Mason or Guinness?


I've seen this movie twice and frankly it’s only thanks to Mason and Guinness this movie didn't bomb more so then it did.

So who out of the two actors (James Mason and Alec Guinness) gave the better performance?

And by the way the fall of the western Empire was an economic one not a military one, besides the Eastern Empire went on for another 1000 years. So I don’t know were the produces get of by calling this movie the fall of the Roman Empire.

reply

I'm a fan of both James Mason and Alec Guinness, but Mason more so, so I go with him. He was also in the film longer, and had more of a dramatic part than that of Guinness' Caesar.

reply


I agree - Mason gave the better performance.

His role had more range.

reply

According to certain historians this was "the beginning of the fall" of the Roman Empire. The movie presents just some causes of that fall.


God is real unless declared integer.

reply

Either way I like Guinesses Marcus Aurelious moreso than Richard Harris'. But maybe thats because Richard Harris in Gladiator aped him so much (no disrespect to Harris meant).

"But it's got electrolytes..."

reply

James Mason, with his voice, much like a fine violin, steals every scene he is in. Guinness is a great actor- James Mason is an unforgetable one. Think Heaven Can Wait- James Mason had a supporting role- but who do you remember more fondly- beatty? or "Joe, this is where you go after life and after dreams" WC Fields should have said- never act with kids, dogs or James Mason.

reply

So I don’t know were the produces get of by calling this movie the fall of the Roman Empire.

What did Edward Gibbon get when he called his books The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire?

As the opening narration states and Finlay Currie's character in the senate emphasize, the film doesn't see the end of the Roman Empire as being of the literal kind. It doesn't literally end with all the buildings razed to the ground but it ends with Caesar's throne being auctioned.

So who out of the two actors (James Mason and Alec Guinness) gave the better performance?

Guinness easily. James Mason is sort-of wasted as Timonides save for that wonderful scene in the senate and his attempt at "diplomacy" with the Goths. Whereas Guinness gives a stunning performance as Marcus Aurelius, deeply tragic and also unsentimental and tough like when he essentially sells his own daughter to the Armenian kings so as to beef more troops at his border.



"Ça va by me, madame...Ça va by me!" - The Red Shoes

reply