I remember seeing this as a boy in the 1970s. I was impressed by the size of Spartacus's army, but when I saw the size of the Roman army I thought "Oh shit!"
Funny that you mentioned effects, but they did use one in the scene. It's always been obvious that they used a bad split screen effect half way up in order to make it look like the Roman army was larger than it really was.
Actually no.....The Romans wouldn't have marched up in a line. They would have formed a box with shields above them and on all sides and moved forward. This is a film after all there are numerous historical inaccuracies in it.
@@kennethpaulsen5407 "face palm* Noo, I mean the movie makers didn't have the extras to make up the numbers who were at the actual historical battle, so they had to use very crude special effects to make it look like there were far more extras on the set than there really were on the day of shooting the battle scene. You can even see where they split the screen. As the front columns are approaching, you can just see that the ones to the rear on the hill are matted in. So what you're seeing to the rear are actually the very same extras as those who are nearing the camera. Get it now, bright eyes? 🙄
Movie making on a grand scale, does not get any better than this. I saw this film in Corona, California, where I lived in the early 60's. We had a single downtown theater. That was enough, back then to amaze me at age 10.
This scene is true to the way Romans actually did their formations. Cubes, squad leaders, marching orders, time movements, and execution of defense and offensive stance. The director wanted to terrify the audience showing the might of the Roman Empire. No over the top dramatic music was used, as seen in today's films. Most sounds came from the effects of the marching soldiers in tune with the orchestra, drums, etc, and trumpets embedded in the musical beat to emphasize the approaching doom. One of greatest battles scene of all times, if not the greatest. Primarily due to no CGI of any kind or current camera tricks used by directors today. Everything was practical and extremely well organized. Not to mention having thousand of extras move and act as a one military regiment in an open field was hard, as well as coordinate fight sequences in sections for large scale shots.
To be fair it has aged a lot (costumes, usual flaming haystack garbage...) but funnily enough there still isn't any movie with better showcase of roman tactics (or any tactics from any culture). It's like directors are unaware of how good this could make their battle scenes. My most hated offender was the Alexander movie, where they had the opportunity to showcase the Macedonian phalanx, companion cavalry and so on, but you barely get any shots and most of them are shit. That being said, I completely disagree with the CGI part. CGI is just that thing that everyone shits on because it's easy to do so. Yes, battle scenes with too much CGI are shit. But most battle scenes before CGI (or that decided not to use it) were also shit. Almost all battles involving the Romans can be summed up to disorganized barbarians and a forced 'testudo'. Also a lot of battles that are CGI wouldn't have been possible in the first place.
I see what your saying, but CGI are designed for things that can't be achieved realistically and feel fluid, or situation where it's too dangerous and time consuming to do realistically, or painfully time consuming in total. Beyond these points, CGI is useless. Movies like Jurassic Park, LOTR and SW need CGI due to their worlds fantastical nature. However, movies like Fury Road, Terminator, and John Wick need only fractions of good CGI because these films are better grounded in reality. So when they have lots of CGI in them, it ruins realism. Another example is Aquaman. In the water CGI is heavily needed for this film, but outside the water it felt wrong. Other than powers, every other part in the movie, on the surface, didn't need CGI. And yes cost efficiency is necessary and safer even though taking this route is far more painful on the CGI developers. No matter what the issue might be, the audience can tell CGI easily. That's bad thing. Ease discovery ruins the adventure.
@@explorationofvisualartside1163 Can't disagree with that. There have been some movies ruined by CGI (The Thing prequel), but most of them time a scene that was bad with CGI would've been bad without it too.
@@Cybermat47 Smart azz . LOL You knew what I meant. NO OTHER ACTOR playing Spartacus can be taken serious as the character OF Spartacus like Kirk Douglas is!!! FYI I knew there was a real Spartacus since the 1970s when I was a teenager.
There's nothing wrong with CGI when done when used at the appropriate times. The problem with CGI today is that it's lazily being used as a crutch. The first Jurassic Park is a good example of it being done well. They used CGI when it was appropriate and Practical effects when they were appropriate. As opposed to now where they puke CGI all over the screen at all times.
Perdón, aquí los españoles, como miles de galos, germanos, ilirios, africanos, orientales, eslavos, están en las filas de los esclavos. ¡¡¿¿Que tiene que ver los españoles aqui?!!! Dejen de robar historia. Hasta en sus mejores tiempos (siglos XV, XVI y XVII) sus flotas y ejercitos estivieron comandados por italianos e integrados por ellos, alemanes, gascones y flamencos. El elemento español fue siempre minoritario.
4 minutes of great film making. Today if such a scene were filmed, the writers would require loads of exposition from the cast. Instead here in Spartacus, they let the scene play out without dialogue and all the actors do is show their emotions through their facial expressions.
It's been years since I watched this. Even the Roman skirmish line was 5 ranks deep in this shot. Two entire battles of troops on the field. They show you one formation, then move to another. They covered most of that ground in 4 minutes. Few generals who took the field against the Romans did well. You can see why.
Those are Battle Hardend Roman Army of previous overseas campaign! I be pissing my pants in a spectacle like that coming toward me as the enemy. Great film too.
Actually Crassus Legions were built from scratch to counter Spartacus, the follow on legions which this clip didn't show, were the veterans under Pompey.
One of my fave scenes in cinema..thanks for showing.by the way the Roman army is duplicated in the extreme long shots,but still brilliantly achieved.saul bass credited as design consultant..
I remember seeing this as a boy during the late 1960s. Awesome. Also, sad. Even as a boy my sympathies were with the insurgent slaves led by Spartacus. This was the final battle in which the rebel slaves were defeated
stanley kubrics symmetry at its finest. once you see the roman legions formating or the spartan phalanx there is that mysterious fear in your heart that no matter how many battles you win, in the end you are going to lose the final battle
You would not see anything in a movie like that today. Every soldier on the field is a real individual. Not a group of pixels manipulated by a computer in the shape of a person. As is the case of CGI today.
@clark cimmerian Its not. Ppl like this are just film hipsters where Older automatically means better. They think being anti-modern makes them more artsy. Favorite movies are usually all black and whiteones, and their definition of "Best special effects" would be something like the stop motion from Clash of the Titans.
You have to appreciate what filmmakers could do back then without CGI. Filming such massive set piece battles involving thousands of extras meant they had to get all the scenes they needed there and then. Nowadays they can use a green screen and CGI the armies and settings.
Even though this is a fictional movie (and an amazing scene from Kubrick), Crassus should have immediately ordered his men to step aside as soon as Spartacus signalled the logs to be ignited. That way, the flaming logs would have simply rolled passed the Romans without inflicting serious damage. Scipio used the exact same tactic to defeat Hannibal's war elephants at Zama almost two hundred years prior.
If you watch the grass as they march you can just about make out the previous lines on the ground used whilst doing retakes, unbelievable film.. way ahead of it’s time
In 'The Making of The Roman Army' by Lawrence Keppie, the author writes concerning the quincunx maneuver, "the gaps, or at least some of them, were filled before the armies clashed. (The main battle sequence in the film 'Spartacus' shows this happening.)" And the author continues by saying, "each maniple simply extended its frontage [or] if the maniple was drawn up two centuries deep, the rear centuries may have run out (almost certainly to the left and right) and formed up alongside the century in the line itself. On balance this seems the more likely method of deployment."
I also read about a battle between caesar and the gauls where the gaps remained and were neither filled by Romans or the enemy, the barbarians attacked each extended group of romans front to front with their own separated groups and ignored the gaps
I have seen this movie and the entire 4 part series on Netflix I love the original movie but the Netflix version is okay for people who never saw the original movie like did when I was a kid!👍😊😉😇😄😁
You could replicate this well in CGI. The problem today is not CGI, but the pace and technique. Most people who go to cinemas and justify the 100-200 million dollars investment in a movie production would complain this scene above was too boring.
I beg to differ. It's NOTHING, REPEAT NOTHING, for a film to cost $100 million nowadays, and all you get is comic-book "heroes", instead of the real thing...
+Optimusnorm You actually forget that the biggest portion of a movie cost is the main actors and advertisement, the equipment cost the least, the extras are after that, all in all you could replicate a scene like this today very easily without CGI indeed.
Que dolor ver gente humilde y humillada levantarse contra un imperio cruel....no merecían perder ....y ser liquidados de esa forma.... eternos...héroes y simbolos de la libertad....hasta niños han de ver peleado esa batalla...
To think, this was the Spanish Army (Franco’s men) who drilled this. Can you imagine how kinetic and fluid the real thing was? What strikes the watcher is the impeccable drilling and fighting order of these men. The real thing was far, far more terrifying.
Yes... This panoramic scene has Stanley Kubrick written all over it... Still considered by many historians to be the best ever representation of how the Roman Army went into a set-piece battle... Still good after 60 years... IMO this preparation for battle actually made this film better than any others...
Very very very n VERY impressive formation marching indeed. Wonderfully scripted AND SUCH well COMPOSED to fit Roman legion marching MUSIC indeed. Formation like this SHOULD HAVE sending powerful messages, psychological, that you are up against or confronting well train mighty Roman legion Army n saying you will be defeated... Another surely class movie acting by Kirk Douglas n may you live over 120 n EVEN surpass French women almost 123 years, 122 and 7 months about. So be it, I hope. Wish Kirk would or should have took care of him MORE when he was starting 50 or so. ALL that drinking, punching, kicking will get you LIKE Charles Bronson, he borrowed name from 1930 stat, n die with or EVEN before dye HARDLY walk n WHAT the hel happened when Charles Bronson has SUCH impressive physical shape when he was making movie like Apache.... All these guys lacking a bit common sense NOT thinking about their hard earned money after retire...
Look at this - no CGI, no computer graphics, no special effects. Just 50,000 men. There was a painted backdrop by necessity so that jet trails from airliners would be eliminated, but WOW, just look at this!
imagine if people did this movie accurate or the tv show. Spartacus was brilliant but he outnumbered crasus 3 to 1 and they lost because of a lack of discipline
@clark cimmerian Look up the facts. The whole entire war saw Spartacus out number the Romans. Even the final battle saw Crasus outnumbered, and he still beat the breaks off him.
I believe SPARTACUS played by KIRK DOUGLAS is more exciting and packed with actions than the rival BEN HUR of CHARLTON HESTON. This was the bitter times of Kirk Douglas not being chosen for the role of BEN HUR. It may be an irony he was not favored for the role because he was destined to produce the greater blockbuster film of a triumphant slave-gladiator who will capture the imagination of modern day film makers of the epic SPARTACUS.
Quite right. In 1958, Kirk Douglas went to MGM asking for the role of Judah Ben Hur but MGM wanted Charlton Heston instead offering the role of Mesalla to Douglas who was so offended he decided to use his Bryna (his mom's first name) company to start up Spartacus. Ben Hur was a great movie but I like Spartacus better.
kubrick obviously had some research done on roman legions. The divisional structure of centuria and cohorts is visible, you can count the blocks of roughly 100 men lumped toghether in "double centuria" where youre typical first legionary cohort would have 5 of such double centuria. You can also clearly distinguish the centurions and optio's who respectivly lead their centuria from the front and back,, you can see them in about the right proportional number spread across all the centuria if you look close. Rome's subdivisional structure was relativly innovative for ancient times, it allowed far more tactical flexibilety and allowed for more complex moves and maneuvers when lead by good centurions that could work toghether and take independant initiative where needed.
Seems a bit odd that the Romans would first send in a thin line of skirmishers against Spartacus's army. Maybe they did it to test the strength of their enemy, as the Zulus did to the British in the film "Zulu".
Great visuals, but it seems improbable that the Romans should have marched all the way up to the enemy line without throwing their javelins first (causing confusion in the first ranks, which held the burning mats).
Indeed. the only thing that annoy me in this battle scene is the fact legionaries are carrying what look like spears instead of pila (the javelins). And if it is actually pila then it is quite inaccurate as far as i known. The roman legionnaries used to carry at least one pilum, often two (a heavy and a light one). Standard procedure was : advance , throw one or two pila at close range in order to break enemy's line (and shields as well ), then engage close-combat with short sword.
A great scene, but it was a shame the director:Stanley Kubrick disowned the film after completing it .There were some great moments in it, and everyone who performed in it and the crew who helped make it deserved full credit. In reality, Spartacus took a gamble as he attacked Crassus who was trailing him,but he stood no chance against the professional Roman legions, although he did come close to killing Crassus before he fell himself
Crassus was tailing him all throughout Italy, had him cornered a couple times, but Spartacus’ army would escape; however, once Pompey’s legions started on their way to Italy, Spartacus HAD to give battle. His ONLY chance was to defeat Crassus quickly then turn to face Pompey; basically, zero chance of success.
There is still a lot of interesting conjectures. I always wondered if Spartacus had succeeded in getting his people over the Alps and successfully escaped the Romans. Of course, it's not known if anyone in his force knew where the passes were, so it's perhaps a strong possibility they didn't want to chance it,instead still seeking glory and plunder when they turned back. Whatever the reason, it was a fatal error of judgment.
AY? Y did SK disown the film? AND what has SK got against 'military' authority figures ie the gladiator trainer in this film, & the US C drill sergeant in Full Metal Jacket? DID he have a bad experience as a recruit in the military?
I'm Spartacus!.......No, I'm Spartacus!.......I thought that guy over there was Spartacus...............Who ME? I'm not Spartacus..............My brother is Spartacus.................Wait!!! I thought that was my sister that was Spartacus...........Aw hell, We're all Spartacus!!!!!.
If this was true i could never understand why Spartacus did not disrupt the Romans from forming up. Surely a good commander would have done this in stead of standing there.
+TheBerghain Prince You should have a look on the amazing battle scenes from "Waterloo" (1970) by Sergueï Bondartchouk. If you don't know it already :)
And the EXTREMELY realistic battle scenes from 2002's "Napoleon", which co-stars John Malkovich & Gerard Depardieu. (The entire 6 hour mini-series is right here on TH-cam!!)
В кадре 2 римских легиона. Каждый из которых выстроен из 10 когорт. У Красса на этот момент их было вроде бы 8. ) И всё равно сцена наступления римлян просто давящая В детстве смотрел фильм в кинотеатре 5 раз)
Although this scene is fantastic it suggests a larger army of Crassus which was not true. In fact the army of the slaves was far larger (~75.000 vs ~40.000 soldiers) but the roman soldiers had better equipment and were trained to fight. Moreover a second army (Pompejus) was approaching and even caught and killed slaves that fled after the defeat.
Just the way the rebels stand there, watching with dignity and courage, facing the coming slaughter, committed to do their best to defend their freedom.
I thought battles were all supposed to be big disorganised blob 1 and big disorganised blob 2 charge headlong into each other and within second break into little more than a big mix of individual melees.
Well I think the Romans were far more sophisticated than that! But you may be correct once the fighting is well underway. As a fellow participant said to me at a live action role-play (LARP) event, "When you're in a battle all the fancy stuff goes out the window!"
Back than, that was the key for winning the war to keep battle formation, not to run away, even when the next soldier in the line has been chopped to pieces. Cavalry, the attacking horses, knights had the job to break up enemy formations, running them down. Undisciplined enemy often just ran away scared from the horses rushing at them. Barbarians were not trained to this kind of high skill level of fighting, because it took lot of training for years and discipline for the army and using high tech weapons of those times. That's why the city Venice was built on water and flourished for hundreds of years , barbarians didn't have the skill to build boats or large war ships to effectively attack on water.
@@szaki There was also the fact that the warrior ethic of "barbarian" tribes was based more on individual bravery than on collective discipline. Warriors were showing off to their own comrades as much as trying to frighten and defeat the enemy. They did occasionally pull off spectacular victories over the Romans though, especially when the latter were lured onto unsuitable terrain, as happened at the Battle of Tuteborg Forest in which Germanic tribes wiped out three Roman legions. Northern British Celtic tribes probably did something similar to the Roman 9th Legion.
@@johnnyb8825 Battle of Tuteborg Forest was different, it was inside dense forest and the barbarians hit upon the Romans, surprise attack, as they were marching through the forest. Romans were good in open field battles. It's like fighting a terrorist proxy army of today, totally different warfare. No use for heavy weapons.
I remember seeing this as a boy in the 1970s. I was impressed by the size of Spartacus's army, but when I saw the size of the Roman army I thought "Oh shit!"
This is the best roman war scene ever. No stupid effects to glamorize it, just exactly as it would’ve look like back then
Funny that you mentioned effects, but they did use one in the scene. It's always been obvious that they used a bad split screen effect half way up in order to make it look like the Roman army was larger than it really was.
Seeing the Roman maniple actually deployed is amazing, I wish more movies did this instead of just melee cafee
Actually no.....The Romans wouldn't have marched up in a line. They would have formed a box with shields above them and on all sides and moved forward. This is a film after all there are numerous historical inaccuracies in it.
@@white-dragon4424 he had Eight legions with him so that looks like the right amount of troops to me
@@kennethpaulsen5407 "face palm* Noo, I mean the movie makers didn't have the extras to make up the numbers who were at the actual historical battle, so they had to use very crude special effects to make it look like there were far more extras on the set than there really were on the day of shooting the battle scene. You can even see where they split the screen. As the front columns are approaching, you can just see that the ones to the rear on the hill are matted in. So what you're seeing to the rear are actually the very same extras as those who are nearing the camera. Get it now, bright eyes? 🙄
Movie making on a grand scale, does not get any better than this. I saw this film in Corona, California, where I lived in the early 60's. We had a single downtown theater. That was enough, back then to amaze me at age 10.
This scene is true to the way Romans actually did their formations. Cubes, squad leaders, marching orders, time movements, and execution of defense and offensive stance. The director wanted to terrify the audience showing the might of the Roman Empire. No over the top dramatic music was used, as seen in today's films. Most sounds came from the effects of the marching soldiers in tune with the orchestra, drums, etc, and trumpets embedded in the musical beat to emphasize the approaching doom.
One of greatest battles scene of all times, if not the greatest. Primarily due to no CGI of any kind or current camera tricks used by directors today. Everything was practical and extremely well organized. Not to mention having thousand of extras move and act as a one military regiment in an open field was hard, as well as coordinate fight sequences in sections for large scale shots.
To be fair it has aged a lot (costumes, usual flaming haystack garbage...) but funnily enough there still isn't any movie with better showcase of roman tactics (or any tactics from any culture). It's like directors are unaware of how good this could make their battle scenes. My most hated offender was the Alexander movie, where they had the opportunity to showcase the Macedonian phalanx, companion cavalry and so on, but you barely get any shots and most of them are shit.
That being said, I completely disagree with the CGI part. CGI is just that thing that everyone shits on because it's easy to do so. Yes, battle scenes with too much CGI are shit. But most battle scenes before CGI (or that decided not to use it) were also shit. Almost all battles involving the Romans can be summed up to disorganized barbarians and a forced 'testudo'. Also a lot of battles that are CGI wouldn't have been possible in the first place.
I see what your saying, but CGI are designed for things that can't be achieved realistically and feel fluid, or situation where it's too dangerous and time consuming to do realistically, or painfully time consuming in total. Beyond these points, CGI is useless. Movies like Jurassic Park, LOTR and SW need CGI due to their worlds fantastical nature. However, movies like Fury Road, Terminator, and John Wick need only fractions of good CGI because these films are better grounded in reality. So when they have lots of CGI in them, it ruins realism. Another example is Aquaman. In the water CGI is heavily needed for this film, but outside the water it felt wrong. Other than powers, every other part in the movie, on the surface, didn't need CGI.
And yes cost efficiency is necessary and safer even though taking this route is far more painful on the CGI developers. No matter what the issue might be, the audience can tell CGI easily. That's bad thing. Ease discovery ruins the adventure.
@@explorationofvisualartside1163 Can't disagree with that. There have been some movies ruined by CGI (The Thing prequel), but most of them time a scene that was bad with CGI would've been bad without it too.
True. But no Roman Empire. It was still a Republic :)
yes, that ominous humming when the legions neares, you know that something dreadfull is comming your way, very good use of sound
When i watched the movie for the first time last week, for some reason that scene gave me goosebumps all through, it was so fking good.
I think it's because it takes its time. It builds tension as it's dragged out.
Just finished the movie for the first time and wow!!! It's amazing.
It's the realisation of no hope.
RIP Kirk. He WAS Spartacus and always will be.
I feel the same way. He will always be Spartacus and Einar the Viking to me.
Actually, I think that the actual historical figure of Spartacus was and always will be Spartacus...
@@Cybermat47 Smart azz . LOL You knew what I meant. NO OTHER ACTOR playing Spartacus can be taken serious as the character OF Spartacus like Kirk Douglas is!!! FYI I knew there was a real Spartacus since the 1970s when I was a teenager.
@@bonniebrock5109 calm down bruh
@@Cybermat47 Not a bruh, sister. LOL was to show you I was joking back to you.
The mastery of Kubrick cinematography in all its glory.
this part of the movie was directed by saul bass.
Kubrick was not the cinematographer. Russell Metty was.
Nowadays these armies are computer created. This is real movie making.
Modern epics can't compare to movies like Spartacus or Lawrence of Arabia. This is real Hollywood movie making.
@Rocknrolladube more than in the Return of the King?
Lord of the Rings begs to differ.
@Rocknrolladube here's a fact: the charge of the rohirrim is one of the most epic battle scenes in cinema history.
There's nothing wrong with CGI when done when used at the appropriate times. The problem with CGI today is that it's lazily being used as a crutch. The first Jurassic Park is a good example of it being done well. They used CGI when it was appropriate and Practical effects when they were appropriate. As opposed to now where they puke CGI all over the screen at all times.
Very, very powerful scene - that scene alone justified the oscar! The fear on the slave army faces is justifield. The battle to end all battles!
Fact: Romans here, indeed, were real spanish infantrymen. Thats Why They made the formations so real.
FRANCO'S Hispanic Legions.
Perdón, aquí los españoles, como miles de galos, germanos, ilirios, africanos, orientales, eslavos, están en las filas de los esclavos. ¡¡¿¿Que tiene que ver los españoles aqui?!!! Dejen de robar historia. Hasta en sus mejores tiempos (siglos XV, XVI y XVII) sus flotas y ejercitos estivieron comandados por italianos e integrados por ellos, alemanes, gascones y flamencos. El elemento español fue siempre minoritario.
An epic cinematic scene with a music score to match. Absolutely marvelous!
4 minutes of great film making. Today if such a scene were filmed, the writers would require loads of exposition from the cast. Instead here in Spartacus, they let the scene play out without dialogue and all the actors do is show their emotions through their facial expressions.
It's been years since I watched this. Even the Roman skirmish line was 5 ranks deep in this shot. Two entire battles of troops on the field. They show you one formation, then move to another. They covered most of that ground in 4 minutes. Few generals who took the field against the Romans did well. You can see why.
Первый раз смотрел в 8лет! Мурашки по коже! С удовольствием пересматриваю!
This movie with the Roman army and deploying its formation into battle lines is as realistic as it could ever be a fantastic scene
02:30 If the first wave is scary, the second wave is terrifying, Run for the hills.
This comment hits very differently after this year.
@@Silkorvelvet then their is a third and fourth wave shotly after :)
@@JosephGibson fifth, sixth, and seventh too 😴
This was before CGI. Incredible.
what is CGI?
@@viaprenestina3894 computer generated images
My all time favorite Opening Battle Scene!
I just love this kinda scene, a well organized military power. The formations are spectacular. Thank you 🙏
Those are Battle Hardend Roman Army of previous overseas campaign! I be pissing my pants in a spectacle like that coming toward me as the enemy. Great film too.
awesome to the maximus!
Actually Crassus Legions were built from scratch to counter Spartacus, the follow on legions which this clip didn't show, were the veterans under Pompey.
Uniform shield up makes impressive looking, but ALSO FINAL chilling message or display to rebels saying be prepared 2 die.
Sehr guter Film danke
this movie was SO EPIC!!!!
It's still insane how they managed to put all these people in one set!
One of the best ever made
Wver made , movie 🎬 were movie 🎬
The power of Rome !
IMO, this is scene makes makes anxious like no other else before, no special effects for today´s movies, simply marvelous!
This film was so much fun! Great pre-battle scene here. Kirk was really, really memorable in this role.
One of my fave scenes in cinema..thanks for showing.by the way the Roman army is duplicated in the extreme long shots,but still brilliantly achieved.saul bass credited as design consultant..
I remember seeing this as a boy during the late 1960s. Awesome. Also, sad. Even as a boy my sympathies were with the insurgent slaves led by Spartacus. This was the final battle in which the rebel slaves were defeated
NOT me!
CRASSVS EGO.
🤚🏻🤚🏻🤚🏻
Great quality. What a scene, thanks for uploading
stanley kubrics symmetry at its finest. once you see the roman legions formating or the spartan phalanx there is that mysterious fear in your heart that no matter how many battles you win, in the end you are going to lose the final battle
You would not see anything in a movie like that today. Every soldier on the field is a real individual. Not a group of pixels manipulated by a computer in the shape of a person. As is the case of CGI today.
great scene , no Computer BS here!!!
Exactly. This scene was magnificent.
is
@clark cimmerian Its not. Ppl like this are just film hipsters where Older automatically means better. They think being anti-modern makes them more artsy.
Favorite movies are usually all black and whiteones, and their definition of "Best special effects" would be something like the stop motion from Clash of the Titans.
You have to appreciate what filmmakers could do back then without CGI. Filming such massive set piece battles involving thousands of extras meant they had to get all the scenes they needed there and then. Nowadays they can use a green screen and CGI the armies and settings.
One of my favorite war scenes. 2019
This movie is so good.
GREATEST MOVIE EVER MADE.......
Awesome formations!
Even though this is a fictional movie (and an amazing scene from Kubrick), Crassus should have immediately ordered his men to step aside as soon as Spartacus signalled the logs to be ignited. That way, the flaming logs would have simply rolled passed the Romans without inflicting serious damage. Scipio used the exact same tactic to defeat Hannibal's war elephants at Zama almost two hundred years prior.
And: those who dragged burning logs would be killed by Roman pila, and their dead corpses would stop these devices
Indeed. The Romans would never run like that either.
LOOKS impressive, but surely if the slave army had used flaming tree trunks as a weapon, some1 in the ancient sources would've mentioned it.
The best movie 🇨🇺🇨🇺🇨🇺🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼💯💯💯
Imagine walking into battle thinking this could be my last day on earth and your likely to be in your mid twenties.
They were used to death in ways we in modern times are not.
If you watch the grass as they march you can just about make out the previous lines on the ground used whilst doing retakes, unbelievable film.. way ahead of it’s time
Epic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Gran demostracion del poder de la superpotencia que fue Roma.
The bit from 1.59 to 2.11 is bloody awesome
THz 4 up loading much clear picture than others. Good job n there will be lot more viewers n next generation make you worth the efforts.
Terrifying march toward a hand-to-hand fight. And no computer effects. Stanley was a genius.
In 'The Making of The Roman Army' by Lawrence Keppie, the author writes concerning the quincunx maneuver, "the gaps, or at least some of them, were filled before the armies clashed. (The main battle sequence in the film 'Spartacus' shows this happening.)" And the author continues by saying, "each maniple simply extended its frontage [or] if the maniple was drawn up two centuries deep, the rear centuries may have run out (almost certainly to the left and right) and formed up alongside the century in the line itself. On balance this seems the more likely method of deployment."
I also read about a battle between caesar and the gauls where the gaps remained and were neither filled by Romans or the enemy, the barbarians attacked each extended group of romans front to front with their own separated groups and ignored the gaps
Thats why these movies were so expensive everything was happen on screen, bad use of cgi really hearts emotion or feeling of involvement
I have seen this movie and the entire 4 part series on Netflix I love the original movie but the Netflix version is okay for people who never saw the original movie like did when I was a kid!👍😊😉😇😄😁
You could replicate this well in CGI. The problem today is not CGI, but the pace and technique. Most people who go to cinemas and justify the 100-200 million dollars investment in a movie production would complain this scene above was too boring.
Spectacular scene...no way you could do it today...could you even find enough extras, much less the cost?
This was so much better than newer films and CGI... no comparison!!!!
This is among the greatest battle scenes in cinema history before the first proverbial shot is even fired.
Ricostruzione perfetta !
Movie makers just can't make em like this any more.....way to expensive these days.
I beg to differ. It's NOTHING, REPEAT NOTHING, for a film to cost $100 million nowadays, and all you get is comic-book "heroes", instead of the real thing...
+Optimusnorm
You actually forget that the biggest portion of a movie cost is the main actors and advertisement, the equipment cost the least, the extras are after that, all in all you could replicate a scene like this today very easily without CGI indeed.
when they do they cant resist outrageous numbers as in Troy, and 300, just because they cant resist the CGI
SMGJohn CGI could never replicate the feel of this spectacle
Que dolor ver gente humilde y humillada levantarse contra un imperio cruel....no merecían perder ....y ser liquidados de esa forma.... eternos...héroes y simbolos de la libertad....hasta niños han de ver peleado esa batalla...
Awesome scene.
this is the Wonder pull films that i ataimt to see in hole years
Best War scene
about as close to authenticity as possible
60 years later ... Yet none others have come as close.
To think, this was the Spanish Army (Franco’s men) who drilled this. Can you imagine how kinetic and fluid the real thing was? What strikes the watcher is the impeccable drilling and fighting order of these men. The real thing was far, far more terrifying.
Was surprised to learn this was Kubrick but looking at this scene in particular it is clear that it is a Kubrick film.
Yes... This panoramic scene has Stanley Kubrick written all over it... Still considered by many historians to be the best ever representation of how the Roman Army went into a set-piece battle... Still good after 60 years... IMO this preparation for battle actually made this film better than any others...
I can't believe these are all extras and real people
Very very very n VERY impressive formation marching indeed. Wonderfully scripted AND SUCH well COMPOSED to fit Roman legion marching MUSIC indeed. Formation like this SHOULD HAVE sending powerful messages, psychological, that you are up against or confronting well train mighty Roman legion Army n saying you will be defeated... Another surely class movie acting by Kirk Douglas n may you live over 120 n EVEN surpass French women almost 123 years, 122 and 7 months about. So be it, I hope. Wish Kirk would or should have took care of him MORE when he was starting 50 or so. ALL that drinking, punching, kicking will get you LIKE Charles Bronson, he borrowed name from 1930 stat, n die with or EVEN before dye HARDLY walk n WHAT the hel happened when Charles Bronson has SUCH impressive physical shape when he was making movie like Apache.... All these guys lacking a bit common sense NOT thinking about their hard earned money after retire...
Thanks! I've never seen this wide screen version before! :)
+Fabian Patrizio
You're welcome :)
Look at this - no CGI, no computer graphics, no special effects. Just 50,000 men. There was a painted backdrop by necessity so that jet trails from airliners would be eliminated, but WOW, just look at this!
there must be a more remastered version of this?
Rodado frente al cerro de San Pedro.. Colmenar Viejo. Madrid. España
imagine if people did this movie accurate or the tv show. Spartacus was brilliant but he outnumbered crasus 3 to 1 and they lost because of a lack of discipline
@clark cimmerian Look up the facts. The whole entire war saw Spartacus out number the Romans. Even the final battle saw Crasus outnumbered, and he still beat the breaks off him.
Que buena escena
R.I.P. Kirk Douglas.
I believe SPARTACUS played by KIRK DOUGLAS is more exciting and packed with actions than the rival BEN HUR of CHARLTON HESTON. This was the bitter times of Kirk Douglas not being chosen for the role of BEN HUR. It may be an irony he was not favored for the role because he was destined to produce the greater blockbuster film of a triumphant slave-gladiator who will capture the imagination of modern day film makers of the epic SPARTACUS.
those two characters had similar motivations but driven by different experiences
Quite right. In 1958, Kirk Douglas went to MGM asking for the role of Judah Ben Hur but MGM wanted Charlton Heston instead offering the role of Mesalla to Douglas who was so offended he decided to use his Bryna (his mom's first name) company to start up Spartacus. Ben Hur was a great movie but I like Spartacus better.
@@Rickwmc
Good insight Bro. Strongly agree. Sorry for late reply.
kubrick obviously had some research done on roman legions. The divisional structure of centuria and cohorts is visible, you can count the blocks of roughly 100 men lumped toghether in "double centuria" where youre typical first legionary cohort would have 5 of such double centuria. You can also clearly distinguish the centurions and optio's who respectivly lead their centuria from the front and back,, you can see them in about the right proportional number spread across all the centuria if you look close. Rome's subdivisional structure was relativly innovative for ancient times, it allowed far more tactical flexibilety and allowed for more complex moves and maneuvers when lead by good centurions that could work toghether and take independant initiative where needed.
Seems a bit odd that the Romans would first send in a thin line of skirmishers against Spartacus's army. Maybe they did it to test the strength of their enemy, as the Zulus did to the British in the film "Zulu".
No CGI back then.
In the days when an extra could earn a crust of bread.
Great visuals, but it seems improbable that the Romans should have marched all the way up to the enemy line without throwing their javelins first (causing confusion in the first ranks, which held the burning mats).
Indeed. the only thing that annoy me in this battle scene is the fact legionaries are carrying what look like spears instead of pila (the javelins). And if it is actually pila then it is quite inaccurate as far as i known. The roman legionnaries used to carry at least one pilum, often two (a heavy and a light one). Standard procedure was : advance , throw one or two pila at close range in order to break enemy's line (and shields as well ), then engage close-combat with short sword.
Why isn’t General Crassus (Lawrence Olivier) wearing a helmet?
My guess is that we can recognize him in the scene
A great scene, but it was a shame the director:Stanley Kubrick disowned the film after completing it .There were some great moments in it, and everyone who performed in it and the crew who helped make it deserved full credit.
In reality, Spartacus took a gamble as he attacked Crassus who was trailing him,but he stood no chance against the professional Roman legions, although he did come close to killing Crassus before he fell himself
@clark cimmerian Well, it's still a shame that certain people acted that way then.
Crassus was tailing him all throughout Italy, had him cornered a couple times, but Spartacus’ army would escape; however, once Pompey’s legions started on their way to Italy, Spartacus HAD to give battle. His ONLY chance was to defeat Crassus quickly then turn to face Pompey; basically, zero chance of success.
There is still a lot of interesting conjectures. I always wondered if Spartacus had succeeded in getting his people over the Alps and successfully escaped the Romans. Of course, it's not known if anyone in his force knew where the passes were, so it's perhaps a strong possibility they didn't want to chance it,instead still seeking glory and plunder when they turned back. Whatever the reason, it was a fatal error of judgment.
AY? Y did SK disown the film?
AND what has SK got against 'military' authority figures ie the gladiator trainer in this film, & the US C drill sergeant in Full Metal Jacket?
DID he have a bad experience as a recruit in the military?
@@redwingrob1036 Obviously. he thought it was rubbish. Everybody still performed well in the scene though. Still one of my favourites.
¡Que impresionante lo que fue Roma!
Magistral escena, epica
I'm Spartacus!.......No, I'm Spartacus!.......I thought that guy over there was Spartacus...............Who ME? I'm not Spartacus..............My brother is Spartacus.................Wait!!! I thought that was my sister that was Spartacus...........Aw hell, We're all Spartacus!!!!!.
If this was true i could never understand why Spartacus did not disrupt the Romans from forming up. Surely a good commander would have done this in stead of standing there.
Love this Movie , movies nowadays only use those green screens and it looks shit
+TheBerghain Prince
You should have a look on the amazing battle scenes from "Waterloo" (1970) by Sergueï Bondartchouk. If you don't know it already :)
And the EXTREMELY realistic battle scenes from 2002's "Napoleon", which co-stars John Malkovich & Gerard Depardieu. (The entire 6 hour mini-series is right here on TH-cam!!)
( CLASSIC. MUCIC .BATTLE. AND THE ONE AND ONLY. SPARTACUS. KIRK DOUGLAS. THIS ROLE. MADE HIM A. LEGEND.) NO OTHER ⭐️. COULD EVER. TAKE HIS PLACE.
The soldier who make the roman army was real spanish soldiers
@AzraeL
No, but i think you understand me. The soldier in the film was professional spanish soldier.
SPANISH army extras again...The Patton film too.
You cut the clip too soon!
How it is done? Be fore CGI?
No CGI back then
В кадре 2 римских легиона. Каждый из которых выстроен из 10 когорт. У Красса на этот момент их было вроде бы 8. ) И всё равно сцена наступления римлян просто давящая
В детстве смотрел фильм в кинотеатре 5 раз)
War should be like this, look the enemy in the eye, no sitting in a chair pushing a button.
And, And, came the Night. .., Better too Die on your Feet, than live on your knees
I always remember this scene they knew they couldn't win but decided f### death is better than slavery
That moment when you realize you're totally fucked...
THEY DIDN'T HAVE FLAT TOPS IN ANCIENT ROME
0:11
Is that Michael Gough?
Although this scene is fantastic it suggests a larger army of Crassus which was not true. In fact the army of the slaves was far larger (~75.000 vs ~40.000 soldiers) but the roman soldiers had better equipment and were trained to fight. Moreover a second army (Pompejus) was approaching and even caught and killed slaves that fled after the defeat.
Es una lástima que no esté la película completa aunque sea por "capítulos" :(
Just the way the rebels stand there, watching with dignity and courage, facing the coming slaughter, committed to do their best to defend their freedom.
I thought battles were all supposed to be big disorganised blob 1 and big disorganised blob 2 charge headlong into each other and within second break into little more than a big mix of individual melees.
Well I think the Romans were far more sophisticated than that! But you may be correct once the fighting is well underway. As a fellow participant said to me at a live action role-play (LARP) event, "When you're in a battle all the fancy stuff goes out the window!"
@@johnnyb8825 I was More referring to how battles are usually shown in TV, they never die any sense of control or tactics.
Back than, that was the key for winning the war to keep battle formation, not to run away, even when the next soldier in the line has been chopped to pieces.
Cavalry, the attacking horses, knights had the job to break up enemy formations, running them down.
Undisciplined enemy often just ran away scared from the horses rushing at them.
Barbarians were not trained to this kind of high skill level of fighting, because it took lot of training for years and discipline for the army and using high tech weapons of those times.
That's why the city Venice was built on water and flourished for hundreds of years , barbarians didn't have the skill to build boats or large war ships to effectively attack on water.
@@szaki There was also the fact that the warrior ethic of "barbarian" tribes was based more on individual bravery than on collective discipline. Warriors were showing off to their own comrades as much as trying to frighten and defeat the enemy. They did occasionally pull off spectacular victories over the Romans though, especially when the latter were lured onto unsuitable terrain, as happened at the Battle of Tuteborg Forest in which Germanic tribes wiped out three Roman legions. Northern British Celtic tribes probably did something similar to the Roman 9th Legion.
@@johnnyb8825 Battle of Tuteborg Forest was different, it was inside dense forest and the barbarians hit upon the Romans, surprise attack, as they were marching through the forest.
Romans were good in open field battles.
It's like fighting a terrorist proxy army of today, totally different warfare.
No use for heavy weapons.