User Reviews

It concerns Julius Caesar and his famous existence on Gaul , including feats , fights , political events , betrayal , wars and lovers . Vercingetorix (Rik Battaglia) provokes a popular rebellion against Roman domination , he rallies his people and Gaul tribes when they are threatened by an army commanded by Julius Caesar (Cameron Mitchell) . Caesar asks for senator Pompeius (Carlo Tamberlani) to lead some troops for fighting the Barbarians . But Caesar's protégée (a very young Raffaela Carrá) is kidnapped by Vercingetorix and later on , her lover Claudius (Ivo Payer) is also taken prisoner . But they're freed by Queen Astrid (Dominic Wilms) . Although the deeds described are historically inaccurate , some events are vivid and authentic .

This is a fairly Sword and Sandals standard from the 60s . It's made middling scale with some spectacular scenes and in Peplum style . The action is regularly done and the story occasionally drags , however to be liked for Peplum's hardcore lovers . The motion picture was regularly directed by Americo Anton or Tanio Boccia . He directed some Spaghettis : Saguara , Kill or be Killed , Deadly Trackers and this Dio non paga il sabato (1967), but usually made Peplums, adventures and mini-epics , such as : Vendetta of Ivanhoe , La valle dell'eco tonante , Il dominatore del deserto , Maciste alla corte dello zar , I predoni della steppe , Sanson against pirates , Julio César,conqueror Gaul , Il trionfo di Maciste , Il conquistatore d'Orient , among others . Rating : 5/10 , mediocre .

The picture is partially based on real events . These are the following ones : Gallic chieftain Vercingetorix (dead at 46 b.c) was an insightful and valiant warrior , whose father was captured and executed by Romans , he was leader a rebellion against Roman domination . He seeks justice by winning freedom for Gaul from the Romans , and soon he raises an army of his own to defeat Caesar . Vercingetorix was definitely vanquished in Alesia , where took place a long siege . He was taken prisoner and led to Rome . Then he's coerced to a handcuffed parade throughout the Rome streets , being killed after six years in prison . Later on , Caesar, married Calpurnia, and is appointed Consul for life and then he crossed river Rubicon . His history is written by the same Julius Caesar in 'Comments about War of Gaul' or 'De Bello Galico', also he wrote in brilliant and elegant style 'Comments about Civil War' or 'De Bello Civili'.

Other adaptations about Caesar and Vercingetorix is as follows : 'Vercingetorix (2001)' by Jacques Dorffman with Chistopher Lambert and Klaus Mara Brandauer ; 'Julius Caesar (2004 TV) ' by Uli Edel with Jeremy Sisto as Caesar and Heino Ferch as Vercingetorix . Furthermore , known Shakespearian renditions as 'Julius Caesar(1953)' by Joseph L Mankiewicz with Louis Calhern as Caesar and Marlon Brando as Marcus Antonius and Stuart Burgue version (1970) starred by Charlton Heston .

Expatriate American actor Cameron Mitchell stars as Julius Caesar in the Italian production Caesar The Conqueror. The title is something of a misnomer because he's not conquering anything here, merely trying to hold on to what he's already conquered in Gaul.

Here as in other films Julius Caesar refers to himself in the third person by his proper name. Except in Spartacus where he's a young up and coming man of the hour, in just about every other film I've seen him in he always refers to himself as Caesar. It was his way of saying I'm a man of destiny and something special.

In fact this film is a bit too ambitious for its own good. Films like Cleopatra and Spartacus even more so successfully manage to balance the military campaigns at home with the politics in Rome. But Caesar The Conqueror fails in that task though the battle scenes are nicely staged.

This film concerns Gaul chief Vercingetorix played by Italian peplum film hero Rik Battaglia who is stirring up the people of Gaul and playing for time while Caesar's political enemies seek to do him in at the Roman Senate. Not everyone in Rome was impressed by the man on horseback and that would include Senate's greatest orator Marcus Cicero.

Caesar The Conqueror is a bit better than most peplum offerings, but falls far short of Cleopatra or Spartacus.

Here's a low-budget but epic-looking peplum movie which begins with lots of suspenseful court intrigue as the Roman senate conspire against Caesar, and ends with a predictable but rousing battle sequence which leaves bodies strewn asunder. Now to many people this will just seem like another typical peplum movie with not much to distinguish it from dozens of others. There's one difference - for a change we have a strong acting performance from Cameron Mitchell, resplendent in a grey wig as Julius Caesar. Mitchell's character is actually explored in the movie and given motivation, while the scriptwriters go behind the scenes to show the powerful, occasionally cruel, but just, man that he was (being an Italian movie this is obviously on Rome's "side" and depicting the Gaul as bloodthirsty barbarians).

The costumes and sets are immaculate, giving the film a really authentic look which is one of the strong points, and there's plenty of action to keep the drama moving along nicely. Bloody battles are done in style on wide grassy plains and with good choreography and lots of bloodshed and death. This is a surprisingly grisly film for the time in which it was made, with some strong moments of torture via red-hot pincers and scenes like when a soldier is axed in the head with blood pouring down his face which act as a forerunner to the atrocity movies they were making in the early '80s. Arrows drive into heads and through necks and bodies are impaled and stabbed on swords, so this definitely isn't a movie for children. Whoever said that BRAVEHEART paved the way for historical war violence was obviously mistaken!

The supporting cast is a strong one and the film gives Mitchell a worthy opponent in the form of Rik Battaglia, an Italian actor who would enjoy relative success later on in his career. Battaglia shows us the human side of Vercingetorix which makes him a likable screen villain. Assorted Italian beauties flesh out the rest of the cast along with good supporting turns from Ivo Payer as the torture victim and various double-crossers and traitorous allies.

I found this to be a pretty involving movie in that we learned to care for the characters instead of simply not giving a damn as in so many films. I would even go so far as to say that some moments - like a pan over a field littered with the mutilated bodies of the dead - are pretty humbling as the film-makers intended while the action is both stirring and exciting. Sure, the low budget is evident in the occasional use of stock footage but nonetheless, CAESAR THE CONQUEROR is an enjoyable, old-fashioned yarn which could stand up with the best of them.

The story of the greatest Roman general of all time, is best read from his own commentaries. In this movie called " Ceasar the Conqueror " also taken from those commentaries, is a sad rendition of his life's conquests. In this tale,Cameron Mitchell plays Julius Caesar and for the most part does a good job. His story by the way is poorly portrayed in this Italian movie. The dialog is choppy as best and because of the translation problems, comes off as High Schoolish as best. The acting is poor and also very card board and stiff. Rik Battaglia plays Vercingetorix the best of the Gualic tribes and Carlo Tamberlani as Pompey, both comes off as hammy and unbelievable. Still, If audience members don't mind, the whole production will emerge as second rate as depicted by directed by Tanio Boccia. Here is one film, which should be relegated to the rear of the shelf. **

This film renders the exploits of the famed Roman conqueror (generally depicted on-screen either via the Shakespeare play or the Cleopatra affair) routine through countless tortuous intrigues and, when they finally arrive, lifeless battle sequences (despite some gratuitous carnage in close-up, they're full of choppy stock footage and the moves of the various stuntmen/extras look all-too-obviously choreographed and, worse still, fake)! At the very least, however, the American star of this peplum – Cameron Mitchell, who made several of them during this era – delivers a thoughtful portrayal in the title role. The fact that this is cut-rate even for the modest standards usually set by the genre is borne out by its anonymous production values and supporting cast (other than Rik Battaglia, as a hammy villain bearing the unwieldy name of Vercingetorix, and future Italian TV personality Raffaella Carra', playing Caesar's young protégé); unfortunately, blonde Belgian beauty Dominique Wilms (as Battaglia's warrior lover) does not have near enough screen time to make up for these flaws

One of the better films in Mill Creek's Warriors 50-Pack. It isn't a "clean" copy but you can see and hear the film just fine - but the color of the film is a quite a bit faded. If you are a fan of the film I would recommend finding a stand alone copy that has been cleaned up and color adjusted.

This is the story of how Julius Caesar conquered The Gauls. It's a decent film and account of what happened and how it happened. I am not going to say this is an accurate of what happened because I wasn't there when it happened and really don't know, nor do I claim to know Roman and German history - I'm still learning more about it.

I can say from the stand point of Italian "Hollywood" entertainment - the film is entertaining and is well acted out. Lavish costuming, props and sets the way most all the peplum films are.

5/10

As far as Caesars go, Cameron is better than Calhern, the Caesar in the Brando version of Julius Caesar. And that black and white version was too talky and had little romantic complication. This version is not much better, but at least the performance of Cameron lifts up the Caesar persona a bit higher than the Calhern version. Production values were terrible in both films, so it is like comparing rotten apples to rotten oranges. Cannot recommend either. Even the leaden Cleopatra was almost as bad with full production values. No good film has ever been made about Caesar. Not recommended.

The script proudly reads :"from Julius Ceasar's "the Gauls war" but the plot is so far-fetched it can only have been intended as a joke.Sure,we know about Julius's frames of mind which begin and close the movie,but the rest of the story is business as usual.

Vercingetorix is an obscure historic character,only known by Ceasar's pieces of writing.So why not turning him into the movie's villain?Played by a mediocre actor,the Gallic chief looks like a comic strip baddie,lecherous,cruel and treacherous.On the other hand,Romans are noble,brave,loyal and virtuous.

The Alesia episode is completely false historically speaking:it was a very long siege and the director reduces it to a battle .Alesia was located on a hill,in the movie it's a plain.And I'm not sure Mark Antony was here.

But the Gallic had their revenge in 1963:Astérix was born.

There's nothing to report here other than for once, before France's commercial film market got all artsy in the 60s and 70s, we had a decent epic film with some action made by the French. It could have been a production right out of Hollywood had it not been for the fact that everyone was speaking French.

As you can guess this film deals with Caesar's forays into Gaul, modern France, and how he overcame the Gaullic leader Vercingetorix. Both sides of the conflict are given flourishes, but there is a dash of fatalism in regards to the acting and story presentation (no surprise as it is a French production).

A little history, Julius Caesar simply went into Gaul/France to bolster his own reputation. There was no real threat at the time, and all he did was exacerbate what tension there already was, and, on to of that, tortured and slaughtered thousands all for the sake of his name. Vercingetroix was one of the toughest foes Rome had ever faced, but he was publicly strangled in the end in Rome before the people.

That part is not in this film, nor are Julius Caesar's bloodier exploits of killing women and children, and not just fighting men. But, being a film of the 1960s, there was only so much violence that could be shown at the time.

The acting is okay, the art direction is quite good. It's decently shot for the time; lots of master shots, few cutaways unless focusing on a different character. And, finally, a little hampered in the action department.

I don't if it's the French version of staging a battle, or whether they just didn't have competent technical people, but the battle scenes seemed a little half baked, and that's putting it kindly. Still, they deliver on the action for a film that had been heavy with dialogue, but are somewhat scattered in terms of staging.

Over all it's an okay film. A product of it's time, it's nothing to write home about, but a decent watch all the same.

See it once.