Now Over 5500 Reviews and (near) Daily Updates!

WELCOME! Use the search engines on this site (or your own off-site engine of choice) to gain easy access to the complete MAKSQUIBS Archive; more than 5500 posts and counting. (New posts added every day or so.)

You can check on all our titles by typing the Title, Director, Actor or 'Keyword' you're looking for in the Search Engine of your choice (include the phrase MAKSQUIBS) or just use the BLOGSPOT.com Search Box at the top left corner of the page.

Feel free to place comments directly on any of the film posts and to test your film knowledge with the CONTESTS scattered here & there. (Hey! No Googling allowed. They're pretty easy.)

Send E-mails to MAKSQUIBS@yahoo.com . (Let us know if the TRANSLATE WIDGET works!) Or use the Profile Page or Comments link for contact.

Thanks for stopping by.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

DEMETRIUS AND THE GLADIATORS (1954)

In this quickie sequel to THE ROBE/’53 (the stiff, dollar-churning debut of CinemaScope), we’re still following those early Christians in Rome, but the focus has shifted from martyrs & religion to swords & sandals. (There may have been more of the former at one time. A fade-to-black pause at the one-hour mark signals Intermission, but there’s no actual break. Best guess is that the developing character arc between good-girl Debra Paget & bad-girl Anne Bancroft got left on the cutting-room floor.) Jay Robinson’s Caligula is still chewing up the scenery and the Christians; Victor Mature’s Demetrius is still questioning what it all means and still oiling up his hair & limbs; Michael Rennie’s Peter is still wise & saintly, but he’s been demoted and the script sends him off on a road trip. The big addition is Susan Hayward as Messalina, the new vixen in Rome. She’s married to Claudius, plotting against Caligula and vamping Victor in brightly colored Roman outfits that could easily work on the L.A. cocktail party circuit. One red number has a bodice that’s pure ‘50s Bel Air chic. All in all, the whole shebang is a lot less ponderous than the original . . . but even more forgettable.

No comments: