Tuesday's Overlooked (or Forgotten) Films: CLEOPATRA (1934) starring Claudette Colbert, Warren William and Henry Wilcoxon

This is a fan letter to CLEOPATRA, the 1934 extravaganza directed by Cecil B. DeMille and starring Claudette Colbert, Warren William and Henry Wilcoxon.

"Action.....!!"

I can't help it, I simply love this movie. Director and flim-flam man Cecil B. DeMille simply (or not) outdoes himself. He and his designers created a phantasmagorical ancient Egypt (in a Hollywood back-lot) in which to place his 'tragic' queen of the Nile and her cohorts - a theme park of wonders to stagger the eye and the imagination.

And of course, the magic of Travis Banton (unbelievably uncredited) only enriched the mystique. The brilliant Banton's vividly lascivious costumes for Claudette Colbert dazzle the eye. Colbert never looked or showed herself better.

She is the ultimate coquettish, fantasy dress up doll - from the heels of her gold sandals to the tips of her extraordinary faux Egyptian head pieces.This is a woman who will stop at nothing, not even slinking about in gold lame and sequins - hard to imagine being woven by Egyptian slaves in the desert, but why digress. Cleo is out to conquer an emperor and no detail is too unimportant.

But it's not only Colbert who commands attention (and boy does she) - though admittedly it's hard to turn away from her wickedly dazzling self - the elegant Warren William as the indulgent and oh-so-sexy Julius Caesar caught in a snare of his own making, is superb.

But then, for me, Warren William can do little wrong. I love the way he looks at Cleo, indulging her rather obvious wiles but still captivated by her charm and beauty, not to mention those slinky peek-a-boo gowns. Caesar, imperious, self-important and in thrall to his own ego, mistakenly gambles that he can have it all.

Henry Wilcoxon makes for a beefy, ruggedly handsome Marc Anthony who mopes around the palace like a love-sick teenager, whining when he can't have his own way. It's hard to believe Cleo would turn to Anthony after Caesar, but hey, a queen desperately trying to hang onto  her country can't be too choosy. And after all, Caesar lies dead on the floor of the Roman Senate.

Any port in a storm, as they say.

Apparently though, Cleo comes to love Anthony in her own fashion. The proof? She only just stops herself from poisoning him in the nick of time. Ah, love. 

There are many, many things about CLEOPATRA that live on in the imagination and for me make it a film not to be missed. Never mind Liz and Dick's version, THIS is the movie to watch.

For other Overlooked or Forgotten Films and/or other Audio/Visuals, don't forget to check in at Todd Mason's blog, Sweet Freedom for the relevant list and the links.

"What - this old thing? I just threw it on spur of the moment."

It's Official: Angelina Jolie will play CLEOPATRA!

Don't know about you, but this is a film I will definitely want to see. Jolie is a great choice to play Cleopatra. As to who should play Marc Anthony? I pick Daniel Craig. Yes? No? For Julius Caesar I pick Jeremy Irons. Yes? No?

Can't wait to see what they make of this fabulous historical epic. The last time out with Elizabeth Taylor as Cleo, scandal eclipsed the film. In truth the film just wasn't very good - too much pomp, not enough circumstance. Though Liz, of course, was stupefyingly gorgeous.

I'm wondering if the film will be based on the new book, CLEOPATRA: A Life, by Stacy Schiff.

Monday Review: CLEOPATRA Last Queen of Egypt by Joyce Tyldesley

This non-fiction bio by archaeologist Dr. Joyce Tyldesley, though confusing in certain aspects, gives a good overall picture of the much maligned Cleopatra and her times. The 'confusing' aspects can't be helped, since the history of her family line is tortuous, to say the least. To begin with, she is Cleopatra VII - not the first Cleo in the bunch - even her mother (assumed) was named Cleopatra, so you can see how it all becomes kind of hard to follow unless one is an Egyptologist/Genealogist. The Ptolemy line, of which Cleopatra is the last Egyptian queen, is even more convoluted - filled with Ptolemies upon Ptolemies - Cleopatra's own brothers, each of whom she is assumed to have married (and murdered) - were both named Ptolemy.

All these Ptolemies and Cleopatras seemed to share at least one family trait: murder as the easiest means of self-preservation and succession. There's murder and duplicity right and left throughout their history, so much so, that after awhile it seems matter-of-fact. You stop being shocked and just shake your head in resignation - murder appears to have been a way of life for the Ptolemies: fratricide, matricide, patricide and any other 'cide' you can think of were part of their ancient charm. Into this boiling cauldron was born the girl-child destined to become the legendary Queen of the Nile. It is amazing to me that anyone survived this brew for any length of time. But survive she did, at least as long as it took to become the legend we're still reading about today.

Only the Bible and the classical authors, Homer and Herodotus among them, offered western scholars a tantalizing, selective and highly confused version of Egypt's past. The dynastic queens were to remain hidden until the nineteenth century saw the development of the the modern science of Egyptology.

One group of queens was, however, never forgotten. The Ptolemies, the last dynasty of independent Egypt, enjoyed three centuries of rule sandwiched between the conquest of the Macedonian Alexander the Great (332) and the conquest of of the Roman Octavian (30). Their stories, an integral part of Roman history, were recorded not only in Egyptian hieroglyphs, but also in Latin and in Greek. Best remembered of all was Cleopatra VII; certainly not the most successful Ptolemy, nor the longest lived, but the Ptolemy whose decisions and deeds influenced two of Rome's greatest men and, in so doing, affected the development of the Roman Empire.

One of the more interesting things I found though, in reading Tyledesley's book is this bit of news: Famous though she undoubtedly is, it is entirely possible to devote a lifetime to the study of ancient Egypt without ever meeting Cleopatra. Paradoxically, the woman whom millions regard as the defining Eqyptian queen is more or less ignored by traditional Egyptologists, who confine their studies to the thirty-one dynasties preceding the arrival of Alexander. The Ptolemies are considered peripheral beings and, as such, they have become the preserve of classical and specialized Graeco-Roman scholars, who, naturally enough, set them against a classical rather than an Egyptian background.

I hadn't really thought deeply about Cleopatra's place in actual history before. Too blinded by the make-believe magic of the movies, I suppose.

...the Ptolemies were foreigners in Egypt, and relatively modern foreigners at that. They were separated from the true dynastic age by an embarrassing period of Persian rule and, lacking a numbered dynasty of their own, were omitted from many well-respected Egyptian histories that came to a neat end with the reign of the last native Pharaoh...if that was not enough, they reigned over an Egypt whose pure native culture had been diluted and distorted by Greek and Roman influences: they worshipped curious hybrid gods; they issued coins; they spoke Greek, not Egyptian.

The author states that the Ptolemies always thought of themselves as a true dynasty nonetheless. Cleopatra considered herself an Egyptian queen.

The bare bones of her story - Cleopatra's liaisons, children and untimely death - have always been known and cannot be disputed. The flesh that generations of scholars and artists have chosen to cover those bones is a different matter, and each and every account of Cleopatra presents a new version of the same woman.

That she was an ambitious and ruthless queen is obvious from even the most superficial examination of her life, although the extent of her ruthlessness tends to be hidden in the more popular histories, which gloss over the murder of her sister and (almost certainly) her brother while concentrating on her 'love life'. That Cleopatra, living in an age of highly unstable governments, chose to form personal alliances with individually powerful Romans should be seen as sensible (intelligent) rather than a weak (emotional) decision: and 'love', as in any dynastic match, may have had very little to do with it.

Julius Caesar comes off as less than the man I'd thought him to be, but still intelligent, crafty and a splendid warrior if not the canniest of rulers. His own personal lurid history is scattered with wives and women and the usual sexual excesses.

Mark Anthony, sometimes seen as heroic, comes off, unfortunately, as a weak man given to foolish and excessive behavior of the most revolting sort. Hardly the character we're used to seeing in films.

But again, we're reminded that histories are written by the winners and often enough, by scholars and historians whose viewpoint is colored by time and inclination. Dr.Tyledesley tries to present alternate points of view in almost every instance. I like her measured approach.

The author's detached voice works very well in this telling of Cleopatra's history - personal and otherwise. The truth appears to be that much of what has been told in the past is based on inference, rumor and the views of ancient scholars (all men) with, perhaps, an ax or two to grind. So, in truth, Cleo's history may always be veiled in relative mystery. But modern archeology could, in future, have a hand in revealing more about Cleopatra since her palace, newly discovered, appears be underwater off the coast of Alexandria.

Included in this revealing book, are some intriguing pictures of coins with the supposed likeness of Cleopatra - if so, not the beauty we've been led to believe. Cleopatra's charm and manipulative powers are stressed where her beauty may be suspect. My favorite picture though is of a beautiful and finely detailed bust of Julius Caesar which captures the apparent strength in his finely boned, middle-aged face. The bust of Octavian (found in the Aegean sea) also pictured, while interesting, comes off not so much strong, as eerie.

The book also contains a handy Who Was Who section in the end and also a section of Notes.

If you have any interest at all in trying to get at the truth of Cleopatra, the Last Queen of Egypt, I recommend this obviously well-researched book by an expert well versed in Egyptian history.

CLEOPATRA: Her infinite variety.

A rambling sort of post today: I've just realized, while straightening my bookshelves, that I have a biography of CLEOPATRA I've never read. It's the one by Joyce Tyldesley published in 2008 (read the review in The Independent here), not the new one (2010) by Stacy Schiff. (Read the Schiff review from the NY Times here. ) Sometimes books get lost on my shelves, but then when one fine day I find them again, they're a pleasant surprise. A faulty memory can occasionally be a good thing.

Will I read the Schiff book? Maybe. But once I finish CLEOPATRA Last Queen of Egypt by Joyce Tyldesley - I may have had enough of Cleo for awhile. Though, admittedly, there's always something new to learn from history. And who doesn't love the movie-style glamor of the ancient Egyptians? Funnily enough, I'm not big on fiction books based in ancient Egypt - I find the reality of it all quite intriguing enough.

Speaking of Cleo, which of the movie Cleopatras is your favorite? Here's my pick: Claudette Colbert in the Cecil B. DeMille epic, with Warren Williams as Caesar (I've always had a crush on Warren Williams) and Henry Wilcoxin as a muscular and imposing Mark Anthony. I love this film. (I'll be talking about it on A Favorite Film one of these days.)

I included a couple of photos from a film below in which Joan Collins doesn't play Cleopatra, but a Cleo-clone. LAND OF THE PHARAOHS is a God-awful, though very entertaining, film I love to watch whenever it shows up. My favorite parts? The chorus singing on the soundtrack and the garish costumes. I was talking to someone about this film a while back and they suddenly broke into song, the chorus bits are THAT catchy - we had a good laugh. To remember something like that after so many years. Ha! I must mention too, the fake tan body make-up Joan Collins wears in this. I mean, she looks like a gingerbread floozy. And she is so obviously inexperienced, acting-wise. She plays this Cleo-clone like a Hollywood tart. So fun to watch. Jack Hawkins as the pharaoh just looks and acts bombastic and silly. An aside: Charles Chaplin's son Sydney plays the Cleo-clone's sap of a lover.

On to Theda Bara below - doesn't she look a bit overwhelmed by the costumes? Never saw this silent movie, but I can imagine Cleo as slinky-vamp. I love the photos anyway.

I did see Vivien Leigh below in the film, Caesar and Cleopatra, an adaptation of George Bernard Shaw's play, years ago. She was an enchanting, though a very British Cleo. I think it's all about the language in this film.
Elizabeth Taylor below. No. It didn't work then, it doesn't work now. But it's still kind of interesting to watch - like cruising by an accident safe and snug in your car and shaking your head, wondering what happened. Whose idea was this? Extreme beauty is no guarantee that a woman can look like a queen. Taylor never gets the 'feel' of the part. (And from what I understand, in reality, Cleopatra was not thought of as a great beauty.) Liz plays and sounds, in some scenes, like a fish-wife. (And believe it or not, I do like Elizabeth Taylor, just not as Cleo.) Richard Burton is awful, he reminds me of a lovestruck hound (and not in a good way) - which, of course, he was. The only one worth watching is Rex Harrison as Caesar.

So, what do you think? Which is your favorite?