it and himself into the ground.
But actually, the Bessarabian-born Broston, who died penniless in
Sacramento, California in 1994, was unwittingly the victim of others’ greed.
The jury is still out as to how many who came to Spain to work on these screen
spectacles were only there to drink from the trough until the proverbial well
had run dry. But there is enough evidence to suggest Bronston would have preferred
to make money for every last one of his financial backers, most notably, the du
Ponts – an American dynasty with whom his ongoing and very public battle
ultimately turned his good name into mud. To suggest Samuel Bronston was a
visionary is perhaps a stretch. Although he believed in the proliferation of
film as art, there was nothing particularly cutting edge about his approach to
film-making. No, a quick analysis of Bronston’s epics reveals their anchoring
in the time-honored traditions of the Hollywood epic, arguably, suffering from
an acute case of elephantiasis. What set Bronston apart from virtually all his
contemporaries was his inexhaustible optimism and showmanship, plus his insatiable
ability to convince others of the feasibility in his schemes.
In hindsight, Bronston and his adopted country – Spain – were a perfect
fit. Neither was particularly well-received abroad. Both were in line for a
major public image overhaul and each had their sights set on expanding new
horizons. Under the totalitarian regime of General Francisco Paulino
Hermenegildo Teodulo Franco y Bahamonde (Franco, for short), nationalist Spain
had existed as its own enviable and insular thiefdom, perceived as a danger to
the free democratic nations of the world. Indeed, Franco held to the same
fascist principles as Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini, with no international
trade and an economically backward approach to foreign investment. Investors
were free to put their money into his country. They just could not take any of
it out! Even with this rigid structure
in place, independent Hollywood film makers like Stanley Kramer and Robert
Rossen had managed to shoot movies there. Ultimately, such investment could be
summed up in one word – cheap. Apart
from the year-round agreeable climate, Spain’s cost of labor was a mere
tuppence, and this, at a time when Hollywood’s production costs were
skyrocketing wildly out of control.
Bronston had a different slant than most. If, as Rossen and Kramer had
proven, films could be made in Spain more grandly and cheaply, why leave the
country after the shoot was over? Why not establish a permanent facility to
take full advantage year-round? Into this brainstorm, Bronston reformulated
ties he had established in Washington with the Rockefellers and the Pierponts;
two of the most influential and wealthy dynasties in the United States. Pierre
du Pont III wielded considerable clout in the Du Pont Corporation. Moreover, he
had more than a slight Cecil B. DeMille complex, unfulfilled at home, but
destined for greatness via his considerable investment in Bronston’s
Madrid-based operations…or so he naively believed. Du Pont ought to have read
the fine print on their agreement. The onus for repayment on his loans was not
based on Bronston’s box office success. Should Bronston fail to produce a hit
film, the responsibility to pay back the creditors reverted back to du Pont. For
outside investments, Bronston employed a savvy ‘pre-sell’ marketing philosophy.
While quite common today, this was virtually unheard of during his time. In
essence, Bronston would shoot some of his biggest and most impressive set
pieces first, despite the fact he had neither the time nor funds to complete
the actual movie. This footage would be processed at Technicolor and then go on
a whirlwind tour with a sales pitch made to potential distributors/investors to
cut a check for the necessary moneys required to finish his movie. Alas, this
bait and switch could only succeed if the movie itself became a smash hit. At the same time, a financial arrangement
between Bronston and the Franco government, involving the oil industry,
afforded Bronston a license to act as an intermediary in the purchase and
import of oil on Spain’s behalf; Bronston, purchasing raw crude at a fixed
price on the open market, then turning around and selling it to Spanish
refineries for a considerably higher price, skimming the differential off the
top and funneling it back into his film productions.
For du Pont, the Bronston oil deal – if slightly crooked - was something
of a failsafe. What it boils down to is ‘legal’ money laundering. Since no
investment in the Spanish economy could be refurbished in anything other than
Pesetas – the national currency – and du Pont would only accept remuneration in
American dollars - du Pont’s sale of oil to Bronston was to be repaid by the
international monies accrued from Bronston’s completed movies, based on the
blind understanding each would obviously turn a profit. Meanwhile, the Franco
government was repaid in the court of popular opinion, officially recognized as
a tourist Mecca. Bronston kept up this illusion by inviting an endless stream
of dignitaries and stars to his studio; the glitterati paraded through the
gates, rich foreigners with lots of money to spend. As was usually the case
with Bronston, he had more than one project on the go. Hence, even after
construction on the sets for The Fall of the Roman Empire was already
well underway, the producer came back to Charlton Heston – his good luck charm
in El Cid (1961) – with another script for 55 Days at Peking (1963).
Heston’s reticence to commit to ‘Fall’ may have had something to
do with the fact he had already covered such familiar territory in The Ten
Commandments (1956) and Ben-Hur (1959); two of the most successful
sword and sandal spectacles of all time. More directly, his ultimate refusal
was likely based on the thoroughly unpleasant working relationship Heston had
on the set of El Cid with his co-star, Sophia Loren – already slated for
The Fall of the Roman Empire. To keep Heston happy, Bronston tore down
the outdoor sets already begun for ‘Fall’ to erect an exact
replica of China’s Forbidden City for 55 Days at Peking (1963). Unhappy
chance, the latter proved less of a dynamo at the box office than El Cid,
putting a considerable strain on Bronston’s studio finances. With little to
suggest he could recoup what had already been lost on his next venture,
Bronston dove headstrong and feet first into The Fall of the Roman Empire,
an exact replica of the Roman forum rising from the dusty Spanish landscape at
a staggering cost.
To imply Bronston’s approach to budgeting was laissez faire is to
understate the enormity of the blood-letting going on behind the scenes.
Indeed, both the Forbidden City and Roman Forum sets, designed down to the last
detail by production manager, C.O. ‘Doc’ Erikson, were not only built to scale,
but also 3-dimensional, affording their respective directors a multiplicity of
camera angles. Ironically, cinematographer, Robert Krasker chose to utilize
very little of the Roman forum in the finished film. Apart from a few startling
long shots, Krasker’s work almost exclusively concentrates on the famous faces
set before it. Even more of an oddity, his lack of artistic license did not
particularly concern Bronston, who derived a certain amount of pleasure from
entertaining visiting dignitaries, particularly historians of Roman antiquity
who were utterly flabbergasted by its jaw-dropping scope, size and historical
accuracy. Good showmanship on Bronston’s
part, although, in hindsight, very bad planning in terms of achieving
profitability for the future.
So long as Bronston could be assured a rollover of profits from one
‘super production’ into the next, this precarious cycle made his film-making
empire completely renewable – especially, on paper. Unfortunately for Bronston,
55 Days at Peking did not perform as well as expected, and neither did The
Fall of the Roman Empire. When
Erikson approached Bronston with a whopping $9,000,000.00 budget for ‘Fall’
– of which Bronston had only secured seven and a half – the producer
fastidiously went to work procuring more outside investment to make up the
difference rather than trim his costs down to compensate for this revised
bottom line. It appears as though Samuel Bronston’s motives for investing
heavily in movies that, comparatively speaking, returned very little to his
coffers, was more an artistic pursuit, misguided in eschewing the necessary
crass commercialism to make it click. The flipside to Bronston’s penultimate
demise after the release of ‘Fall’ was his inability to wriggle
out from under this quagmire he had created; his entrusted colleagues, suddenly
vanishing into the woodwork with mismanaged funds spent elsewhere along the way,
taking advantage of Bronston’s hospitality to the point of no return and
bankrupting his Spanish adventure into an embarrassing debacle with social
ramifications to follow. For Pierre du
Pont, the fallout was immediate and decidedly humiliating. When several
defaulted loans made to the Bronston organization found their way back to his
desk, following the doomed release of The Fall of the Roman Empire, du
Pont was forced to pay out in excess of several million dollars to gloss over
and appease the creditors. His chagrin extended to his impeccable line of
credit, enough to oust du Pont from the family business he had inherited; a
very public embarrassment du Pont never forgot, forgave or had any quam about
entirely blaming on Samuel Bronston. Thereafter, du Pont made it his life-long
purpose to destroy Bronston’s reputation. The release of Circus World
(1964) notwithstanding, Samuel Bronston’s next project; Paris 1900 never
went beyond the planning stage, chiefly because Bronston was quick to discover
he could not gain enough trust or interest from any of his usual sources to
produce it.
All this is a most unhappy epilogue to The Fall of the Roman Empire,
the final flourish and disintegration of Bronston’s movie-making empire in
Spain. Initially, the project had been brought to Bronston’s attention by
director, Anthony Mann after reading Edward Gibbons’ lengthy history, The Decline
and Fall of the Roman Empire. Interestingly, Gibbons did not view the onset
of Christianity as thematically responsible for Rome’s ultimate demise; a
perspective carried over into the finished film, and thus, making it quite
unique amongst the usual Roman screen spectacles. Mann, who had cut his teeth
in Hollywood as a scout on Selznick’s Gone With The Wind (1939) and Rebecca
(1940) before directing a series of highly successful B-budget noir thrillers
throughout the decade, and later, in the 1950s, A-list westerns tinged with
noir undertones, came to The Fall of the Roman Empire well-versed in the
construction of the epic. He had, after all, directed second unit on the
burning of Rome for MGM’s titanic production of Quo Vadis (1951), had
shot considerable portions of Spartacus (1960) before a rift with
actor/producer, Kirk Douglas resulted in his removal from the picture, and, had
shot El Cid (1961) for Bronston; by far, his biggest and brightest epic
to date. Bronston saw The Fall of the
Roman Empire as a reunion picture for Sophia Loren and Charlton Heston. The
two stars had yielded big box office in El Cid (1961). It is unclear
exactly when Bronston realized this screen re-teaming was not to be. But Heston
evidently made it quite clear he had no intention of reprising his co-starring
status opposite Carlo Ponti’s Italian Cinderella; disheartening for Bronston,
who enjoyed working with familiar faces – particularly those responsible for
making him a lot of money. Undaunted, Bronston cast Heston in 55 Days in
Peking instead, handing over the plum part of Livius in ‘Fall’
to Chuck’s arch nemesis in Ben-Hur - costar, Stephen Boyd.
The Irish-born Boyd had carved a niche for himself in Hollywood and, by
mid-decade, had proven his acting diversity. Moreover, he was already a known
quantity to audiences and could hold his own in the oft feminizing, and
occasionally overpowering attire befitting a Roman General. For the rest of the
cast, Bronston assembled a who’s who of the most celebrated actors of their
generation, falling back on the time-honored principle of casting Brits as
Romans. But his ‘look who’s here’ mentality, with its memorable parade of
famous faces, at least in retrospect, tends to marginally take the audience out
of the story, veering dangerously close to the travelogue tomes in Michael
Todd’s Around the World in Eighty Days (1956). Even so, the picture is
immeasurably blessed to have such a wellspring of talent on tap. Ultimately, The
Fall of the Roman Empire became the victim of very bad timing. Released on
the heels of President Kennedy’s assassination, and in a year of frothy and
lighthearted entertainments capped off by Walt Disney’s multi-Oscar-winning
super-musical, Mary Poppins (1964), an anesthetizing elixir to buffer
the thought-numbing national grief, ‘Fall’s’ dour perspective on
this disintegrating superpower, corrupted from within, was a message that
perhaps struck much too close to home for then, contemporary tastes.
It should be evident, though nevertheless prudent to illustrate the
purpose of all historical epics is not primarily to provide a literal
historical record in moving tableau. Like all filmed art, its primary object
should be to entertain. Yet, even on this score, The Fall of the Roman
Empire is somewhat misguided, uneven and flawed. Its historical accuracy get in the way of the drama…or is it the other way around? The whole movie has
a very episodic quality, one that, in general, does not endear itself to our
conventional appreciation for a rich and vibrant spectacle. What is most
impressive about the movie - everything is achieved full scale and without the
benefit (or illusion, for that matter) of optical effects and/or matte work.
What you see is precise what was there; the titanic scale, awe-inspiring to say
the least. Alas, when it debuted, ‘Fall’ received unanimously
scathing reviews. Almost without fail, it was dismissed as an elephantine bore.
Whether the epic’s waning popularity had anything to do with its’ critical
backlash is a moot point. The dark undercurrents of death and destruction,
intricately woven into the narrative by screen scenarists, Ben Barzman, Basilio
Franchina and Philip Yorden, left the popcorn sect stultified. In some ways,
the movie plays much better today, in an era where cynicism in the arts runs
rampant.
The premise is set up beautifully with Dimitri Tiomkin’s main title; not
pomp and circumstance, but a pipe organ dirge; the narration that immediately
follows, suggesting two of the most mystifying and elusive historical facts
about Rome relate to its meteoric rise and epic crumble; the Pax Romana, so
desperately desired by the benevolent and world-weary Marcus Aurelius (Alec
Guinness), hastened into an amoral decline under the autocratic rule of the
murderous and mad, Commodus (Christopher Plummer). As our narrator points out, the death of a
civilization is never an event, but a process. We are brought into the sad-eyed
spectacle of an emperor whose thirst for conquest, long since cooled, is
strained for purpose during his latest campaign against Germanic forces.
Aurelius’s ever-loyal advisor, Timonides (James Mason) is empathetic and a
closeted Christian. These early scenes were shot during the steely blue-gray of
dawn with only a crack of golden sunlight fast fading in the distance. While
virtually all of The Fall of The Roman Empire was shot in Spain,
director Anthony Mann had a little help from Mother Nature during this opening
sequence. The script called for snow, a commodity in short supply in Spain.
Miraculously the weather obliged Mann, bringing down the biggest storm to hit
Spain in fifty years and saving Bronston the added expense of having to fake a
blizzard with pulverized gypsum and asbestos.
As a matter of record, Ridley Scott’s Gladiator (2000) bears a
striking resemblance to ‘Fall’, the revised historical record as
embellished for the screen by Barzman, Franchina and Yordan a veritable
template employed for Scott’s loose remake. We meet our central love interests;
the unerring and noble General Gaius Livius (Boyd) and Lucilla (Sophia Loren),
the philosopher/daughter of the Emperor. Ironically, their love is complicated
by a great chasm in their political views, also by the vengeful manipulations
of Lucilla’s elder brother, Commodus (Christopher Plummer). We move from the
starkness of dawn to the noonday resplendence of vast armies gathering at
Aurelius’ request. These galloping brigades were on loan from Franco’s vast military
stables; the pride of Spain on display in these valiant beasts and horsemanship
in particular, creating an impressive assemblage of Rome’s neighboring nations,
come to hear Aurelius’ plans for golden centuries of peace. Alas, this moment
is fraught with a mortal tragedy; Aurelius’ unwillingness to bend to the unholy
surprise that life’s great moments are often doomed to break in the end, our
blistering fire meant to burn out in a faded flicker.
In hindsight, ‘Fall’ is as much a tribute to Samuel Brontson’s
profligacy as it remains a fashion parade of painstakingly recreated costuming
by Veniero Colasanti and John Moore; each garment made of genuine leather, real
metal breastplates and fur. For years afterward, Samuel Bronston would take
great pride in this accomplishment, adding, “We rented nothing. We made
everything.” After Bronston’s company imploded, virtually all these
costumes and props vanished overnight from their warehouse storage facilities,
presumably into the hands of private collectors throughout Spain, and
eventually, the world. Will Durante, a famous historian of his time, was hired
by Bronston as a consultant. Alas, Bronston and Durante parted on less than
amicable terms; Durante, upset that history had been altered for entertainment
purposes. He might have better realized Hollywood is not in the business of
making documentaries. Plot wise: after Aurelius’ shining hour, he retires in
pain to his bedchamber, attended by his devoted daughter and Livius, the blind
sage and soothsayer, Cleander (Mel Ferrer) - who already knows that his emperor
is dying of cancer. Aurelius entrusts the future of Rome to Livius over his own
son. Indeed, Commodus is ruthless and insincere; jealous and easily distracted.
He would rule Rome as a penetrating autocracy.
Livius is humbled and startled by the appointment. He is, after all, an
adopted son rather than the legitimate heir. And Aurelius’ decision is sure to
infuriate Commodus while driving a wedge into the heart of their already
tenuous friendship. Nevertheless, their initial reunion is playful; Commodus,
overjoyed to see his best friend and father looking so well. He is less
enchanted by Lucilla, whom he has dubbed the vestal virgin; Aurelius
acknowledging the two have been quarrelsome and confrontational almost since
birth. Aurelius has an even more unpleasant surprise in store for Lucilla - her
betrothal to the Armenian king, Sohamus (Omar Sharif), a marriage of state,
meant to secure a peaceful alliance on Rome’s eastern borders.
The first order of business for Commodus is a competitive drinking game
with Livius. Commodus inquires, “Did
you study logic? Do you know what a dilemma is?” to which an inebriated
Livius replies, “When there are only two possibilities and both are
impossible…that is a dilemma!” Alas, a scene that was to immediately have
followed, differentiating clearly Livius’ politics from Commodus’, was excised
by Paramount – the U.S. distributors of The Fall of the Roman Empire,
before its theatrical debut. Instead, we jump ahead to a night of drunken
debauchery, Commodus unable to force himself on a terrified prostitute,
stumbling back to seek Livius’ acceptance. Livius, however, is a solemn drunk –
or rather, still able to see clearly beyond the haze of his alcoholic stupor.
In light of Aurelius’ decision to appoint him to the seat of power, has
suddenly become quite aware the Emperor has made the only choice for the
security and safety of the empire. Commodus would make a disastrous leader, his
stifling egotism and lack of compassion destined to lead to ruin. Livius and Lucilla renew their passion for
one another. It is the last respite before all hell breaks loose; Aurelius,
ordering his sons into battle after learning of a Germanic plot afoot in the
forests just beyond, but not before he has revealed to Commodus his grave
decision to overlook him in the line of succession. It is a bitter pill to
swallow and Commodus proves how fickle his love is by divesting himself of all
emotional warmth towards either his father or best friend. Commodus is
determined to prove his worth against these barbarians by taking a small army
of his gladiatorial forces into the woods. They are ambushed and almost
immediate overrun, forcing Livius to forge the vast Roman garrison on a rescue
mission.
Both Bronston and Mann agreed implicitly the focus of these battle
sequences would be on the human drama instead of the morbidity to fashion a
bloody spectacle from the obvious carnage. The results speak for themselves; a
myriad of amazing stunt work, beautifully stitched together by editor, Robert
Lawrence for maximum effect. We are treated to exhilarating action without the
gore. Afterward, Livius is required to set an example of his newfound authority
by punishing the gladiatorial forces for defying his direct order. Commodus
refuses to allow for this, sparking an impromptu chariot race through the dense
forests. Staged by Yakima Canutt (responsible for the breathtaking chariot race
in Ben-Hur), this confrontation created more fervor amongst the critics
as a shameless rehash of the aforementioned sequence in the 1959 film. In fact,
the race in Ben-Hur had been designed to accentuate the triumph of
Christ’s influence over Rome’s seemingly unstoppable might. In ‘Fall’;
the race caps off an emphasis on the diverging political viewpoints between
these two men, their friendship reduced to mortal enemies. Parted at the last
possible moment and thus prevented from destroying one another, the wounds
inflicted on Commodus’ ego continue to fester. Cleander sets a conspiratorial
plot into motion, poisoning the Emperor’s fruit to hasten the ascendancy of a
new Roman order. Either out of pity or magnanimity - neither reason, good
enough - Livius makes the wretched decision to betray his own heart and
Aurelius’ final wishes by relinquishing the throne to Commodus. As Commodus
prepares to light the pyre on which his late father’s remains are displayed, he
cannot contain the wicked thin grin of satisfaction permeating his lips. As
consolation, Commodus appoints Livius his Captain of the Roman Guard and
pro-counsel, second only in rank to himself.
We retreat from these relatively cold and inhospitable conditions to the
sun-drenched warmth of Rome in all her glory. Here, in this decadent metropolis,
Commodus vacillates in the thronging masses crying out their adoration. At this
juncture is inserted an intermission; a chance for the audience to meditate on
all that has gone on thus far. The tone afterward turns from elation to
solemnity once more as Lucilla arrives at the great temple library, entrusting
the entire written history of her late father to their care before departing
the city with Sohamus. Commodus’ edicts are swift and terrifying. He vows to
undo all that his father has done; to rule as nothing like Aurelius would have
wished, merely to be different. Commodus further commands that his eastern
provinces produce twice as much grain as before so all Rome’s inhabitants may
be fed. Furthermore, their taxes are to be doubled immediately. When it is
explained this simply cannot be done, since there is extreme poverty and a
drought plaguing the eastern region, Commodus instructs his representatives to
anticipate rebellion and to meet it by mercilessly crushing all those who
oppose his will as Caesar. Livius finds himself embroiled in an unjust war
against the barbarians, led by Ballomar (John Ireland). Far from a massacre,
Livius places his captors in chains, sending Timonides to make the peace.
Timonides’ Christian faith is put to the test when Ballomar repeatedly burns
his hand with a torch. If his God is all powerful, he will give Timonides the
strength to free himself. Timonides proves unable to do just that. However, he
does not cry out from the extreme pain being inflicted upon him as this would signal
the Roman legions to put the barbarians to death. Ballomar is most impressed by
Timonides, particularly as he redoubles his efforts to forge an alliance with
them on Rome’s behalf, despite their cruelty shown him.
A short while later, Lucilla returns to Rome, finding Commodus at play
in his gladiator’s training school with Verulus (Anthony Quayle); his beloved
teacher. Although neither Commodus nor the audience knows it yet, Verulus is
really Commodus’ father. Lucilla’s return to Rome is met with skepticism by
Commodus. Livius’ arrival shortly thereafter is preceded by rumors he is
plotting against Commodus to remake the Pax Romana Aurelius had so desperately
desired but had failed to create in his own lifetime. Commodus tempts Livius to
reveal his truest motives, moreover promising him Lucilla in exchange for a
sacrifice of his principles. Instead, Livius appeals to the Roman senate to
consider what it would mean to make peace with the barbarians, employing
Timonides’ persuasive logic to help sway them to reconsider a Rome without bloodshed,
and, where Roman law may still appeal to the vanquished without any bitterness
or resentment – because ultimate freedom is attained through kindness, not at
the point of a sword. Timonides reasons free men produce more than slaves ever could
because they are invested in the outcome of a free market enterprise. “Let
us then do what is profitable,” Timonides concludes, “- and right!”
A note of dissension is offered by Julianus (Eric Porter), who believes
Rome will be viewed as weak by others if it allows these barbarians to live and
work as free men under their own citizenship. But the sage (Findlay Currie)
intervenes, proposing – then answering – the question of ‘when does an
empire begin to die?’- when the people no longer believe in it. Alongside
its resplendent scenery, The Fall of the Roman Empire reveals the grave
human complexities in such philosophical debates. The barbarian nation is given
its independence and begins to prosper. His edicts defeated in the senate by
Timonides’ persuasive arguments, Commodus exiles Livius to a remote frontier
under the guise it is for the good of the empire. Not long thereafter, Lucilla
returns to Rome to find Commodus even more self-obsessed in his plot to squeeze
the eastern nations of their resources.
She retreats to Armenia to support her husband in a campaign to rid the
east of Commodus’ oppressive rule.
Begrudgingly, Commodus is compelled to recall Livius to put down this
rebellion. However, when he arrives on the eastern plateau, Livius is horrified
to discover Lucilla has pledged her support against Rome. Livius is
understandably divided in his loyalties. He is a true Roman soldier, recalling
with faint sadness the glorious reign of Aurelius, and determined to work within
the framework of its less than benevolent present regime to bring about lasting
peace.
Lucilla tries to persuade Livius to join their splintered state. But
Livius remains loyal to Rome. Sohamus ambushes Livius and his men with the
Persian forces in an epic confrontation, rumored to have employed more than
20,000 extras on horseback. In this hellish exchange of clashed swords, Sohamus
informs Livius if he is struck down, he has already given the word for Lucilla
to be killed. Indeed, moments later Sohamus is defeated, though not by Livius’
hand, and the order is given for Lucilla’s murder to take place. Livius charges
through the raging armies, narrowly arriving in time to prevent her death. Distraught and now a widow, Lucilla agrees to
return to Rome with Livius. On route they pass through the once thriving
barbarian community, now reduced to a bloody and still smoldering cinder;
Commodus’ rage against Livius exacted in a brutal revenge against these
defenseless believers. Livius discovers Timonides body amongst the slaughtered
and mourns his loss. Returning to Rome with Lucilla, Livius quickly discovers
the city’s decadence has unraveled its citizenry into a hedonism run amok. He
leaves the army and Lucilla at the gates, instructing her, if he does not
return by sunset, to give the order to storm the city.
Livius confronts Commodus in the great temple; Commodus revealing he is
quite mad – his cynical cackle echoing throughout the chambers. Livius appeals
to the senate to have Commodus deposed. Too late, he discovers Commodus’
decadence has corrupted even those who were once loyal to Aurelius. In fact,
the senate has made Caesar a god. Now, they condemn Livius as a traitor to be
burned alive in the public forum, along with hostages from the barbarian
village, including Ballomar, also, the few Roman senators who oppose
Commodus. As Livius has not returned by
sunset, Lucilla sneaks into the palace in search of him. She finds what appears
to be Commodus, alone in his private chamber, his back to her as he meditates. Seizing
a concealed knife to put to death her own brother, Lucilla is instead subdued
by this shadowy figure. It is not Commodus, but Verulus. She begs him to put
Commodus to death. But Verulus reveals himself to be Commodus’ father from a
clandestine affair with the late empress, Faustina Minor, Lucilla’s mother.
Unable to bear the notion he is not of divine lineage Commodus appears from the
shadows and murders Verulus with his sword. Lucilla races into the crowds
beyond the palace, desperate to warn Livius’ armies and give the signal to
invade. But Commodus has anticipated this, bribing the army, including General
Victorinus (George Murcell) with freshly-minted gold ducats made from the
precious metal previously stripped off Rome’s statuary.
Chaining Lucilla to the same pillar as Livius in the public square,
Commodus now prepares a garish pageantry for the masses. His mind further
unhinged by the discovery of his great shame he makes the bizarre decision to
challenge Livius to a duel to the death for the imperial crown. Commodus makes
Livius a promise - that his victory will save Lucilla and the rest from their
death sentences. In a brutal display of
javelins, the thoroughly insane Commodus momentarily gains the upper hand
before being run through by Livius. Alas, Commodus had no intension of letting
Lucilla live, his dying cry - ‘burn them!’ – met with torches lit under
the condemned. Livius bursts through the crowd and manages to free Lucilla in
the nick of time. But Ballomar and the others are burnt alive in a hellish
fireball. The fickle Julianus, who only moments earlier was seen bartering with
Victorinus to appoint him Imperial Caesar, whatever the outcome of Commodus’
showdown, now declares Livius the new and undisputed Caesar of Rome. Seething
with disgust for these contemptible men who have rotted the dignity of their
offices and corrupted Roman law merely to maintain their own levels of wealth
and importance within the government, Livius replies with gritted teeth, “I’m
afraid you would find me unsuitable…because my first act would be to have you
all crucified!” Departing the forum with Lucilla at his side, Livius
observes as the bartering for a new head of state begins; the divine nature of
its former office thus reduced to an even more unstable oligarchy of absolute
power available to the highest bidder. As dense, acrid clouds of smoke fill the
air, obliterating much of the spectacular detail in Colasanti and Moore’s Roman
forum set, our omnipotent narrator summarizes the government’s eventually collapse,
brought on by this self-afflicted malaise of political infighting.
The Fall of the Roman Empire is a supreme spectacle. For those merely interested
in such star-studded and mind-boggling elephantiasis, the picture holds up
remarkably well. Yet, in hindsight, its ominous political intrigues, then
practically ignored by the critics and virtually shunned by audiences of their
day, presumably in search of more lighthearted programming, appear even more
foreboding, sobering and clairvoyant with the passage of time. And, indeed, the
parallels between this Rome from antiquity and America in the present, are
uncanny; both nation’s perplexedly inexcusable distraction from more prescient
matters, its populations drunk on decadent and diverting entertainments that
fail to enrich any collective understanding of humanity, and, finally, its
intolerably stymied machinery of a fractured government, chronically bent on an
endless – pointless – power struggle, to pervert beyond recognition the
democratic due process: these not so distant echoes from one empire to another,
already in the throes of its own crisis, seem too eerily a mirror, revealed
with startling second-sight in Bronston’s monumental epic. Yet, it is too easy
to blame Samuel Bronston for his own folly. Point taken: Bronston’s savvy in
matters of business had always lacked refinement. Yet, despite a federal
investigation into ‘secret’ bank accounts in Switzerland (that earned two
indictments against him before being overturned in the Supreme Court), the
unvarnished truth regarding Bronston’s personal finances was he made virtually
little or nothing off his pictures that had not already been reinvested on
other projects. He left Spain in disgrace and, for all intent and purposes –
bankrupt, and, was forced to live on his meager social security check of
$367.00 a month, his children supporting him in his emeritus years. In
declining health, Bronston remained the optimist. He never stopped planning his
big comeback, despite the onset of Alzheimer’s. But the illness did much to
slow him down. He died of pneumonia on January 12, 1994 in Sacramento,
California. As per his request, he was buried in his beloved Madrid.
At the time of its release, The Fall of the Roman Empire was
heavily criticized on several levels, the critics all too quick to suggest
Stephen Boyd a weak and ineffectual ‘hero’, his performance, eclipsed by
Christopher Plummer’s bombastic turn as the mad Emperor. Plummer, to be sure,
has the better half of the story and makes the absolute most of it. Again, ‘Fall’
is rather unique situated; its focus, somewhat more staunchly and uncharacteristically
situated on the grey areas of virtue, and even more interested in the villain
of the piece. Commodus - we love to hate, or perhaps, in our present
topsy-turvy world of amoral muddles, has morphed into the tragically
‘misunderstood’ misanthrope to whom our mediocre loyalties are more easily
aligned. The best performance in the picture arguably belongs to Alec Guinness;
the empathetic liege, torn by familial loyalties as well as those he must
nevertheless afford the state to preserve it for future generations. It goes
without saying, Guinness is the consummate actor’s actor, his lyrically wrought
delivery of every last line of dialogue impacting our appreciation for
Aurelius’ sad statesman. At precisely the moment when Aurelius’ dreams for a
pax Romana are poised to revolutionize these warring factions of humanity into
a divinely inspired harmony of nations, he is cut down by the inescapable
reality of death - a disturbing parallel with the assassinated President John
Kennedy – not lost on theater attendees in 1964. This too, may have also
submarined ‘Fall’s’ critical success.
Whatever the reason, The Fall of the Roman Empire has long been
overdue for reassessment as a bona fide masterpiece. The sheer size of
Bronston’s epic, its vast undertaking in research, construction and execution
are awe-inspiring. For decades, Bronston’s independently made spectacles have
remained absent from public view while various distribution apparatuses via for
control over their rights. This shocking oversight ought to have been rectified
in early 2002 when Alliance Home Video made a valiant stab to establish the now
defunct ‘Miriam Collection’; marking its debut with the long overdue releases
of El Cid and The Fall of the Roman Empire in elegantly-appointed
DVD box sets. While the European market has been blessed to have Blu-ray
releases of virtually all the Bronston epics, only 55 Days at Peking and
Circus World have benefited from a true upgrade to 1080p (and only ‘Peking’
is region free and thus available for consideration around the world. As for El
Cid and The Fall of the Roman Empire, both appear to have fallen
between the cracks for restoration and preservation, leaving collectors to seek
these titles at a considerable cost, and, in a quality belying the fact each
was photographed in the superior Ultra-Panavision format and Technicolor. In ye
olden days of LaserDisc, Criterion released The Fall of the Roman Empire
with a competently rendered image harvest. But for several painfully long
decades thereafter, the only way to appreciate this movie was via a bootlegged
DVD from Japanese distributor, Tohokushinsha, marred by some disastrous color
implosion and an unhealthy green tint.
Then came the aforementioned Miriam Collector’s Edition DVD on which
this review is based. It isn’t terrible, but it is still a far cry from Robert
Krasker’s sumptuous cinematography. What
we have here is a flawed master, exhibiting color fading and sporadic built-in
flicker. Flesh tones are hideously pink during almost the entire first half of
the movie. Sophia Loren looks as though she were hosed down in Pepto Bismol. Curiously,
color balance and density marginally improve over the course of this presentation;
particularly, after we leave the woods and enter the gargantuan Colosanti and
Moore Roman Forum sets. Color fading and color timing remain a prescient
concern. Blacks tend to register a deep navy blue. There is no sparkle to this
transfer. These sets were designed with real gold leaf and mosaic marble tiles,
Bronston and director Anthony Mann conspiring to show them off from every
conceivable angle. Alas, the gold lacks glitter and the marble is deprived of
its elusive colorful veins. Worse, there is a residual softness creeping into
these images. None are as razor-sharp or refined in their detail as any image
lensed in 70mm ought to be. Close-ups are the most impressive, but even they do
not celebrate the great pains Bronston and Mann took to achieve something
visually resplendent on celluloid.
On the whole, the Dolby Digital 5.1 audio is more richly satisfying than
the image. Even though DVD is a compromise, Dimitri Tiomkin’s score sounds
spectacular; the dialogue and effects integrated with precision, and, the sound
field giving bass speakers a real workout. Extras are plentiful and include a
fairly comprehensive ‘making of’ featurette created exclusively for the Miriam
Collection release. Dr. Bill Brontson,
the producer’s son, weighs in with biographer, Mel Martin on a fantastic audio
commentary as well. As The Fall of the Roman Empire is divided, at its
intermission across two discs, these also house the aforementioned featurette,
plus a vintage promotional junkets, trailers, filmographies, and two more short
subjects made to complement the Miriam release; the first, a reel to real
comparison of ancient history, the other a glowing tribute to composer, Dmitri
Tiomkin. We also get a third disc,
advertised on the back package as ‘…and more!’ The ‘more’ are a series
of short subjects produced by Bill Deneen for the Encyclopedia Britannica to
document Roman antiquity. As the Bronston sets were so accurate in every last
detail, they became a hub for historians to attend and marvel over. Alas, these
sets were torn down and bulldozed shortly after production wrapped; an epic
loss to movie-land’s cultural heritage. Mercifully, these shorts and the
feature film endure as a testament to their greatness.
I have broken a precedent with this review, made on a product most
collectors will not be able to get their hands on without paying big bucks to
third party sellers via Amazon or Ebay. I have done so because the time has
come to demand a renewed interest, not just in The Fall of the Roman Empire,
but all the Samuel Bronston epics made in Spain. While Bronston’s reputation
has greatly suffered since his own time, still regarded unjustly as something
of a nimble-minded shyster and con, there is nothing to deny Bronston his place
amongst the movie gods who dared bring such resplendent antiquity to the big
screen, unencumbered by a big studio executive brain trust. It is the purity of the work that counts
here. For a brief wrinkle in time, Samuel Bronston was his own man. He made
movie art. For this, he ought to have long since taken his rightful place
alongside such showman as Michael Todd, Samuel Goldwyn and David O. Selznick.
Regrettably, today Bronston’s reputation has either been mislaid or it continues
to be pitied and/or reviled. And yet, Bronston was the last of this vanishing
breed - the master for whom class, culture and entertainment value took a decided
backseat to crass commercialism. If you are fortunate enough to snag this DVD –
or are in a position to purchase the ‘region B’ blocked European Blu-rays,
equally as flawed, then you will be exposing yourself to some of the finest and
most opulent entertainments money can buy. As Commodus might very well have
proclaimed, “Permit us to worship!”
FILM RATING (out of 5 – 5 being the best)
4.5
VIDEO/AUDIO
2.5
EXTRAS
5+
Comments
John Schenk