scott-946 This is a rare chance to see a very old picture that has been restored, and combined with a sound track that brings a rather classical approach to provide minimally invasive music that sets a tone for the tragedy together with a well measured modern song that adds color and personality to the character of Cleopatra. I'm sure that some viewers will be turned off by this, since the singer and the song sound rather out of place at first simply because they are unexpected and a surprise. Not everyone likes a surprise, especially when it's applied to something they think should be maintained in total integrity with the original presentation.My personal view is that these early silent films were meant to be supported by the best efforts of musicians available at the time to add their own personal interpretation to the film, and to support the film with appropriate artistic sound to help convey the viewer into a more complete sensory experience. I know there are some musicians who could provide an accompaniment that would sound more like a 1912 accompaniment, but I liked what the musicians did with this film. I added to my enjoyment and brought me more emotionally into the whole story.The film itself is an excellent example of how pure acting together with simple sets and costumes can by itself bring a good story to life for a viewer. It helps to have one of the greatest love stories of all time as the subject matter. And, the fact that almost everyone has some level of familiarity with the story as originally written for the stage by the greatest playwright, Wm. Shakespere, certainly provides a foundation that exceeds any minimum requirements.Scott Indy

marcslope The Queen of the Nile turns out to be a zaftig hausfrau with long tangled hair and, seemingly, no eyeballs. But to be fair, her handmaidens appear to have been noshing liberally on the pomegranates, too. This 1912 full-length feature may be ambitious for its day in its attempt to bring ancient history alive in six or seven reels, and it's admirable that Helen Gardner, the Cleopatra, was an actor-manager with unusual prestige and power for a woman. But the movie is still ludicrous: the posturing and finger-pointing and flailing, the static camera, the rudimentary plotting where the two most powerful rulers of the ancient world appear never to govern, because they're too fixated on each other.There's a smitten slave who escapes death three or four times, a Marc Antony who does little but glower (give him credit -- he does have a romantic profile), and a lithe Octavia I'd leave this Cleo for in a minute. The sets and costumes are flimsy but at least they're of a piece, and it's sort of fun to see the Hudson River, somewhere around Nyack, standing in for Egypt. But even by its primitive 1912 standards, it's laughably unconvincing -- if silent pictures could talk, this one would have a New York accent.

FISHCAKE Despite some added fictional characters, this is still essentially the legendary and historical Cleopatra and Antony story. It is only cinematic in making use of quick scene changes, otherwise it is very much a photographed play, more choreographed than directed. Acting is highly mannered and stylized in a way that will likely send modern viewers into gales of laughter sometimes. Compare this film to D.W.Griffith's BIRTH OF A NATION only three years to see what a revolution occurred in cinematic technique. Fortunately Griffith's style prevailed, while Gardner's film remains a quaint curiosity.Among the many curiosities, viewers will note that "Cleopatra" and all her attendant ladies are definitely of the matronly and well-fed type. Maybe in 1912 this was what the menfolk liked!

silent-12 I just saw this version of "Cleopatra" as part of TCM's Women Pioneers in Film Series. Although I think they did a beautiful job on the restoration, I found the new, avant-garde soundtrack too invasive and distracting. In fact, I had to watch it with the mute on.Having said that, though, I did find this adaptation interesting. It is true that, like many films of this era, it is a bit creaky and primitive. However, it provides a fascinating glimpse of early filmmaking--no closeups, the camera hardly ever moves, etc. I also found Ms. Gardener fascinating, given how much of the production was actually done by her, including costume design. I wish there were more information available on her life and career.