Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Steineded How sad is this?

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Console best movie i've ever seen.

JohnHowardReid NOTES: A sequel to "The Robe", this movie was nowhere near as successful at the box-office with a domestic rentals gross of just over $4 million compared to the previous picture's $17½ million. In Australia, the movie came in 18th at the ticket-windows, which is probably its position in the U.K. and North America as well. Certainly it took good money, but considerably less than its predecessor.REVIEW: Competition is the key word here. The movie is competing with "The Robe". It fails of course. And the players are competing with each other as to who can give the most over-the-top performance. Robinson wins easily, though he has the advantage of all the best lines. Mature's hamminess in fact seems often embarrassing, but at least he's a trier. Michael Rennie is a dead loss. So is Barry Jones. And naturally, Richard Egan. I don't even remember Anne Bancroft. But good to see Ernest Borgnine in a villainous role.The budget is not as full-blown as "The Robe", though good use is made of standing sets. Daves' direction appears stolidly routine. And photographically the film shows up early CinemaScope's defects (fuzziness, distortion, blurring) even more than "The Robe" Obviously, less care was taken as the movie was hurried into release.

MartinHafer I am not a huge fan of the religious epics of the 1950s. For every good one, such as "Ben Hur", there seemed to be two turkeys--such as "David and Bathsheba" or "Samson and Delilah". Because of that, I have avoided watching "Demetrius and the Gladiators" for many years. However, after completing the task, I am surprised that I actually enjoyed the film very much.When Twentieth Century-Fox filmed "The Robe", they already knew that it would be followed up by "Demetrius and the Gladiators". In fact, the movies were filmed like one huge film and then separated into two as the studio was THAT confident that "The Robe" would be a big hit--which it was. And, for that matter, so was its sequel. Fortunately, you can watch either without watching the other.The film begins with a clip from the previous film--just before the two main characters (Richard Burton and Jean Simmons) were executed. Soon you learn that the Apostle Peter and his followers (including Demetrius--Victor Mature) are the keepers of the robe that Jesus wore to the cross. Oddly, however, the Emperor Caligula is very fascinated by the robe and insists he must have it. When Demetrius tries to hide it, he's sentenced by this loony emperor to become a gladiator--a sure death since Demetrius has vowed never to fight now that he's become a Christian. However, the lure sexy Messalina (Susan Hayward) and his own desire to live make it difficult, if not impossible, to fulfill this oath. What's next? See for yourself.There's no doubt about it--this film is a spectacle. It has huge scenes, huge gladiatorial fights and lots of beautiful sets and costumes. While it's not a fantastic film, the action is there and the film is fascinating. Part of this is due to the supporting performances. William Marshall shows what a wonderfully unsung actor he was. Had he been born later, his wonderful voice and acting skills would have made him a top star--something not possible for a black actor during this age. Additionally, while Jay Robinson's version of Caligula is not in the least bit subtle, it IS very entertaining and fun to watch. All in all, a decent film that is far better than I'd suspected.UPDATE: Since this review, I've finally seen the precursor, "The Robe", and was surprised just how bad it was compared to "Demetrius and the Gladiators. It's an odd example of a film whose sequel was better--much better.

ragosaal A sequel to the box office successful "The Robe", this film is just one more of those spectacular epic films of the 50's and early 60's settled in ancient Rome and with a religious background of the early Christians and their whereabouts in an all pagan world.After a secondary lead in "The Robe", Victor Mature (as the freed Christian slave Demetrius) takes here the centre of the stage and the film deals with his story; the man looses his faith and recovers it after fighting as a gladiator in the arena, becoming a Decurion for Emperor Caligula and having a passionate affair with the woman (Messalina) married to the weak emperor's uncle Claudius (Barry Jones). The film is most colourful, the script is not bad as well as the costumes and armors, the settings and reproduction of the old Rome are good enough (no computers back in 1954) and some action sequences in the arena are well achieved. But somehow this picture lacks the sort of sensation of greatness and huge spectacle other products of the genre transmitted ("The Robe" itself, the previous "Quo Vadis?" or the posterior "Ben Hur" and "Spartacus"); in fact, "Demetrius and the Gladiators" is not one of the titles that comes to mind easily when epic spectacular films is the subject.Victor Mature shows his inevitable overacting as the main character though it is fair to say he has done worse ("The Egyptian" and "Samson and Delilah", for instance, and many others). Susan Hayward also overacts every now and then as the wicked Messalina but she was a fine actress and rounds up a better job. Jay Robinson clearly overacts and very much as Calìgula (Caius Germanicus was his real name) but in his case it appears to be a conscious performing decision after he was the most remembered character in the previous "The Robe"; he just lets himself go without limits. It is hard to swallow Michael Rennie (Peter) as a rude uneducated fisherman not for his acting but for his important and polite looks. There are good performances by Ernest Borgnine, Richard Egan (as a villainous gladiator), Barry Jones, Anne Bancroft and William Marshall (far before his "Blacula" days). Debra Paget delivers her acceptable acting but she looks as a contemporary girl here (she could have used the same hairdo and make up for her real life in the middle 50's).All in all, "Demetrius and the Gladiators" is a watchable and entertaining product, but no much more than that in my opinion. A 6 (out of 10) for me.

James Hitchcock The historical epics which were so popular in the fifties and early sixties frequently had a religious theme. Some were based on stories taken directly from the Bible ("The Ten Commandments", "Solomon and Sheba", "King of Kings"), while others tried to convey a Christian message indirectly. Thus the central character of "Spartacus" is treated as a metaphorical Christ-figure, and "The Egyptian" draws parallels between Christianity and the monotheistic religion of Atenism which briefly flourished under the heretical Pharaoh Akhnaten. "Demetrius and the Gladiators" is one of a number of films (the most famous is "Ben Hur", but others include "The Robe", to which "Demetrius" is a sequel, "Quo Vadis" and "The Fall of the Roman Empire") which deal with the early days of the Christian church and its persecution by the Roman emperors. The stories told by such films were normally fictitious, but were set against a background of historical fact. The central character, Demetrius, is a former slave who, after assaulting a soldier who is molesting his girlfriend Lucia, is sentenced to fight in the arena as a gladiator. This causes him difficulties as he is a Christian whose moral code will not permit him to kill another man, even in self-defence. He survives, however, largely because he attracts the attention of Messalina, the wife of Claudius, uncle of the Emperor Caligula. Later, believing that Lucia has accidentally been killed by another gladiator, Demetrius renounces his Christian faith, and fights fiercely, killing the man he believes to have been responsible for her death and several others. His courage and skill with a sword lead to his being made a tribune in the Praetorian Guard, and he becomes Messalina's lover. As in "The Robe", the robe which Christ wore to His crucifixion plays an important part in the film; Caligula wants to get his hands on it because he believes that it has magical powers and that it will give him the secret of eternal life. Several of the epics of this period combined, incongruously, an improving religious message with a good deal of eroticism, with much bare female flesh on display- examples include "Solomon and Sheba", "Esther and the King" and "Salome", where we get to see the famous dance of the seven veils, but it is made clear that, contrary to the Biblical version of the story, Rita Hayworth's character is in fact a virtuous heroine who only is flashing her legs in public in a desperate attempt to save John the Baptist from his fate. There are elements of this strange combination of godliness and sexiness in "Demetrius", but the sexiness is very much downplayed. Messalina's notorious promiscuity is alluded to rather than shown on screen, and the scene between the gladiators and the women brought in to entertain them may be an orgy, but it is a very decorous one. The film-makers were clearly more interested in the element of godliness, and, unlike some films of this type, "Demetrius" raises genuine moral issues about pacifism, non-violence and Christian forgiveness. Demetrius himself is a man who goes through a crisis of faith and abandons his Christian beliefs in favour of an ethic based on revenge and worldly ambition. His conscience, however, is troubled, especially after he is reproached by his old friend St Peter. He is a more complex and interesting figure than many epic heroes, so it is unfortunate that the part was played by Victor Mature, an actor whose success often seemed to owe more to his ruggedly masculine good looks and his virile physique than to his acting technique. Susan Hayward (an actress who could often look bored and listless when asked to play roles that did not interest her) makes a weak Messalina. Neither give their worst performance (in Hayward's case that must surely have been "The Conqueror"), and Mature brings a certain rough sincerity to his part, but I felt that the film might have been improved with other actors in these roles.Nevertheless, there was much I enjoyed about the film. Michael Rennie was appropriately dignified as Peter, played as a sort of ascetic philosopher, although I would agree with the reviewer who pointed out that it would be hard to imagine him ever working as a fisherman. I also liked William Marshall as Glycon, the former African king now forced to fight as a gladiator, who befriends Demetrius. ("Spartacus", a better film than "Demetrius" although it owes something to it, also features a sympathetic black gladiator who befriends the hero). Jay Robinson, who played Caligula, has been criticised by some reviewers for overacting, although I must say I liked his performance. Historians have doubted whether the real Caligula was actually insane, although he was undoubtedly cruel and eccentric, but in the context of this film he is definitely presented as a lunatic, a man who has literally been driven mad by power to the point where he believes himself to be a god. (Not even Hitler went that far). There is an interesting contrast with a modern epic, "Gladiator", in which Joaquin Phoenix plays another tyrannical Roman Emperor, Commodus, as a basically weak and insecure young man. Although Phoenix's performance works well in the context of that particular film, the way the role of Caligula was written called for something quite different- the sort of ranting, over-the-top performance which might be unfashionable now but would have been less controversial in the fifties.Although the standard of the acting is mixed, I generally enjoyed the film. It does not reach the standard of the really great epics, such as "Spartacus" or "Ben-Hur", but it works well on the level of spectacle, with fine sets and costumes and some exciting scenes of gladiatorial combat, and has a more intelligent script than many epics. 7/10