I don't know what Caligula was like, but he was probably like Jay Robinson portrayed him. Jay Robinson was especially good as Caligula in Demetrius and the Gladiators. In Demetrius and the Gladiators it was a pretty accurate portrayal of Caligula. Jay Robinson should've won an Oscar. Demetrius and the Gladiators was even accurate in showing why Caligula was killed.
shareActually his death in 'Demetrius and The Gladiators' is ahistorical.
"An eye for an eye only ends up leaving the whole world blind" - Gandhiji
Yes, he should have been nominated for supporting actor for playing Caligula. He did a great job. Many great performances have been overlooked by the Academy.
shareI very much agree. I have never seen a actor portray Caligula as well as Jay Robinson. It's seems as though all others have tried to imitate his version of the mad emperor, but none have yet to be found his equal. Demetrius and the Gladiator was the best of the sword and sandle movies,(my opinion). Jay Robinson rose too the level of CLASSIC in that movie. 5 stars, he is the best portrayal of Caligula I have ever seen.
shareMe too. There have been many interesting interpretations of this emperor. I liked John Hurt in "I Claudius", too. But, somehow, Robinson's effort has had a lasting impact on me, and I do not think it was "over-the-top" as some have suggested on these boards. Seems hard to be over-the-top when playing a homicidal maniac who thinks he is a living god and has the power of life and death over everybody in the civilized world. One might even say he was an over-the-top, 1st Century personality in the first place.
shareRobinson's Caligula felt uninspired to me, he acted Crazy, but nothing based on anything particular about Caligula.
Of course this movie was grossly inaccurate in placeing Roman persecution of the Church that early to begin with.
"It's not about money.... It's about sending a Message..... Everything Burns!!!"
"... he acted Crazy, ..."
Given the acts he committed, I think it safe to conclude that Caligula WAS "Crazy".
"Of course this movie was grossly inaccurate in placeing Roman persecution of the Church that early to begin with."
Not necessarily. We don't KNOW about any persecution at that time, but we're not really sure are we? There is, after all, a great deal we're not sure about when it comes to events that took place any where 2,000 years ago. Besides, it made for good drama and wasn't a wholly improbable scenario in that context.
Tetreulan said "Check your records and you'll see Nero was the first Caesar's sword against us" And at that time contemporary records of that era where common.
"It's not about money.... It's about sending a Message..... Everything Burns!!!"
Didn't know Tertullian said that. Thanks. But . . . one man's comment doesn't a certainty make. Especially considering the relatively unorganized and individualized kind of persecution depicted in the film.
share