|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
Film 5060
25 February 2003
At the time of Cleopatra’s release, in 1934 and again in 1963, times were changing for the role of the woman. Female society needed a spokeswoman and they found one in Cleopatra. ... These advances have everything to do with the changes and progression of the role of Cleopatra. ... The women of the thirties and the sixties identified with Egypt and Cleopatra’s quest for power, her ability to dominate men through sexual prowess and cunning, her creative ploys and her courage. Along with Cleopatra’s positive attributes, however, are many negative attributes. ... Claudette Colbert, Elizabeth Taylor and the rediscovery of Cleopatra provided an important role model for the women of the time. ... Each depiction of Cleopatra, in 1934 and 1963, is representative of society’s beliefs and needs during the time of the movie release. Claudette Colbert in 1934 represents a childish, playful and mischievous Cleopatra; whereas Elizabeth Taylor of 1963 represents a domineering, cunning and glamorous Cleopatra. Each time period created an image of Cleopatra that was acceptable and parallel to the actual role of women in society during that time. ... Cleopatra is portrayed in both films as a ruler who must use a man to achieve her goals. Both women portray Cleopatra as dependent on Julius Caesar and Marc Antony for various reasons. ... It is as if Caesar lures Cleopatra just like Cleopatra lures Marc Antony. Taylor, on the other hand, portrays a Cleopatra who needs Caesar just as much as he needs her. ... Cleopatra is not an entirely positive role model. ... Hollywood has softened the political side of Cleopatra and exaggerated the mischievous sex goddess who is able to lure the leaders of Rome with her beauty. ... By the time the ’63 version was made, Cleopatra uses more avenues of control than just sex. She has far more power than she did in ’34, but the focus is more on the spectacle of Elizabeth Taylor than Cleopatra’s political aspirations. ... When Caesars guard approaches, Cleopatra walks up to him and fondles part of his chest shield; he grunts. ... It is known that Cleopatra herself used sex and bribery to achieve her political goals, but Colbert seems more amused with flirting than she does with advancing politically. ... Once Apollodorus clues in Cleopatra, she then dominates Caesar for a moment. ... But the leader in Cleopatra is lost by Colbert. ... In 1963, Cleopatra’s character, as well as the actress playing her, had considerable power both in the script and in the real live studio. Taylor depicts Cleopatra as blatant about her superiority and her intelligence. ... She is selling her chest as Cleopatra to her people and as Elizabeth Taylor to her admirers. ... She is, like the real Cleopatra, able to use her sexuality as a strength and a lure, not as a weakness. ... Cleopatra just up and goes to bed! She is totally in power; a far cry from the Cleopatra that Colbert portrayed.
By the time Liz Taylor portrays Cleopatra, Hollywood is huge. The idea of the Empire that Cleopatra is attempting to create with Rome is a remarkable parallel to the empire created by Hollywood. The extravagant entrance of Cleopatra into Rome is depicted as a much smaller event in the ’34 version than in the ’63 version. ... The Cleopatra of ’63 is much showier than the Cleopatra of ’34. ... Taylor portrays Cleopatra in much the same way. ... Taylor’s Cleopatra immediately denies the possibility that she will take Antony’s life, whereas Colbert’s Cleopatra goes so far as to poison his drink and then knock it out of his hand. ... Taylor’s Cleopatra will not settle for anything less than exactly what she wants, which seems more along the lines of the real Cleopatra. ... The progress made for women between ’34 and ’63 is remarkable and directly accounts for Hollywood’s ability to portray Cleopatra the way that Taylor did; as a domineering, outsmarting, intelligent leader. ... Hollywood did an excellent job of interpellating its female audience both through the use of Colbert and Taylor and most importantly the revival of Cleopatra. Hollywood has hailed society with Cleopatra for both decades. We are subjected by our identification with Cleopatra. ... Hollywood not only used the image of Cleopatra to hail its audience, but it used Elizabeth Taylor. ... Many critics reported the desire to see Cleopatra, but were presented with “Cleopatra Taylor” (106Wyke), instead. ... Women wanted to see themselves in Cleopatra and they did. Both representations of Cleopatra defined the role of woman at the time. Women looked to Cleopatra as a creature to aspire to, a successful woman in a leading role.
“Women in the audiences of DeMille’s historical film were thus encouraged to identify with the Cleopatra on screen and to carry over that identification into their lives outside the cinema through the purchase of Cleopatra gowns and other ‘style accessories’” (99Wyke).
The movie and the representation of Cleopatra were greatly influenced by western society. The women of ’34 were greatly influenced by the depiction of Cleopatra. ... “The characterization of Cleopatra through casting, dialogue and gesture, camera work and lighting, often invites audience identification with her” (97Wyke). ... Westernized Egypt was the only way to present Cleopatra to its audience. ...
The progression of the role of Cleopatra parallels the progression and the accomplishments of women in history. The historical context of the 1934 production of Cleopatra puts women only 15 years after their win for the right to vote. ... It is no wonder that the plan to reproduce Cleopatra was decided upon around this time.
Approximate Word count = 4590
Approximate Pages = 18.4
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|