Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Kinley This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

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

SnoopyStyle The title refers to the corrupting politics setting the stage for the final collapse of the Roman Empire far in the future. Marcus Aurelius (Alec Guinness) is the aging Roman Emperor. His closest supporters are the ethical general Gaius Livius (Stephen Boyd) and Greek former slave Timonides (James Mason). Livius is in love with Aurelius' daughter Lucilla (Sophia Loren). Aurelius wants to make Livius his heir instead of his son Commodus (Christopher Plummer). This sets off a series of dark events with consequences that will bring down an empire.Although this is a sword and sandal epic, it has more in common with a Shakespearian play. There are some action battles and big set pieces. The settings are impressive. There are some big scenes with lots of extras. It is however more reliant on an epic of human drama. Some of the acting can be old fashion but that's par for the course. Loren comes off a little stiff while Plummer revels in some broader work. In a way, it fits the Shakespearian feel. This is a nice example of a lesser known Hollywood epic.

grantss Epic but not that great.Massive in its scale, sets, ambition and running time this movie is more about showing off how big you can make a movie than how well you can make a movie. Plot isn't entirely historically accurate, and is in some ways a soap opera with historical figures (and many fictional characters). This isn't helped by a fairly unconvincing performance in the lead role by Stephen Boyd. Wooden, lame and just plain irritating.Christopher Plummer and Sophia Loren are OK. Best performances come from James Mason and Alec Guinness, who both bring a suitable amount of gravitas to the movie.There is some degree of truth to the plot, and the battle scenes are great, and these are what make the movie not a total waste of time.

qormi This movie had one thing going for it - incredible special effects to depict Roman architecture. The Roman fort in what is now Germany was a masterpiece inside and out. The stone work, the ramp whereby horses and chariots galloped right up to the gate, the log bridge over the gorge....looked very real. I don't know if it was historically accurate or not, but it was very impressive. The Roman temples and various government buildings in the center of Rome were fantastic - what a visual display - it was unmatched in any other toga epic. To this day, such realism has not been achieved again. The same goes for the detailed Roman legions. Now for the bad part - who exactly were the Romans up against - Barbarians or cave men? The Barbarians all had the dumbest wigs and beards. They lumbered around and seemed to fight with sticks. Then, there was the totally inane dialogue, which was more stilted than an oil rig in the Atlantic. Whenever Sophia Loren and Stephen Boyd were together, the lovey-dovey talk with reverent Biblical epic overtones was too funny. Stephen Boyd was a blond, probably so you wouldn't confuse him with Mesalah from Ben Hur. Sophia Loren was caked with oily makeup and seemed to have the same somber facial expression throughout. She seemed like a large, disoriented amphibian. Christopher Lee at least was interesting because he was evil. There were two instances where scenes from Ben Hur were revisited - the scene when Boyd and Lee reunite was very similar to when Messalah and Be Hur rekindled their friendship after many years. The chariot race from Ben Hur was revisited when Boyd and Lee raced off in a chariot "fight", whipping each other and bumping axles along the way. The film "Gladiator" with Russell Crowe borrowed half of "Fall of the Roman Empire". Same scenario where the dying emperor in Germany appoints his general over his son to succeed him. Same psychotic Commodus character. Same duel to the death as gladiators. One more thing - the musical score in Fall of the Roman Empire was very inappropriate. Seemed like the soundtrack for "The Sound of Music" or "My Fair Lady". Really bad.

johngerardmatthew This and 'Spartacus' are the best of the Roman Epics, and it's no coincidence that 'Gladiator' is essentially a remake of TFOTRE; Scott was inspired by the best.This is a beautifully made, intelligent film with great performances, especially from Mason. And quite fitting that it was the last of the 'Epics'...I grew up watching these films on TV with my late father who always explained the history behind them, and they remind me of him when I watch them.I've just picked it up on Blu-Ray for very little. Although the transfer isn't as great as 'Ben Hur' or 'Cleopatra', which it fully deserves, it still looks good.