An idealized and dull version of Spartacus.

Rating: Null/10 (14 January 2007)

Watched it again, nearly twenty years later, and I can't say I warmed to it much. I certainly didn't expect Ancient Rome to be shown in such a dark way as in "Caligula" (especially not in 1960), but the story of the slaves who rebelled goes into the other extreme: it's pure Hollywood nonsense, unfortunately. Spartacus isn't bloodthirsty or ruthless enough; he is more like Moses than an ex-slave/gladiator. Out of all the slave women in Ancient Rome, Olivier has to have the one, i.e. has to fall for the exact same one that Spartacus loves. That is just a little too corny for my taste.
The first third, with the training and the rebellion, is actually good, but from then on the pace is much too slow, there are some needless scenes, and the movie gets increasingly unrealistic. Plus, the ending is a downer. ("Braveheart", which is similar in its basic premise, length, and that it has also a downer ending, grips you; "Spartacus" does nothing of the sort.)
The casting is very good, though, with Olivier and Ustinov being particularly good. I see nothing here that would suggest that the best director of all time is behind the camera. Then again, Kubrick was only hired to direct this; i.e. this film wasn't one of his produce/direct/write projects. Also, it was years before he developed his unique style. It's his next movie. "Lolita", that started a string of major classics.