Spartacus

Any remake of Spartacus has the task of being compared to the 1959/1960 Anthony Mann/Stanley Kubrick masterpiece.The 1959 original made for a budget of twelve million dollars;and thousands of Spanish troops as extra is hard to top.This version for only ten percent of the budget in 2003 dollars works.But this version of the 73-71 BC slave revolt, is a more compact, focused telling of the story. Goran Visjiic,being from the Balkins recognizes the mythic hero that Spartacus is in that part of the world and his performance shows his respect for the character. The rest of the cast especially Sir Alan Bates and Anglo-Indian actress Rhona Mitra play their parts well.A worthy film in it's right,or compared to the earlier film. A minor gem that is under appreciated.

I'm a huge fan of historical films like this and have been wanting to watch this movie for some time now, but my local library didn't have it- so I decided to purchase it. I know you're not suppose to judge a book/movie by it's cover, but I did. They cover looks great, and speaking as a woman, Goran Visnjic looks kind of hot, so I was hoping it was a good movie. But I was sorely mistaken. The history of the legend of Spartacus isn't 100% known, but there are some facts that are known such as the existence and death for fellow gladiator Oenomaus- this is not included in the movie- so the historical value of this movie is questionable. The picture and acting- basically just the overall movie- wasn't up to my satisfaction and liking. Would I have purchased it in the first place now knowing what the movie is like? No. But, I should note that I'm a huge fan of the Starz series of Spartacus including Gods of the Arena, Blood and Sand, Vengeance, and War of the Damned. That series was unbelievably amazing and magnificent and is loads better than this Spartacus movie, and it's also more historically accurate. So I would suggest instead of purchasing this Spartacus movie, you'd be better off watching the Starz Spartacus.

I wont say this movie is terrible but its not very good. I found it rather boring and lacking in action for a movie about a Gladiator. The action is crap and the movie jumps along too fast and lacks details crucial to the story of Spartacus. Honestly I'd say just rent or skip it. Its not worth buying. If you want Spartacus go with the Star TV series (as long as you don't mind nudity). Neither is 100% accurate but at least The TV series has action and suspense and a lot of moments where you get blind sided with something you may not have seen coming. All and all this movie left me more than a little Depressed as I liked the older Spartacus movie as well. This one just didn't live up to expectations. Hope this helps.

I am not into violence or fight scenes or gladiators, etc. Unfortunately those are the only type of movies my favorite actress seems to enjoy making (Doomsday, Underworld Rise of the Lycans, Skinwalkers). At any rate, the story was enjoyable (if you forget about all of the blood) but the best part of the film is Rhona Mitra as a tortured slave girl- turned- wife of Sparticus and co-conspiritor in the rebelion. For those who've purchased horrible films like The Number 23 because she was in it, only to find out that she had a 5 minute scene... or good films like Sweet Home Alabama, but the same case is true - she only appears on screen in one or two scenes - you won't be disappointed by Sparticus. It's a 3-hour mini series and the film begins with her and ends with her. Her role is prominent throughout. It was well worth the money!

Soulful, powerful, beautiful.

A remake, in any form, should offer something new (if not a better concept than the original). This mini-series lives up to "mini". Mini talent in almost every aspect: script, direction, music, acting. This version of SPARTACUS is pedestrain on all levels, except (possibly) the production level, (sets & costumes) it's not too shabby.Mr. Visnjic has the charsima of a carrot - Ms. Mitra, is a bore. Who would care about these two dullards (certainly not a force that challenged mighty Rome).The "score" is as rousing as elevator "music". The direction, that of a hack - a pick up your paycheck and have a beer at the corner saloon sort of thing.The fattie who played Batiatus is the exception in this mini effort - a good actor, a job well done."If it ain't broke, don't fix it." SPARTACUS (1961) is a magnificent classic, (with an unbelievable cast: The late, superb, Simmons, Ustinov, Laughton, Olivier) not this mouse!

When I first saw this miniseries I was unsure that an actor from ER could do heroic fiction. However, he was quite believable in the role. The miniseries was much more realistic than the Starz series (I have all episodes) as most of Starz actors look like gladiators when in history only about 70 were. Of course there is much less sex and less violence so while not as spellbinding as Starz version it was still quite compelling to watch. Interesting enough to watch in one sitting. Also, as it is pretty cheap that makes it a better bargain. Recommended...just realize it is historical action fiction...sgu

This was a good redux of the classic Spartacus. The movie was fairly well directed and acted, although a few of the characters were fairly two dimensional. I thought this was as good as the cable series, without the misc. porn. Pretty good job, although Goran Visnjic is no Kirk Douglas.

2004 mini-series Spartacus is certainly a good-looking production, with a vividly recreated Rome and visually impressive direction from Robert Dornhelm, but never quite clicks. Rather than going back completely to history, this is based on Howard Fast's novel that formed the basis of the Kirk Douglas-Stanley Kubrick film, so rather than the roaming band of looters sacking small towns that were ultimately defeated because of a fatally divided command (Spartacus could never get his Germanic troops to follow his strategy) you have another allegory about the thirst for freedom from tyranny. In reality Spartacus had plenty of opportunities to escape from the Empire but passed them up in favor of more pillaging. To be fair the miniseries does attempt to address this, as well as including the less salubrious aspects of the slave revolt. The slaves are certainly rather more vicious here than in the film - they kill their unarmed owners and surrendering soldiers alike, even crucifying prisoners (this time it's the winner of a pair of Roman generals forced to fight each other who is crucified, not Spartacus, who dies in battle) - though it does pull some punches. While it does include the famous gift of a white horse to Spartacus before the final battle, here he frees it rather than kills it before making his speech about having his pick of Roman horses if they win and not needing one of they lose, but then crucifying prisoners or slitting gladiators' throats is far less likely to outrage an audience these days than harming a defenceless animal.Running a half-hour less than the 1960 original, it's more a reinterpretation of the novel than a strict remake - there's no "I'm Spartacus!" moment here - but while the script isn't exactly bad but it could be better. Where the 1960 film was especially effective in showing how the aftermath of the revolt led to Rome down the path of dictatorship, with Spartacus himself dead the last 20 minutes or so here seem rushed and unfocused: again, history is given its due as it shows how public credit for Marcus Crassus' victory was stolen from him by Pompey, but the emotional involvement is almost completely absent.What really lets the film down is the casting. Goran Visnjic doesn't really convince as either a slave or a gladiator, a more refined and intelligent characterisation than the film. Where Douglas' Spartacus grew from an animal to more than a man, there's no real development in the character here: what you see in reel one is what you see in the final reel, and Visjnic's less than committed performance doesn't help. But the real damage is done by Angus Macfayden's Marcus Crassus. Played like a rather chubby Terry Thomas, he's far too dissolutely caddish and feyly disinterested to make much of an adversary and looks frankly absurd in the badly judged dream sequences that see him in the arena with Spartacus. Nor are the supporting cast exactly memorable. An initially unrecognisable Alan Bates is game as Grappa, but it's sadly clear that much of his energy is going into trying to hide his terminal illness in the early scenes, though his final scene is particularly effective even without the knowledge that he died shortly after. Rhona Mitra, Ian McNiece, James Frain and Ben Cross give capable enough performances, but no-one's exactly excelling here, leaving the human element distinctly flat. Nor does crosscutting the generally unimpressive battle scenes with would-be emotional moments (such as intercutting Spartacus' death with the birth of his son) pick up the slack: if anything, it acts more as an irritation. All-in-all it's certainly watchable and often interesting, but nothing to cause Kirk Douglas to look to his laurels.

The story of spartacus is of a young man captured by Roman conquerers, who is made a slave and a gladiator to entertain the revelling crowds of that day to the death, the gladiator are treated less than human and rebel, to over throw thier captures and take on a number of Romes Legions, only to win and free thousands of slaves thoughout the country. Eventually Spartacus and all the gladiators and freed slaves are trapped and falls to Romes Legions and are crucified all the way back to Romes gates as an example, Brilliantly acted.

The movie is well directed and well done.Goran Visnijc is wonderful as Spartacus the Thracian; Rona Mithra is very nice.I loved most the photography; except some modern concerns or trends, the brand movie is OK.Rome is well represented (except the army in the City, in war arrenagement) and so Italy of I century B.C.Bravo

I agree with one commentator's view of life in Roman times as being brutal. However, I do disagree with her assertion that Gladiators were treated as low life or sub human. Slaves very definitely were treated in this manner, but Gladiators were not. They very often became heroes to the Roman public. Also, there were fewer fights to the death than some people might think. the Romans enjoyed the spectacle of the fight more.As for the film, this was a tv mini sries and therefore lacked the vastness of the production of the earlier film where the Roman legions could be seens in all their glory and indeed strength, although the battle scenes were not how the legions fought. They were very disciplined and fought in lines, shields held together, not in one to one combat. I agree that Crassus had been miscast, but then who could have out acted Olivier. History tells us though, that it was Pompey who defeated the slaves and not Crassus.Still, I enjoyed it!!

Pretty good version of Spartacus, not bad saying it was made for tv great battle scenes, and plenty of blood and guts worth a watch.