Topic: One of My favorite Movies...

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

Combine great actors, a great director, and a great musical score you get a classic....

In this scene, a movie I saw at a dingy theater for 2 bucks with a good screen and a decent sound system, you see a masterfull finale to a great adaptation to an american novel.  The ebb and flow between the conflict of good of vs evil is just, well, watch it...

enjoy!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DV1VOIaukrQ[/youtube]

[Bonk]

I liked the cinematography except for at 3:09, at a critical point in the fight you cannot see what happens. How was the guy in green defeated? Where did that blow hit? How did it get through? Good scenery, but a little weak on the fight shots. Perhaps I'm spoiled by martial arts films though?

[Corbomite]

That is one of the most beautifuly shot movies ever. I could watch it with the sound off.

[knightstorm]

I read the book first, and was disappointed by the film.

[Corbomite]

I read the book first, and was disappointed by the film.

This is just about always the case.

[TAnimaL]

wait, James Fennimore Cooper's book?? Or the "Classics Illustrated" version? 'Cause, the man's writing style... and I'm not talking about it being almost 200 years old... because a lot of things hold up well from back then...

I guess I share Mark Twain's opinion of Cooper's writing 

As I repeat ad naseum to my kids and students - a book is a book, a film is a film. You don't compare breakfast to desert or a painting to a sculpture... You certainly can prefer one to the other. When I hear my 12 years-old friends say, "The book of Harry Potter 5 was better than the movie," I tell them they weren't really watching the movie.

(Sorry, a touchy subject for me)

I absolutely love this movie, it being based more on the 1936 movie than Coooper's book. The cinematography is amazing, North Carolina serving as a beautiful substitute for the Hudson Valley, and I found the fight choreography to be "tastefully discrete." 

And while I agree that it's beautiful enough to watch without sound, the soundtrack by Trevor Jones is spectacular. I'm soaking in it now...

(hmm, I've been replacing the music in OP with other stuff... some of this would work very nicely...)

[knightstorm]

Most film adaptations differ from the books in that they have to cut scenes to run in the time allotted.  What bothered me about this film was how badly they garbled the plot.  Characters who are supposed to live die, and vice versa.  While I do concede that the music and scenery are excellent, I can't watch this film without thinking "they've killed the wrong sister!" as well as other plot complaints.

[Corbomite]

Most film adaptations differ from the books in that they have to cut scenes to run in the time allotted.  What bothered me about this film was how badly they garbled the plot.  Characters who are supposed to live die, and vice versa.  While I do concede that the music and scenery are excellent, I can't watch this film without thinking "they've killed the wrong sister!" as well as other plot complaints.

Hollywood demands at least some sort of an upbeat ending.

[knightstorm]

Hollywood demands at least some sort of an upbeat ending.

More main characters die in the film than in the book.  How is that ending more upbeat?

[Corbomite]

Hollywood demands at least some sort of an upbeat ending.

More main characters die in the film than in the book.  How is that ending more upbeat?

True love prevailed.

[TAnimaL]

Again, Michael Mann's "Mohican" = 1936 Hollywood version, not the 1826 book.

[Father Ted]

I read the book first, and was disappointed by the film.

This is just about always the case.

One of the rare exceptions was "Patriot Games", which actually turned out to be a much better story than Clancy's book. For the most part, however, you're right. If you gave me enough time, I could come up with a few more, but I'll have to dwell on it.

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

wait, James Fennimore Cooper's book?? Or the "Classics Illustrated" version? 'Cause, the man's writing style... and I'm not talking about it being almost 200 years old... because a lot of things hold up well from back then...

I guess I share Mark Twain's opinion of Cooper's writing 

As I repeat ad naseum to my kids and students - a book is a book, a film is a film. You don't compare breakfast to desert or a painting to a sculpture... You certainly can prefer one to the other. When I hear my 12 years-old friends say, "The book of Harry Potter 5 was better than the movie," I tell them they weren't really watching the movie.

(Sorry, a touchy subject for me)

I absolutely love this movie, it being based more on the 1936 movie than Coooper's book. The cinematography is amazing, North Carolina serving as a beautiful substitute for the Hudson Valley, and I found the fight choreography to be "tastefully discrete." 

And while I agree that it's beautiful enough to watch without sound, the soundtrack by Trevor Jones is spectacular. I'm soaking in it now...

(hmm, I've been replacing the music in OP with other stuff... some of this would work very nicely...)

Very well spoke.  Movies stand on their own.  The movie media is just too different.  Updating the Last of the Mohicans in the style it was done brought the whole concept back into contemporary times. 

But what movies do best is actually what books do best in another way ... if they are really good they transfix you.  Like a book you can't put down a great scene from a movie leaves you mouth breathing.  The best of these scenese are about life and death and usually against odds.

I didn't like this movie the first time it came out.  Criticized it heavily from because of departures from the book and use of "composite characters", characters that combine one two or more in the book like Arwen and Glorfindel (an elf noble (or lord) who actually saves Frodo at the Ford of Bruinen) to move the plot forward.

I was much better disposed to the second movie and by the third movie, particularily this scene, I realized I was watching a true masterpiece of cinema...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaZI2799SJc&feature=related[/youtube]

* notice again the use of violins in the musical score, an instrument not used much for such scenes in cinema before Last of the Mohicans.  This version of the battle is pretty short as the battle goes on quite a bit but the sound is so good I had to use it.  I was completely won over on this series of movies after this.



 

 

[knightstorm]

Personally, I think combining Arwen with Glorifndel was really to give Liv Tyler a larger part, maybe I'm just being cynical.  One thing that annoyed me was that they cut the battle of the shire from film 3, not for time constraints, but because Jackson didn't like that scene.  However, in my opinion, having the final battle of the war fought not by men, but by hobbits was more in keeping with the theme of the story.

[Corbomite]

There were a lot of things that I didn't like about LOTR, but they got way more right than they got wrong. I was more upset about losing Tom Bombadil than the Scouring of the Shire (lets face it, at almost five hours ROTK is almost unbearable in one sitting so adding more would have required a fourth movie). I hate the things they added more (battle of Osgiliath, Boromir holding the Ring, Aragorn and Arwen etc...) than anything they had to leave out due to time or good movie story telling. And yes, Glorfindel was cut out to make Arwen's part larger, set up the romance story and remove a character we see only once when we have a dozen others to remember.

[knightstorm]

Tom Bombadil was probably removed because general audiences (people who haven't read the books) probably wouldn't have responded well to a character who is constantly singing.  As for the battle of the shire, they could have at least added it to the extended DVD version.  One thing I disliked about the film is that they took away the mystery around Aragorn by stating up front that he was the king.  Personally, my favorite thing about the films was the depiction of the Shire and Bagend.

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

There were a lot of things that I didn't like about LOTR, but they got way more right than they got wrong. I was more upset about losing Tom Bombadil than the Scouring of the Shire (lets face it, at almost five hours ROTK is almost unbearable in one sitting so adding more would have required a fourth movie). I hate the things they added more (battle of Osgiliath, Boromir holding the Ring, Aragorn and Arwen etc...) than anything they had to leave out due to time or good movie story telling. And yes, Glorfindel was cut out to make Arwen's part larger, set up the romance story and remove a character we see only once when we have a dozen others to remember.

Agree.

Also books and written media can make and carry transitions cinema cannot due to the “laid back” nature of reading.  “Digressions” can be inserted for changes of pace, background, and  other enjoyments because a book deals in far more details than a movie and plays over a far grater length of time.  We actually do have data comparing the two.  In the early days of silent film Eric von Stroheim filmed “Greed”, a direct paragraph by paragraph scene by scene adaptation of the Frank Norris novel “McTeague”

http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/165

went about 24 hours before  they butchered it down to 2 ½ hours.  McTeague is only about a third the length of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy.

Per Ralph Bakshai, whose adaptation of the Fellowship (Part 1 only), also dropped  Bombadil because the character "didn't move the story along."    He was a delightful digression in the novel but might have ruined the movie.

Same thing I think for the Battle of the Shire.   I didn’t show the entire battle of Pelennor Fields simply because the sound mix was so good on this version;  but its long and riveting full of fantastic images and confrontations.  But the Battle of the Shire takes place once the real adventure is over… things are returning to normal (with a difference) and magic is leaving the world. 

"The Skowering of the Shire” is almost an entirely different story conducted in a low magic world.  It’s a great story, an allusion to WWII vets returning home from the “great war” I’d wager but perfectly suitable to reading because you really don’t want to say “goodbye” to this world, middle earth, and Tolkien provides you with a slow transition back to reality and even a wonderful, and tearful goodbye.

But movies aren’t suitable to long goodbyes.  You cant stuff people inot a theater for much more than three hours.  Trying to insert that story probably would have derailed the movie. 

[Corbomite]

I'm glad Peter Jackson got the time to tell the story as well as he could, but I always thought (and still do) that the format should have been one three hour plus movie to do The Hobbit, then two movies each for FOTR, TTT, and ROTK. That way it could all be told without wiping out your audience and they could have raked in even more dough.

[knightstorm]

Originally, he was going to do the entire LOTR in 2 films.  When Miramax tried to force him to compress the entire story into one film, he went to New Line, and they not only agreed to make the films, but also requested it as a trilogy.  While there is a limit, to what Jackson could put in a theatrical release, he did produce an extended dvd version which includes additional scenes from the books.

The reason I am so bent out of shape about the omission of the battle for the shire is because I feel that one scene from ROTK completely encapsulates the theme of the trilogy, with the final battle of the war being fought not by men, but by halflings.

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

Originally, he was going to do the entire LOTR in 2 films.  When Miramax tried to force him to compress the entire story into one film, he went to New Line, and they not only agreed to make the films, but also requested it as a trilogy.  While there is a limit, to what Jackson could put in a theatrical release, he did produce an extended dvd version which includes additional scenes from the books.

The reason I am so bent out of shape about the omission of the battle for the shire is because I feel that one scene from ROTK completely encapsulates the theme of the trilogy, with the final battle of the war being fought not by men, but by halflings.

Hehe maybe they'll one day do a made for TV movie on it.  These actors will be too old soon to reprise or do a part 4.

[AcePylut]

Last of the Mohicans was a great flick.  One of my favorites.

So was LOTR, but I was really disappointed in the Cavalry charges (both in TT and ROTK).  Apparently, physics mattered throughout the series, except the orcs must have been massless, becauase the cavbalry does not stop or even slow down as they charge through the ranks.

[Nemesis]

One of these days I'll have to get around to watching Lord of the Rings. 

[knightstorm]

Get the extended edition.  Trust me its worth it.  Fellowship has 30 minutes of additional footage, The Towers has 44 minutes, and the King has 52 minutes.

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

One of these days I'll have to get around to watching Lord of the Rings.

Get thee to a nunnery.

 

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

Last of the Mohicans was a great flick.  One of my favorites.

So was LOTR, but I was really disappointed in the Cavalry charges (both in TT and ROTK).  Apparently, physics mattered throughout the series, except the orcs must have been massless, becauase the cavbalry does not stop or even slow down as they charge through the ranks.

Well...  the audience doesnt notice right away because their swept into the moment.  By this point if your heart isn't beating fast, you probably have a pulse rate of thirty.  But yeah if you watch it over and perhaps again you see it.  Plus even if you are somewhat annoyed that the Orcs with their ridiculously short pikes are being swept away like balloons in the wind its onto the next scene with elephants bigger than Brontosauruses (and a King who reforms his horsemen and orders them to charge "head on"),  a skeletal Witch King who wields a Morning Star only a modern day tractor could swing and a ghost army that glides and devours its prey like a swarm of locusts.  This movie isnt about Gettesburgh and reinactment methodology.  So it's all good.

Getting back to Last fo the Mohicans the director there uses a lttle bit of that when we see Hawkeye holding two flint lock muskets in either hand and blowing away two foes while on the run  (a WORLD CLASS feat for those days plus someof those muskets were picked up from dead poorly trained Indians who loaded them)... I mean, don't these guns ever misfire?  (not to mention the ninja like knife play throughout the movie).... Not in Hollywood they don't.  In real life quite a bit thats why you had to stand pretty still to shoot em.  And even then they misfired like bitches, sometimes lethally.

A good director knows that when they got you they got you and they can get away with some stuff.

[Dash Jones]

Actually I thought Fellowship was the best made of the LotR trilogy, they awarded RotK simply because of it being a token to all the films combined.

RotK lost it's magic when they had Oliphant surfing...and green army ants...even for a movie that was rather ridiculous...I heard quite a few folks laughing at the stupidity of those scenes.  Overall well made movie, but some foolishness was rather ridiculous.

[Father Ted]

Actually I thought Fellowship was the best made of the LotR trilogy, they awarded RotK simply because of it being a token to all the films combined.

RotK lost it's magic when they had Oliphant surfing...and green army ants...even for a movie that was rather ridiculous...I heard quite a few folks laughing at the stupidity of those scenes.  Overall well made movie, but some foolishness was rather ridiculous.

IMHO, 'The Two Towers' was the best, but I agree that they gave the Oscar to RotK for the whole trilogy instead of rewarding each movie, which would have been more fair since they were the best films for their years.

[Corbomite]

Get the extended edition.  Trust me its worth it.  Fellowship has 30 minutes of additional footage, The Towers has 44 minutes, and the King has 52 minutes.

As far as I'm concerned there are no other versions. The theatrical releases are a waste of time. Its worth it just for "Concerning Hobbits" in FOTR and getting to see Saruman finished off in ROTK (even though it deters from the book because of no Scouring of the Shire, it was a great scene). Part of the reason Bombadil irritates me so much is that even with the extra 30 mins of footage FOTR is much shorter than the other two movies. That sequence would have added another 20-30 mins to it which doesn't seem prohibitive considering PJ let ROTK go on for almost five hours. Aragorn could still have given them their weapons at Weathertop. Coming out of the barrow safe, but unarmed would have changed the story very little. I swear Bob Hoskins would have eaten that part (Bombadil) up!

[AcePylut]

Last of the Mohicans was a great flick.  One of my favorites.

So was LOTR, but I was really disappointed in the Cavalry charges (both in TT and ROTK).  Apparently, physics mattered throughout the series, except the orcs must have been massless, becauase the cavbalry does not stop or even slow down as they charge through the ranks.

Well...  the audience doesnt notice right away because their swept into the moment.  By this point if your heart isn't beating fast, you probably have a pulse rate of thirty.  But yeah if you watch it over and perhaps again you see it.  Plus even if you are somewhat annoyed that the Orcs with their ridiculously short pikes are being swept away like balloons in the wind its onto the next scene with elephants bigger than Brontosauruses (and a King who reforms his horsemen and orders them to charge "head on"),  a skeletal Witch King who wields a Morning Star only a modern day tractor could swing and a ghost army that glides and devours its prey like a swarm of locusts.  This movie isnt about Gettesburgh and reinactment methodology.  So it's all good.

Getting back to Last fo the Mohicans the director there uses a lttle bit of that when we see Hawkeye holding two flint lock muskets in either hand and blowing away two foes while on the run  (a WORLD CLASS feat for those days plus someof those muskets were picked up from dead poorly trained Indians who loaded them)... I mean, don't these guns ever misfire?  (not to mention the ninja like knife play throughout the movie).... Not in Hollywood they don't.  In real life quite a bit thats why you had to stand pretty still to shoot em.  And even then they misfired like bitches, sometimes lethally.

A good director knows that when they got you they got you and they can get away with some stuff.

The "cavalry" charges were really my only complaint.  I don't mind suspending belief for things that are "magic", but the charges weren't "magic" based - it was pretty much a straight up cavalry charge.  It annoyed me because I'm one of those guys that watches movies for "accuracy" (hahaha - in a fantasy movie, i know i know).  Dinna get me wrong, I loved the LOTR movies. 

My favorite was Two Towers... loved watching the psychological battle going on in Gollum's head.  That was the best part of the movie imho.  Second was the battle for Helm's Deep.  It swept me up in what it must be like to be under siege, where there is no escape.  I was imagining how fearful it must be to be under siege when they showed that shot of the women and chillen hiding when the bad guys were outside stomping and stuff.


Yeah I go for extended version only... and couldn't care less about Tom Bombadil or anythign else that was from the books that was left out... It was a damn great series imho.


And all I have to say about movies...

Pearl Harbor = Worst.  Movie.  Ever.  Worse than Roadhouse. 

[knightstorm]

Pearl Harbor = Worst.  Movie.  Ever.  Worse than Roadhouse.

You need to see The Spirit.

[Nemesis]

One of these days I'll have to get around to watching Lord of the Rings.

Get thee to a nunnery.

 

I do have the DVD sets, I just haven't watched them yet.  Its only been a few years so far.  I'll get around to it one day.

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

Pearl Harbor = Worst.  Movie.  Ever.  Worse than Roadhouse.

You need to see The Spirit.

Bad or good?  I assume bad. But... you might mean good.

[knightstorm]

Pearl Harbor = Worst.  Movie.  Ever.  Worse than Roadhouse.

You need to see The Spirit.

Bad or good?  I assume bad. But... you might mean good.

Worst film I have ever seen.  It makes Pearl Harbor look like a masterpiece.  After seeing this film, I have to say that anyone who even thinks about letting Frank Miller near the director's chair again should be shot.  The only thing the film had going for it was the shock value of that one scene where Samuel L. Jackson was in a nazi uniform.

[Father Ted]

Pearl Harbor = Worst.  Movie.  Ever.  Worse than Roadhouse.

You need to see The Spirit.

Worst movie? Try "Natural Born Killers". If people needed a hint that Oliver Stone had truly gone off the deep end, this was it.

[Sirgod]

Worst movie for me? Brave heart.

What a piece of misguided history. Nun chucks for gods sake. I mean come on. Don't even get me started with Bridge battles that are not on a bridge.

Stephen

[Commander La'ra]

Worst movie for me? Brave heart.

What a piece of misguided history. Nun chucks for gods sake. I mean come on. Don't even get me started with Bridge battles that are not on a bridge.

Stephen

I thought that was like a grain flail or something.  Not that it being a grain flail would help the rest of the movie that much.

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

Worst movie for me? Brave heart.

What a piece of misguided history. Nun chucks for gods sake. I mean come on. Don't even get me started with Bridge battles that are not on a bridge.

Stephen

A lot of Directors are using oriental style fighting their movies.  Even LOTR.  A fad I think.

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

Well time for a slight diversion to one of my favorite films of all time.   And amazingly the conflict presented here hasn't a moment of violence. This film turns up on many a scholars top ten films of all time.

Here we see that moment where actions and music combine in a conflict between good and evil.  This time music itself becomes the object of contention.  I think you all know this film.  The brooding hero of this film is an Amercian Icon, a cynical man who finally after great disappointments chooses a side. He's the real hero here, the decider, and at great cost.  As in the other clips the camera also focuses on single individuals.  Note the shift in camera angles near the end of the scene (very pronounced) that denotes a huge reordering in the balance of power.  I added the last scene because its always a favorite, completes it, and provides some comic relief.


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_iYbEPZVVIA&feature=related[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Gf8NK1WAOc&feature=related[/youtube] 

[Father Ted]

It was made years before I was born, but 'Casablanca' is still an alltime classic. There are good movies and then there are great movies, and I'd put 'Casablanca' in that second list any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

[knightstorm]

Worst movie for me? Brave heart.

What a piece of misguided history. Nun chucks for gods sake.

Stephen

Are you trying to tell me that nun chucks aren't traditional Scottish weapons?

[Corbomite]

Worst movie for me? Brave heart.

What a piece of misguided history. Nun chucks for gods sake. I mean come on. Don't even get me started with Bridge battles that are not on a bridge.

Stephen

That was a flail. They never get all history movies right. Patton never stood out in the wide open firing his pistols at a strafing fighter plane, but it was still a good movie. I like Braveheart for its realistic medieval battle scenes, I don't think I ever felt it was historically accurate (The French princess was a child at the time and there is no record of them ever meeting  etc...).

[Nemesis]

Since we were discussing LOTR.

Link to source

Dear MR BAGGINS, Fellow Conspirator,

I am Thorin Oakenshield, descendant of Thrain the Old and grandson of Thror who was King under the Mountain. I am writing you to discuss our plans, our ways, means, policy and devices for rescuing our treasure from the dragon Smaug.

During the reign of Thror our kingdom was a prosperous one. Kings used to send for our smiths, and reward even the least skillful most richly. Fathers would beg us to take their sons as apprentices, and pay us handsomely, especially in food-supplies, which we never bothered to grow or find for ourselves. Altogether those were good days for us, and the poorest of us had money to spend and to lend, and leisure to make beautiful things just for the fun of it, not to speak of the most marvellous and magical toys, the like of which is not to be found in the world now-a-days.

Undoubtedly that was what brought the dragon. Dragons steal gold and jewels from men and elves and dwarves, wherever they can find them; and they guard their plunder as long as they live (which is practically for ever, unless they are killed), and never enjoy a brass ring of it. There was a most specially greedy, strong and wicked worm called Smaug. One day he flew up into the air and came south. The dragon settled on our mountain in a spout of flame and routed out all the halls, and lanes, and tunnels, alleys, cellars, mansions and passages. After there were no dwarves left alive inside the mountain he took all their wealth for himself.

In view of this, I received your contact through a friend and counselor, an ingenious wizard, who noted you as a Burglar who wants a good job, plenty of Excitement and reasonable Reward. And I and my twelve companions have agreed to give you 10% of the total gold and jewels that the dragon Smaug now rests upon if you can join us on our long journey. When you have agreed please tell us the place where you dwell and send one hundred pence so that we might travel to you.

Please hold what I have told you in strict confidence and I look forward to your earliest response.

THORIN OAKENSHIELD

[knightstorm]

Here are some clips from one of my favorite films.  The last one is the surprise ending in case you haven't seen it yet.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLnclSgLYC4&feature=related[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-waJsBs0eBQ&feature=related[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tmzbosye2-Y[/youtube]

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

Great little sleeper of a movie.  Highly underrated.

That OrangeMan scene definitely fits into the categories here.   Great score too.   I just wish they started the clip as he approaches the house and finds the kids then gets pushed into the pool.  It adds so much more and tells the complete story of the encounter along with the somber ebb and flow of the piece.   

[Corbomite]

I give you the most incredible action sequence ever filmed simply because it is real (as it gets). No CGI, no explosions, no special effects. Just 9 men and 36 beautiful, perfectly matched horses racing chariots (the wrangler on this must have had fits trying to find nine sets of each type of horse coloring that matched each other and were trainable). They built the chariots from Roman blueprints, then they had to learn how to drive them, then they had to learn how to race them, then they had to learn how to crash them without killing anybody. I never get tired of seeing this.
 


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbQvpJsTvxU[/youtube]

[Sirgod]

Ben Hur and El Cid are two of my Favorites. Right up there with UHF.

Stephen

[Sirgod]

Please excuse my indulgence here Rondo on your thread, as it isn't a movie at all, But The wife and I recently grabbed the Johnny Carson collection off of Netflix, and have never laughed so hard in our lives.

Right now we are watching Buddy Hacket and Carson doing skits together from the early 60's.

Guys, this was the golden age of comedy right here.

Stephen

[TAnimaL]

"Sis, boom, bah" never fails to illicit a laugh from me...

[Voidwar]

Ben Hur Pwns,  Corbomite Maneuvers FTW !

[Commander La'ra]

Stephen:  I honestly miss Johnny Carson every time I turn on the TV past 10 p.m.

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

I give you the most incredible action sequence ever filmed simply because it is real (as it gets). No CGI, no explosions, no special effects. Just 9 men and 36 beautiful, perfectly matched horses racing chariots (the wrangler on this must have had fits trying to find nine sets of each type of horse coloring that matched each other and were trainable). They built the chariots from Roman blueprints, then they had to learn how to drive them, then they had to learn how to race them, then they had to learn how to crash them without killing anybody. I never get tired of seeing this.
 


[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbQvpJsTvxU[/youtube]

Heh. The good guys never use a whip.

[Father Ted]

The chariot race in 'Ben Hur' is definitely one of the alltime great Hollywood scenes, but going back to that time, my favorite movie for that era is 'Barrabas', about the criminal who was released in favor of Jesus. The only names I remember are Anthony Quinn as the title character, and Jack Palance as a sadistic gladiator. According to the movie, Barrabas was the Biblical version of Rambo.  

[Dash Jones]

Actually, someone DID die in the Ben Hur racing scene.  I believe they even included the cut with permissions from the family (and also a nice chunk of change to the family) as they felt it added the realism of the danger of the chariot race.  The death WAS unintentional.  The guy literally got run over by the chariots and it was a terrible thing to happen on that set.  If what I've heard is correct.

[Corbomite]

Actually, someone DID die in the Ben Hur racing scene.  I believe they even included the cut with permissions from the family (and also a nice chunk of change to the family) as they felt it added the realism of the danger of the chariot race.  The death WAS unintentional.  The guy literally got run over by the chariots and it was a terrible thing to happen on that set.  If what I've heard is correct.

That rumor has been debunked. No one died during the 1959 version, but a few people were hurt. A stuntman did die during the 1920 silent version when the wheel fell of his chariot and he flew into a pile of lumber.

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

Well nothing came to top that until this...  again a great music score combined with action and heroic actions.  This is the best I can get from the net but it is somewhat cut at key places.  When I saw this movie in the theaters a number of people literally lepted off their feet cheering as Maximus took the spear and challenged the chariot from behind.  The music score is Hans Zimmer adaptation (in the beginning) of Gustav Holts "Planets - Mars (god of War)"

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dck5nZrUoZQ&feature=related[/youtube]

Here's Holts original version ...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6NeQ1h6lzLI[/youtube]

The first battle in Gladiator also uses this music and it's alos a griveting scene.

To me the theme of courage in leadership, which plays back and forth in Gladiator, is expressed near perfectly in the two battles, but moreso in the gladiator scene where the confused gladiators are fused together into a small, but deadly fighting force.   I apologize for the bad cut on Gladiator... lots is missing.

[Corbomite]

Sorry, I can't agree on Gladiator. It was poorly shot in places (medium shots when long shots were called for, out of focus backgrounds, lack of epic feel except in a few places) and Joaquin Phoenix just sucked IMO.

"The Fall of the Roman Empire" (Alec Guinness, Stephen Boyd, Christopher Plummer, James Mason and Sophia Loren) tells the same story, but better shot. Every shot in that movie is just a work of art. Martin Scorsese agrees with me.

[_Rondo_GE The OutLaw]

Sorry, I can't agree on Gladiator. It was poorly shot in places (medium shots when long shots were called for, out of focus backgrounds, lack of epic feel except in a few places) and Joaquin Phoenix just sucked IMO.

"The Fall of the Roman Empire" (Alec Guinness, Stephen Boyd, Christopher Plummer, James Mason and Sophia Loren) tells the same story, but better shot. Every shot in that movie is just a work of art. Martin Scorsese agrees with me.

You can get the whole movies here I think.  I havent tried it.

http://www.filestube.com/fdbba100ea07558603ea,g/The-Fall-of-the-Roman-Empire-1964.html

I suppose if thats all I was looking for was photography you might be right.  It was shot in Ultra Panavision 70 which has a wide epic quality to it than normal films.   I looked through some of the you tubes on the movies and generally would agree in that area...plus the snippet I presented here on Gladiator doesn't do the scene justice.  The Fall of the Roman Empire was definitely a source work for Gladiator among a number of other influences.  I too was not totally taken by Phoenix's performance but he didnt ruin the movie for me at all.  On the other hand Stephen Boyds wooden perormance in The Fall of the Roman Empire is generally considered one of the big reasons the film was a financial flop.   To me Fall seems preachy and is just too "Hollywood" with all those big stars, including an all too melodramatic Sophia Loren, at the height of her career no less.

[Corbomite]

Yeah, Sophia was as bad as Joaquin!  I liked everyone else in it though and thought it didn't do well because people were tired of three hour sword and sandal movies by then. I mean after Cleopatra who would want to sit through another one?