I will not scorn Boyd, as he did his best, and died quite young in his 40's, but had James Mason not been in this movie- it would not have been 1/4 the film it was. Mason's voice, expressions, presence is able to make even the most mundane of films watchable. His voice- he can read the telephone book and make it seem like Hamlet. Do you all agree that James Mason was a true original, and one of the greatest screen presence in history?
shareMason was always one of my favorite actors in the movies of his day. You're right, he had an unusual voice which definitely added much to his acting ability. I think Ronald Coleman, an actor from an earlier era, had much of the same voice quality, but Mason was a better actor.
shareTo be honest this film isn't one of my favorites simply because the genre isn't as interesting to me as it is to other people. But I think that many actors played they're roles well. James Mason was good. Christopher Plummer was amazing...and delicious...
shareI've always been a big fan of James Mason. His voice was amazing. He added immensely to this film, as did Christopher Plummer.
Boo Hoo! Let me wipe away the tears with my PLASTIC hand!--Lindsey McDonald (Angel)
James Mason a great actor? Is the sky blue? Mason's arrival as Captain Nemo is the top highlight of 10,000 Leagues, a film full of fantastic actors. The British/Irish actors of the post-war period, Burton, Guinness, Olivier, O'Toole, Mason and others had training that only theater can provide, and also I think surviving WWII had something to do with it. There's just an energy and a manly craziness to these guys that seems like the long-lost world they inhabited.
I just watched the original A Star Is Born and Mason is pretty much the only tolerable part of it.
I believe you err. You had just watched the first remake of "A Star is Born." The original had Fredric March and was shot in 1937. Both versions are rated 7.7 by IMDB users, but I don't care for either, much. I agree with your assessment of Mason, et al, though.
shareI think one of the reasons people disparage this film is because it seems to have no center or cohesion in the first part (up to the intermission). The second part is much more unified and completely works for me because it is primarily about the short reign of the mad Commodus--and Plummer does a magnificent job. Unfortunately, the film would have been much stronger if Charlton Heston had agreed to essay the Stephen Boyd role. There needed a good foil for Plummer and Boyd simply isn't it. In addition, his love scenes with Sophhia Loren are tepid. (Just compare them to the ones in "El Cid".) The picture would have been a lot better, as I said, with Heston instead of Boyd, but as it is, it holds up well if you have a little patience and put up with the lack of cohesion in the first hour and a half (roughly). Yes, Mason was fine, but so was Guinness--and how about Finley Currie in his small part? Still, the film in the second half turned around Plummer and he was up to the demands of the role.
shareUnfortunately, the film would have been much stronger if Charlton Heston had agreed to essay the Stephen Boyd role.
Seriously...after Stephen Boyd wiped the floor with Heston in Ben-Hur. Boyd was very good in his role as Livius, perfectly nailing his character. He's not in the grand heroic mode but this film isn't about grand heroes.
In addition, his love scenes with Sophhia Loren are tepid.
I thought they were okay. The film is not a love story, it's just a sub-plot not the main aspect(one reason why the film flopped at the box-office).
The Fall of the Roman Empire is a wonderfully cast film, Guinness is stunning as Marcus Aurelius, really tragic and unsentimental(unlike Richard Harris' Grand-Old-Man act in Gladiator) and Mason while his part could have been better developed is wonderful as the meek Greek who can pull of a great speech when the time comes although his part as a chorus eventually gets tiresome thankfully his death scene s appropriately sober.
I think that the primary reason why The Fall of the Roman Empire doesn't have it's admirers is that it deliberately prevents audiences from identifying with it's characters. We are drawn to look at the circumstances, the manoeuvers and the machinations of the characters. And the stinging cruel irony of the last scene wouldn't win anyone over.
"Ça va by me, madame...Ça va by me!" - The Red Shoes
I think that the primary reason why The Fall of the Roman Empire doesn't have it's admirers is that it deliberately prevents audiences from identifying with it's characters. We are drawn to look at the circumstances, the manoeuvers and the machinations of the characters. And the stinging cruel irony of the last scene wouldn't win anyone over.
James Mason- the voice - it doesn't matter what film he was in; he demonstrated dignity, authorty, and truth. He was simply one of the greatest underated actors ever to apear in film.
shareJames Mason- the voice - it doesn't matter what film he was in; he demonstrated dignity, authorty, and truth. He was simply one of the greatest underated actors ever to apear in film.
shareJames Mason- the voice - it doesn't matter what film he was in; he demonstrated dignity, authorty, and truth. He was simply one of the greatest underated actors ever to apear in film.
shareAgreed.
He played Erwin Rommel splendidly - whenever I hear mention of Rommel, or read of him, I think of Mason in the role.
Mason was great in the role, the scene he was in the senate where he asked for peace in order to end war was well acted as Mason conveyed sincerely in his role. The compassion Mason gave his character made him one to rally for.
"I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not".
He has always been one of my top ten actors of all time from any country. His voice and diction were absolutely unique.
shareIn Hitchcock's North by Northwest, James Mason is the perfect villain to Cary Grants perfect hero. Two great voices, two British born mid Atlantic suave men. And Mason's villain gets the best one liners. Mason set the template for villains from Goldfinger to Hans Gruber. Both Grant and Mason were offered the role of James Bond in the first Bond movie.
share