On June 3, 1963, director Joseph L. Mankiewicz and 20th Century Fox introduced the movie Cleopatra to the United States and with a budget of 44 million dollars, Joseph Mankiewicz performed an excellent presentation of Ancient Egypt and the depiction of Cleopatra alongside her life struggles and independency. Elizabeth Taylor played a magnificent role as Cleopatra with her beauty, strong emotions, and excellent acting. In the movie, there were multiple marble statues of gods and goddesses, hieroglyphic writing on the walls containing stories and legends, the sphinx was shown multiple times, intricate designs on the headdresses and jewelry, the Roman chest plates and their shields, and the Roman Empire was also shown. All these objects, paintings, and architecture played a major role in displaying the era of the Egyptians and Romans as well as who or what would have been worn, what buildings were used as for courtrooms, bedchambers, or temples for gods and goddesses.
In the movie, there were statues of both gods and goddesses, such as women holding objects or dog or alligator heads with human bodies. One god shown quite often was Anubis, who is portrayed as a black pharaoh hound or the god of death as if foreshadowing the future deaths within the movie. Another statue shown quite often was the goddess Mut, or mother, who wears two crowns that represent Upper and Lower Egypt. This was statue was shown multiple times, almost representing Cleopatra as the mother of Egypt because she nourishes her land and protects her people with a motherly instinct. Her people also look up to her for answers, as if a child looking up to their mother to help them understand something new or heal their wounds. The last statue shown quite often was the god Sobek, or the Crocodile God, he was known to protect against evil, cure the ill, and ensure fertility within the Egyptian people and crops. It is unclear why Sobek was shown so often, but it may have been a hidden message, such as Cleopatra’s intelligence and her ability to help her people.
Another artistic element we see often is the hieroglyphics on the walls inside the palace and buildings outside, or on the boats. When Cleopatra first met the Great Caesar, you can clearly see that Mankiewicz went into exquisite detail pertaining to the palace’s room and the stories of gods and goddesses or ancestors before Cleopatra. It is almost as if you are in the room and can clearly see how many or what exactly the hieroglyphs were. The movie projected the hieroglyphics through focusing the camera at a specific angle so no matter where you looked, you still saw the hieroglyphics. Also, if you pay close attention, you can see the Sphinx, or the body of a lion with the head of a king or god, within the room representing strength and wisdom. It is shown more often throughout the movie, in one of the rooms, outside the palace, and presented to the Romans as a gift of the unification of Rome and Egypt when Cleopatra and Caesar married. The Sphinx seems to have a symbolism for Cleopatra’s strength and independent nature that did not allow her being a woman affect how she rules her empire. Also, it would also be a very stereotypical symbol of ancient Egypt for the audience.
The movie also includes the lavish but revealing clothing for Cleopatra and her servants. Even though it was used to sexualize Cleopatra through the look and revealing clothing or nude scene, it also allowed the audience to understand her seduction better rather than through her words and actions. It sort of gives her a little extra pizzazz to her already boisterous personality and attitude towards those who look down upon her because she is a woman. Besides the lavish designs of her clothing as well as her subordinates and husband, the designer for the movie included intricate jewelry, headdresses, bracelets with snakes and such made from gold. Also, throughout the movie, we are introduced to the flail, which looks like a whip or the punishment to maintain order in Egypt, and the crook, the hook or the shepherd and care of the people, which were used in Ancient Egypt to represent the respectable position of a King or Queen.
There was also the inclusion of makeup, which was another form of art due to the techniques and materials used. The Egyptians were famously known for the almond-shaped eyeliner and skincare oils, but also the perfumes used to protect the skin and avoid bodily odors because it was offensive to their gods. The kings and queens of Egypt were known to use thick eyeliner and like Cleopatra, wear “eyeshadow” up to their brows. It was known as a form of rank in hierarchy and to appeal to the audience’s imagined vision of Egypt, also the movie included this part of the history of Egyptians to provide visual understanding of who would wear it and why. As you can see in the film, servants or civilians did not wear makeup, they were barefaced and kissed by the sun, unlike Cleopatra who stayed in the shade and contained makeup.
Even though the movie did not follow the exact history of Cleopatra for the sake of dramatization, such as making her younger brother seem to be a man in his twenties rather than thirteen years old and killing Cleopatra’s son before her suicide rather than showing he was executed after her suicide and claimed the new ruler. Mankiewicz did an excellent job of interpreting Egypt, Cleopatra’s life, and the artistry and architecture used. He showed the momentous buildings in Egypt and Rome with beautiful and detailed hieroglyphics, the detailed clothing and carvings on Egyptian and Roman jewelry and armor, and also included the statues of gods and goddesses repetitively to show Egyptian pride and religion. He even picked the best actors and actresses who played their parts beyond what words can describe, the costumes used within the movie were outstanding, and the designs on the jewelry, armor, shields, and headdresses were so intricately designed that even I had to take a step back and enjoy the beauty of the well thought out and designed pieces as well as the rooms and buildings within the movie. Overall, the movie was an excellent masterpiece and contained excellent details within the subtlest things that catch your eye with a moment’s glance and make the audience feel as if they are truly in the same room as the actors and actresses or beautiful settings. Also, due to there being such detail in the settings down to the smallest design, and being mostly historically accurate, the movie showed Cleopatra’s independence and strength, but also the struggles she dealt with throughout her life.
]]>When Caesar leaves Egypt and returns to Rome, Cleopatra finds out she is pregnant. She begs Caesar to stay; without telling the news of her pregnancy. When their son is born, she lifts him up on the castle and shows all of Egypt her son. Cleopatra then travels to Rome to tell Caesar the news of their son. In Rome, Caesar finds a wife and has already picked Octavian as his successor. When Caesar finds out of his son, he is not pleased; but eventually claims him. The Romans seem to not be pleased as well; as they chant “Caesar’s whore!” when she arrives. Varela’s pouty face and dynamic acting show her anger and distress from this. Cleopatra meets Mark Anthony here, played by Billy Zane. The charismatic Mark Anthony surprises Cleopatra with their chemistry.
After Caesar’s murder, Anthony and Cleopatra move into lovers; the bloody battle for the heart and soul of the Roman Empire begins. It was no shock that Cleopatra’s entrancing behavior led Anthony to her; leaving Octavian with whom he was ruling Rome. At the end of the film, Cleopatra kills herself with the snake bite. All dressed in gold and jewels, Cleopatra wears her iconic eye makeup as she takes her final breaths.
Throughout the film, the battle scenes are staged for excitement and come off realistic. We see blood and sweat from the men fighting for their lives. Scenes are cut to views of beautiful landscapes of Egypt’s and Rome’s beautiful scenery. Varela’s acting was amazing and powerful. She fulfilled her role as Cleopatra and made the audience envious of her. She can be a seductress queen while maintaining the power of her country by selling herself to men in power. The beginning love story between Caesar and Cleopatra was no match for the love between her and Anthony. I find it interesting how two powerful love stories were put in one. The film seemed to be made for drama purposes, not so much for historical purposes. There was a lot of drama and betrayal that we see in this film. Yet, we do see parts of history such as Cleopatra’s status and her death. There are a lot of faults in historical accuracy. This was a very theatrical film; if you are looking for solid ancient Egyptian history, then you have come to the wrong movie.
]]>The film is credited with its beautiful set and costume design thanks to the million dollar budget that the producers had to develop such an epic film. Cleopatra’s costumes were lavish and exotic along with other characters in the film presenting Roman culture and Egyptian culture altogether as one. Because she was a Nile queen she had a high position of power in her country, Hollywood sexualized her to present this. In some scenes she was nude presenting the ideal body of a young queen. She had many costumes in the film, and it was very difficult to keep note of them all. She is seen in the first scene wearing a sleeveless dress with a V neckline to emphasize the Egyptian queen apparel. The fabric appears to be silky and red and white which is bold and pure, this is almost characterizing her throughout her costumes. Red is also a color that is related to the Romans and symbolic in wealth. She is also seen wearing a sky blue gown in a scene that embodies her royalty. She is also clothed with headdresses that represent ceremonial elements. The jewelry she wears is almost all gold because of her royalty, but in an art view her not wearing the symbolic necklace with Caesar’s face on the gold coin, when her affair with Antony begins she no longer continues to wear it. Many of these costumes were steered to present the ancient art that are known about the Egyptians. The famous sculpture of Cleopatra is evident to try to represent her character in the movie and based on the costume design. The crown that Cleopatra is seen wearing is the ceremonial scenes I researched to be based off the sculpture of Nefertiti. She is also shown wearing a bracelet that resembles two snakes; snakes were significant in the Egyptian empire.
Cosmetics is a form of art, it consist of different tools and techniques to establish what others may perceive of someone. In relation to Cleopatra, the ancient Egyptian women wore heavy eye liner and used elements of minerals and animal fat to color their lips and eyelids. Cleopatra’s character is shown wearing heavy eyeliner and colors on her brows that are blue or green. Gender roles for makeup was not something Egyptians were concerned with. Men also wore cosmetics to adhere with their beauty standards. They also wore wigs and powdered their faces. This was clearly inspired by the history of the Egyptians.
The construction of the set also was a large part of the budget for the film. The interior design of Cleopatra’s palace was made of stone and some statues were present in the scenes to be marble. The term used to define it was a “barge” because it floated on the sea. There was an abundance of plants as well to design it to fit the climate of the geographical setting of her palace. Her temple was highlighted with gold and had statues of mythical creatures on the walls. When they were dining they used gold and jeweled goblets. The film detailed her embassy to be very wealthy, which is how historically it most likely was represented. The Egyptians were proud of their wealth and these factors are symbolic in representing their wealth. Another example that relates to Egyptian history was the feline statues on the throne, the Egyptians had believed that felines were godly. There were many presented elements of snakes on the door handles of the temple and ram heads on the furniture. The ram heads were correlated with Amon, an Egyptian god. The snakes were represented to reveal rebirth in Egyptian culture. The sphinx was also presented in the film to show more history. In one scene Cleopatra is shown in a large bathtub, which is true to the historical context because wealthy Egyptians were known to bathe than most Europeans. When Rome is presented on screen, the forum is shown which was a significant architectural design from the Roman Empire.
Although this was not quite revealed in the film, the Romans learned and gained interest in the Egyptian art. After the conquest of Egypt, Rome was provided with architecture and sculptures in the Roman forum based off Egyptian styles. According the metmuesum.org the wealthy Romans were inspired by the dress of the Egyptians which led to a new style of clothing inspired by their fashions. Long silk dresses and jewelry were brought into their culture and more enhanced in creative detail. Egypt was abundant in deserts that contained minerals and fine stones, these were traded to the Roman empire to use for their architecture. Egypt was also rich in gold, which led the creation of gold coins in Egypt. In the film, Cleopatra wears a gold coin with Caesar’s face on it.
The film Cleopatra was produced in the early 1960’s to appeal to the audience Hollywood wanted. It is not completely historically accurate but the the set and the props used to fulfill the Egyptian beauty was done in detail. They highlighted the wealth of the Egyptians in power and submerged the Roman empire into their culture. They provided an example of Cleopatra to portray their ideal beauty standards and sexualized her to the audience of this decade. The colors in the film were done symbolically to depict the difference of the Romans and the Egyptians. This film was beautiful, and the budget allowed them to fulfill the producers vision to portray an important part of history.
]]>While this film is not without its flaws, the film at its core is a love story, with the focus being on the love story between Cleopatra and Caesar, and the background being that of any sort of art and or historical accuracy. This film was accurate in its depiction of the clothing and architecture of Egypt, with the clothing of Cleopatra being accurate. The filmmakers wanted to be as accurate as possible with the costume design of the film, with research being done from early Egyptian tomb paintings and sculptures. This was to be an epic in terms of a Hollywood film, so the filmmakers wanted to be as accurate as possible with their portrayals of these historic people. The armor of the Roman soldiers is fairly accurate in this film, even the armor of Caesar and his generals is accurate, being that as high ranking officials, their armor would be more detailed and be that of actual armor, unlike a common solider who wouldn’t have such extravagant detailed looks.
Although in the film the characters do visit the tomb of Alexander the Great, there is little evidence of Greek culture in this film, despite Cleopatra being of Greek descent. I would assume this was a choice by the writers and the studio to keep production costs down, to keep those costs down, I imagine the studio would’ve had to cut extra extravagant scenes maybe depicting more detailed artwork, seeing how at the time this was considered the most expensive film to be put in production. From Caesar’s very first meeting with Cleopatra, her clothing she wore is also accurate from that time period. It is also based on an account by the Roman historian Plutarch.
The film’s depiction of its main characters is also somewhat accurate, with Octavian being the most obvious. In the film he is depicted as a coward who would shy away from battle, faking an illness, when he was known as a brave and courageous warrior, who would even in illness, take the battle field. The main character Cleopatra herself, was described as a young woman of great beauty, in the film she is quite beautiful, she is smart and yet she makes bad decisions when it comes to love, mainly due to her desire to rule Egypt herself, thus getting involved with Caesar himself, then Antony instead of Octavian. I imagine such characters were changed or perhaps depicted differently based on how the script flowed, it may have made sense on paper but when acted out maybe took away from the main focus of the film, that being of Cleopatra and her journey. The performances are generally very good in the film, and again while the art and architecture of that time takes a backseat in this film to showcase the romance of Cleopatra, they are generally done well by the filmmakers.
This film does indeed have great performances by the lead actors that make you interested in what they do and say, as well as where they go in the film, regardless of some historical inaccuracies. The great performances overshadow any sort of art in the background, that being due to the fact they are not as significant to the plot or what is happening in the scene, unless you count the buildings you witness, for example, when Cleopatra enters Rome, you see the buildings have the classic Roman arches and pillars, which many buildings used in their designs, or when they visit Alexander the Great’s tomb however, there are fantastic costume designs and set pieces used to show the grand scale of how Egyptian royalty lived, and even battles at sea with the Roman ships are presented in spectacular fashion. It is of no surprise then that this film was heralded as the most expensive film of its time.
In conclusion, while this film indeed highlights the clothing styles and some architecture of both Rome and Egypt, the main primary focus of the film is the larger than life performances of the lead actors.
]]>While this movie stays true to clothing and sets that would have been common for this time, the movie is still “Hollywoodized.” While the makeup that Taylor
The story of Cleopatra, Julius Cesar, and Marc Antony is indeed a true one, taking place during the rise of the Ancient Roman Empire. But how well did Mankiewicz know his history? Proceeding the intermission, the movie is historically accurate. There are of course dramatic flares, such as Cleopatra being snuck into the palace rolled up in a carpet; but not every detail of history is recorded. The important part is that she met Julius Cesar, stole his heart and bore him a son. Following the intermission however, history gets slightly altered. For example, it isn’t made clear that Marc Antony is also in the running for the succession of Rome. The movie makes it seem as though he is simply trying to conquer Octavian. It also completely leaves out that Antony and Cleopatra have three children together; it instead focuses on Cleopatra and Julius Cesar’s son Caesarian.
Moving away from historical context and into the setting, the movie was filmed in England, although Mankiewicz does a fine job producing sets that make the audience feel like they are in Rome,Alexandria, and Actium. The extravagant sculptures in both Egypt and Rome replicate the ancient style sculptures created during the time beautifully; with tall columns and the stylized ancient Egyptian paintings. Further, the water in Actium can’t be mistaken for being anywhere other than Greece with its magnificent aqua blue glow. One major aspect of Roman architecture that was left out however, were arches. Nearly all of the buildings shown in the movie feature massive columns but we rarely see the arches the Romans are known for inventing. A flaw, but a minor one, as Mankiewicz does an exquisite job portraying the statues and artwork of Egypt. Showing the building of Cleopatra’s massive tome was a perfect touch in displaying Egyptian architecture and culture as the Ancient pyramid tomes are something that comes clearly to mind when thinking of Egypt.
One place where Mankiewicz adapted 1960’s culture into the film were the costumes. For an ancient queen, Cleopatra would probably not have been wearing the low cut dresses she is often shown in and Marc Antony’s typical dress is also seeming rather short for a Roman general. While perhaps not following ancient styles of dress, displaying the characters in more scandalous, and stylish costumes again give the movie a dramatic flair that attracts an audience. One thing Mankiewicz gets right is Cleopatra’s hair and makeup. Often she wears gold tassels in her hair, and she always had thick black eyeliner extending to the side of her face. Two elements that are often found in the stylized paintings of ancient Egypt. While we don’t have a portrait of her, Cleopatra’s hairstyles and makeup seem to fit the one’s own perception of the Egyptian queen.
The making of Cleopatra seemed to prove many challenges for director Joseph L. Mankiewicz. Filming in England rather than Egypt or Rome, one might say would be enough of a trial. Then spending $7 million to produce only ten minutes of the film, should make anyone want to quit. Followed by a huge time delay posed by an emergency surgery needed by the leading lady Elizabeth Taylor. Why would Mankiewicz persist in creating the four hour long epic Cleopatra? Because it became the most grossed film in 1963, bringing in $57.8 million. Because the movie and its actors were nominated for and won many prestigious awards and because the movie was a huge success! Along yet beautifully put together film that truly encompasses many cultural and artistic aspects of ancient Egypt, and Rome. Bosley Crowther ends his New York Times review of Cleopatra saying, “I don’t see how you can fail to find this a generally brilliant, moving, and satisfying film,” and once again in 2018, I’m inclined to agree with him.
Work Cited:
Crowther, Bosley. “The Screen: ‘Cleopatra’ Has Premiere at Rivoli: 4-Hour Epic is Tribute to its Artists Skill.” The New York Times, 13 June 1963.