Harrison's Reports (1953)

152 HARRISON’S REPORTS September 19, 1953 “The Robe” with Richard Burton, Victor Mature and Jean Simmons (20th Century-Fox, special release; time, 133 min.) Excellent! Even if it had been produced in the conventional 2-D form, Lloyd C. Douglas’ powerful novel of the birth of Christianity in the days of ancient Rome would have made a great picture, but, having been produced in the revolutionary CinemaScope process, it emerges as not only a superior dramatic achievement but also as a spectacle that will electrify audiences with its overpowering scope and magnitude. Beautifully photographed in Technicolor, the sets, backgrounds and costumes are among the most impressive ever seen on the screen, and through the magic of CinemaScope one feels as if he is present at the glories, pomp and pageantry of Rome; at the awesome Hill of Golgotha (Cavalry) where Christ is crucified; at the gates of Jerusalem and the market place in the Biblical land of Cana; at the ornate marble palace of Caligula, the sadistic Roman ruler, and the Court of Tiberius on the Island of Capri; and at all the other colorful scenes as the action moves back and forth between Rome and the Holy Land. The story itself is tensely dramatic and its emotional impact is compelling. The direction and acting are superb. Richard Burton is excellent as Marcellus, the noble Roman soldier who carries out the Crucifixion order of Pontius Pilate, an act that causes him no end of mental torture until he finds peace in his conversion to Christianity. He portrays the part with such sensitivity and depth that he may very well find himself nominated for Academy Award honors. Victor Mature is equally impressive as Demetrius, Marcellus’ early converted Greek slave, who tries in vain to save Christ and who eventually helps to induce Marcellus to ally himself with the Christians. Jean Simmons is highly sympathetic as Diana, a Roman aristocrat in love with the headstrong Marcellus; their romance gives the story some of its most tender and poignant moments. Dean Jagger and Michael Rennie, as Christian prophets, and Jay Robinson, as the demented Caligula, are among the others in the huge cast who contribute memorable performances. As the first CinemaScope production, “The Robe’’ is richly rewarding and great credit is due to every one concerned in its making: — Diana (Jean Simmons), ward of the Emperor Tiberius (Ernest Thesiger), is destined to wed Caligula (Jay Robinson), the corrupt Prince Regent, but she makes no secret of her love for Marcellus Gallio (Richard Burton), a noble Roman tribune. Embittered by her feeling and by Marcellus’ success in outbidding him at the slave market for Demetrius (Victor Mature), a Greek captive, Caligula punishes Marcellus by transferring him to a post in Jerusalem. There, under orders of Pontius Pilate (Richard Boone), Marcellus leads a group of soldiers in the capture and execution of Jesus Christ, whom the Jews called the Messiah. Marcellus gambles with other Roman soldiers for the homespun robe worn by Christ. He wins the garment, but with the realization that he had crucified an innocent man, it becomes a symbol of guilt. He orders Demetrius to destroy the robe, but Demetrius, cursing Marcellus and all the Romans for the Crucifixion, takes the robe and strides off. Tortured by guilty memories, Marcellus is recalled by Tiberius who, after hearing of his experiences, orders him back to Jerusalem to find the robe and destroy it so that he may restore his mental balance, and to obtain the names of Jesus’ treasonous followers, whom Tiberius sought to subdue lest they become a threat to his empire. In Cana, Marcellus catches up with Demetrius who, together with other followers of Christ, talks to him of the principles of Christianity. This leads to Marcellus’ conversion, and he now looks upon the robe as a cloak of faith rather than a symbol of guilt. He joins the movement to spread Christianity and becomes involved in a series of battles with Roman soldiers, including a daring raid on Caligula’s palace, where Demetrius, taken prisoner, had been cast into a torture chamber. Marcellus succeeds in rescuing Demetrius, but to safeguard his escape he permits himself to be taken prisoner. With his entire court as Judges, Caligula, now the Emperor, acts as prosecutor and tries to force Marcellus to deny his faith and admit treason. Marcellus refuses to renounce Christianity, and Caligula orders him put to death. Leaving her place beside Caligula, Diana stands with Marcellus, denounces Caligula for his corrupt rule, and chooses to share Marcellus’ fate. As the guards close in, she and Marcellus hold their heads high and start on the way to their execution unafraid. It was produced by Frank Ross, and directed by Henry Koster, from a screenplay by Philip Dunne. It is a picture that should be seen by every one, everywhere. A READER TAKES EXCEPTION ( Continued from front page) mension. You (and many others, it must be admitted), took the position very early that 3-D was a passing fad, that the public would never go for those absurd paper glasses that would not stay put, that they would soon tire of dodging flaming arrows, spears, rocks, and chairs, and that all 3-D pictures were “quickies” that should not have been made at all. Now, I too would have liked to have seen this new medium hit the screen fully grown up. I can remember, however, that the movies themselves were in a kindergarten stage for many long years until we could have pictures like “Way Down East,” “The Four Horsemen,” “The Kid” and other great pictures of that far-off era. Sound staggered along for several years before small theatres were able to install RCA or Western Electric sound-on-film outfits that were better in quality than the very costly installations offered to the millionaire exhibitors early in the effort. Why, then, expect the producers, who made some very creditable pictures in 3-D when they offered “House of Wax,” “Fort Ti,” “Charge at Feather River” and “Inferno” to come out of nowhere with a full-blown “Greatest Show on Earth” or a “Quo Vadis” in miracle 3-D photography and completely perfected techniques? Perhaps it was because you, and the “wise” boys of the big city movie columns, panned Third Dimension so mercilessly, pontifically judging in advance what the public would or would not pay to see that made Warner Bros., among others, ease off on their plans for 3-D. How can we blame them? Because crowds stormed the theatres to see “Bwana Devil” then stayed home in increasing numbers for 3-D pictures that had at least some merit, is that any reason why producers should throw in the towel on 3-D, and wash it off the lot? Suppose that they had taken that position with “quickies” back in 1906, or with sound in 1928? In this black summer of 1953 Third Dimension has not been a life saver for the several houses in which we have an installation. Our first 3-D picture in each place was big, after which grosses on the succeeding ones shrunk steadily. But they are still giving us from fifty to one hundred per cent better grosses than our best 2-D showings with the occasional exception of a “Shane” or a “Stalag 17.” If they can do that in their present kindergarten stage can we not reasonably expect much better, and a new interest on the part of the cash customer, if the Hollywood technicians will keep on going and, as soon as possible, give us 3-D as it should be given? There are three immediate things I would like to have in 3-D: ( 1 ) Better glasses. It may be that this is already solved with the color plastic glasses now available. All I have seen, however, while good to look at and comfortable to wear, contain Polaroid that is much inferior to the paper glasses first issued. (2) The best possible process for having 3-D on one film instead of two. This will cut out the annoying intermissions and make 3-D more adaptable in many ways. (3) Improvement in photography, so that we can have a crystal-clear, flawless picture on the screen. If we have these it will follow, I think, that all producers will make their best productions, with leading stars and stories, in Third Dimension. The point I am trying to make is that we need not only CinemaScope (or the anamorphic process by whatever name the producers choose to call it) but also Third Dimension and any other new developments that scientific minds can bring to the screen. We need them all. Most of us have been able to equip our theatres for 3-D at a comparatively modest cost and it would help greatly right now if we had a steady flow of good 3-D pictures, especially with the im-. provements listed in this letter. I feel that it has been far from demonstrated that 3-D will not prove to be the most helpful thing in our business and would like to see you, at least, press for further quick developments rather than let it die aborning or, worse yet, drive it to the wall with merciless and uncalled-for criticism. — CHARLES R. BLATT, Blatt Brothers Theatres, Pittsburgh, Pa.