It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Great movie. Not sure what people expected but I found it highly entertaining.

Prominent stage actress of the day Helen Gardner never became part of the Hollywood scene. This production of Cleopatra was done at her eastern based studio and the supporting cast is made up of players from the Broadway stage. As such the film is a curiosity for those who want a glimpse of people on the stage in those years before World War I.Ms. Gardner makes one buxom Cleopatra, one like you will not likely see again. But that Lillian Russell type figure was considered the standard of beauty back then. Wonder what Lillian Russell might have thought had she seen this film?For 1912 it's a bit risqué. In addition to the standard story of Mark Antony and Cleopatra there's also a story line here about a humble fisherman who has the hots for his Queen and Cleo takes him on as a boy toy.I really was not impressed with the added music soundtrack and singing of modern type music, jarringly out of place for the time. This really cries for a theater organ.It's a museum this Cleopatra, nothing more.

At the peak of her fame, Vitagraph "vamp" star Helen Gardner formed her own company and released this ambitious multi-reel feature. But, while financially and critically successful, this dreadful "Cleopatra" proved to be a gross artistic miscalculation by Ms. Gardner and director/partner Charles L. Gaskill. Some context is required. In 1912, "movies" were widely considered to be a vulgar and cheap form of entertainment, when compared to the "legitimate theater." For example, snooty critics saw movie close-ups as inferior because they only showed part of the actor, and many performers refused to appear in flickering films.Apparently, Gardner and her company shot "Cleopatra" with theatrical intentions. So, the carrying around of fake sets in front of a static camera was intentional; the crew could have gone out on location, but didn't. Moreover, Gardner's wild gesturing purposefully imitated a stage style of acting. Probably, Gardner hoped she and "Cleopatra" would surpass Sarah Bernhardt's recently released "Queen Elizabeth" (1912) in critical acclaim. Instead, it looks like Gardner forgot how to act. And, with her full figure unflatteringly accented by off-camera fans, she looks dreadful. This "Cleopatra" leaves us with only its historical importance.** Cleopatra (11/13/12) Charles L. Gaskill ~ Helen Gardner, Charles Sindelar, Helene Costello, Harry Knowles

I was watching with interest the 1912 production and found it fascinating by the different acting styles strong and weak in the primarily static shots until I realized that each scene may have meant to be tableaux that come to life. Charles Sindelar was a strong looking Anthony and thought the actress playing Octavia was more accessible to modern audiences.The so-called score made probably by some spoiled New York Artists especially that hideous groaning woman was really dreadful,but as with most scores to silents just a flick of the mute button can help as great silents stand on their silence alone!

I'm amazed to see a 1912 feature that's almost 90 minutes long. By contrast, "From the Manger to the Cross" is under 70 min. The tinting and restoration are good, the modern music by Chantal Kreviazuk is interesting if unnecessary (there's no reason to be turned off by it--you can always play your own music!). The film is not in "pure" tableau style but in modified tableaus. That is, there is some cross-cutting from different locations, and dialogue cards do interrupt the shots. The first scene is even somewhat distracting in its cutaways to a man who is a short distance away. During the battle of Actium, the camera suddenly goes in for a series of near close-ups of Cleopatra and Antony from the waist up, and the entire scene is told in these alternating shots with captions. (A way to avoid staging a battle.) The scene in which she barges down the Nile and seduces Antony is a typical example of "film d'art" tableau style, with only dialogue interrupting the shot occasionally. The major lengthy sequence at the end, however, begins in two locations: in Cleo's chamber on an upper floor and outside on the ground below, and Antony is raised up through the window on a rope, then for the rest of the complex scene the camera pans right and left as called for by the action. Fascinating and typically noble.