Page 120 - Shakespeare in the Movie From the Silent Era to Shakespeare in Love

A Tide in Men's Lives I 109

sius, though his portliness would have rendered Caesar's pro-
nouncement "Would he were fatter" ridiculous. Caesar was already
taken; but Casca would be acceptable, even though it was a minor
role. Throughout preproduction, Welles was touted as being on
board; when shooting began, he was notably absent.
Sadly, Snell never offered Welles the director's chair; had he, this
Julius Caesar (whatever the outcome) would have caught the atten-
tion of the world's cinéastes. Apparently aware of Welles's legendary
excesses, Snell decided to go a safer route, hiring a journeyman pro-
fessional with TV experience. Stuart Burge had never mounted a
motion picture but was eager to try after having recorded the Olivier
Othello on film. Moreover, Burge had helmed a BBC production of
Julius Caesar, acclaimed for its total lack of staginess. So the work
inched slowly toward fruition. Snell and Heston agreed to shoot in
1967, though cameras didn't roll for two years.
During that time, cast members came and went. Diana Rigg and
Judy Parfitt would be Portia and Calpurnia, Richard Chamberlain
would play Octavius. Owing to the international flavor, Snell
wanted Omar Sharif for Brutus; when that didn't happen, American
actor Jason Robards, despite misgivings, assumed the role. He had
never before attempted Shakespeare; worse, he was unfamiliar with
the play, never having seen it; worse still, he was in a deep depres-
sion and was drinking heavily over the unpleasant ending of his mar-
riage to Lauren Bacall. The casting decision would prove a mistake.
Problems began when Robards arrived in London for a two-week
rehearsal period and immediately let it be known he didn't care for
Burge's approach.
Deciding to improvise in front of the camera so that his work
would be "fresh" when shooting started in Spain, Robards ceased
showing up for rehearsal and started hitting the pub circuit. No
wonder, then, that he appears to be acting in a different film than
everyone else. In the first half, when others play their parts quietly
and naturally, Robards's work resembles a satiric send-up of bad
Shakespearean acting: all elocution, no emotion, with the words
slowly spoken in a numbing monotone. After the assassination,
when the cast gradually tightens its style to suggest the play's clas-
sic stature, Robards goes the other way and rants and raves in a real-
istic style.
There are other flaws. The budget didn't allow for the spectacle
necessary to bring ancient Rome to life. Yet the Heston name cre-
ated viewer expectations of another grand spectacle on the order of