Looking for Quo Vadis at my local video store, I found this 1985 version that looked interesting. Wow! It was amazing! Very much a Ken Russell kind of film -quirky, stylized, very artistic, and of course "different." Nero was presented not so much as evil incarnate, but as a wacky, unfulfilled emperor who would rather have had a circus career. He probably wondered why on earth he was put in the position of "leading" an empire -it wasn't much fun, and fun is what he longed for. Klause Maria Bandaur had a tremendous time with this role and played it for all it was worth. Yes, Nero persecuted the Christians with a vengeance; one of many who did so. At one point one of his henchmen murmurs: "No one will ever understand we were simply protecting ourselves." He got that right.
5 Reviews
Brandauer unconvincing as Nero
fhrastopla29 July 2006
The most positive element of this miniseries-version of 'Quo Vadis' is it lacks the bombastic tone or settings usually connected with this type of genre. Many may consider the direction by Franco Rossi as slow, but to me it's rather very comfortable in comparison to the fast cutting-virus the historical pieces are handicapped by nowadays, as shown in movies like 'Troy'. It's a relief the makers make time to unfold Sienkiewicz novel and let us become involved in the story and focus on the downfall of decadent Rome and rising of humanity.
Unfortunately, there are some serious drawbacks to this version on other areas. Prepare yourself for mostly irritating synchronized dialog, where the voices of the actors are spoken by others. I believe Max Von Sydow (who gives us a great and moving performance as Peter) was one of the few who was allowed to keep his voice for his part. The greatest disappointment is however the role of Nero, played by Klaus Maria Brandauer. He has not any resemblance with the real Nero, who was fat and had a overall brutal appearance. Brandauer's characterization of Nero is over the top, his boredom with everything and everyone becomes irritating to the point you want him to die in the flames of Rome fast. And we have seen this view of the unpredictable, cruel, and bored Roman emperor many times before. We feel no compassion for Brandauers Nero when he loses the love of everyone around him, even that of Popea, played by the beautiful Christina Raines.
For photography, story-telling and Max Von Sydow, you may enjoy this movie.
Unfortunately, there are some serious drawbacks to this version on other areas. Prepare yourself for mostly irritating synchronized dialog, where the voices of the actors are spoken by others. I believe Max Von Sydow (who gives us a great and moving performance as Peter) was one of the few who was allowed to keep his voice for his part. The greatest disappointment is however the role of Nero, played by Klaus Maria Brandauer. He has not any resemblance with the real Nero, who was fat and had a overall brutal appearance. Brandauer's characterization of Nero is over the top, his boredom with everything and everyone becomes irritating to the point you want him to die in the flames of Rome fast. And we have seen this view of the unpredictable, cruel, and bored Roman emperor many times before. We feel no compassion for Brandauers Nero when he loses the love of everyone around him, even that of Popea, played by the beautiful Christina Raines.
For photography, story-telling and Max Von Sydow, you may enjoy this movie.
Quo Vadis?
CinemaSerf7 March 2024
This mini-series certainly lacks much of the pomp and splendour of the more acclaimed 1951 version but it isn't at all bad. Klaus Maria Brandauer portrays the Emperor Nero as more of a disillusioned actor than a tyrannical maniac with Frederic Forrest dominating as his artistic mentor trying to keep the wayward emperor from losing the plot completely. It hadn't the budget, so ends up as a much more theatrical style production than the Ustinov/Genn film; less brash and more subtle and nuanced as we set off to send the Christians to the lions. It's too long at 6 x 1 hour; and by the end you might be tempted to join the Christians - but give it a go; the two leads offer compelling performances.
Mesmerizing!
steven-22225 November 2008
Do NOT judge this production by the 2-hour version that was released on VHS in the US, which is a choppy and incomprehensible mess. I had the pleasure of watching the full-length 6-hour version available on DVD from the UK, and was spellbound. The deliberate pace and growing sense of menace are mesmerizing, as is the amazing visual and aural landscape; this is an ancient Rome we have never seen before, and far more authentic than most.
Director Franco Rossi was justly celebrated for his 1968 mini-series of The Odyssey, and this mini-series is equally powerful. Just as Bekim Fehmiu became the screen's best Ulysses, so Klaus Maria Brandauer may be the screen's best Nero. Now, I am hoping someday to see Rossi's version of The Aeneid (Eneide) that was broadcast on Italian TV in 1971.
I am undecided which version of QUO VADIS is more powerful, this one or the Polish mini-series from 2001; each has different virtues, and in many ways they complement one another. Certainly, either one towers over that Hollywood camp-riot starring Peter Ustinov.
Director Franco Rossi was justly celebrated for his 1968 mini-series of The Odyssey, and this mini-series is equally powerful. Just as Bekim Fehmiu became the screen's best Ulysses, so Klaus Maria Brandauer may be the screen's best Nero. Now, I am hoping someday to see Rossi's version of The Aeneid (Eneide) that was broadcast on Italian TV in 1971.
I am undecided which version of QUO VADIS is more powerful, this one or the Polish mini-series from 2001; each has different virtues, and in many ways they complement one another. Certainly, either one towers over that Hollywood camp-riot starring Peter Ustinov.
It has the air of Roman decadence
res_ridendi3 February 2006
Methinks the best screen version of Quo Vadis? ever made. Well, yeah, the plot is not so strong and evident as in the book, sometimes meandering and loosing its suspense among aesthetic subtleties. But the film is really and beautifully "strange", has an enigma and style, that other versions - with R.Taylor and the new one from Poland - definitely lack. It has the air of Roman decadence, the beauty of declining paganism and infant Christianity. At least I believe it has). Brandauer, Forrest and Syudov did excellent job in portraying their characters. Forrest's Petronius seems to be the biggest success of the cast (let alone Brandauer who is the one of the greatest actors ever) and accumulates the very essence of this dying world (IMHO). That's it. That is the way it happened, guys... ))) IMHO
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
