What makes it different from others?

Better Late Then Never

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Blistering performances.

Unlike most other European sword and sandal movies of this period, "The Giant of Marathon" was picked up for North American distribution by a major Hollywood studio (Metro Goldwyn Mayer). My guess is that MGM was trying to cash in on the box office success that independent studio Embassy Pictures has with "Hercules", another sword and sandal movie with the same actor (Steve Reeves). That's the only reason why I can think of, because honestly I can't see any other selling points that the movie has. Even by standards of the era, the movie is really dull for the most part; for one thing, there is almost no action in the first half of the movie. While the second half does have some battlefield action, it's not particularly well choreographed or directed; it's not that much more exciting than what happened in the first half of the movie. Most of the movie is instead talk talk talk, none it it really engaging or interesting. I'm sure audiences back then were really bored by this movie. So it's no wonder that nobody was apparently interested in renewing the copyright for the movie, since it's now in the public domain and freely available to bore a new generation of moviegoers.

A rousing Italian/French peplum adventure yarn, teaming screen legend Steve Reeves with a fine director in Jacques Tourneur and one of the best directors of photography in Italian history - Mario Bava. The combination makes for a beautifully-shot, colourful, and well paced movie, which is a bit slow to start off but soon comes into its own with imaginative battle sequences and a story which is always moving.A clean-shaven Reeves plays Phillipides, an Olympic legend who is a hit with all the ladies - and who finds himself torn between a forbidden beauty, Andromeda, and Karis, a woman ordered to seduce him by the bad guys and who ends up falling in love instead. These romantic subplots are what make up the first half of the film, interspersed with plenty of dancing, a few fights here and there and lots of sweeping spectacle thanks to Bava, who really gives the film an expensive-looking veneer.The second half of the movie concerns an invasion by the Persians, with Phillipides attempting to rally the Spartans to his cause. There's an excellently-shot hand-to-hand combat scene involving an emissary who is attacked by a gang of cut-throats, who outnumber him 5-to-1 but still end up getting beaten. Then the film culminates in an fine sea battle in which the Olympic heroes chuck burning spears at the approaching enemy ship, which retaliates by crushing their own ship with an awkward pair of pincers! At this point, there's also some great underwater photography and lots of violence as underwater attackers are shot and speared by the enemy. Finally, a battle ensues, of which you can probably guess the outcome.Reeves is as good as ever as the masculine hero, and here he's supported by a strong cast which offers some good female characters. Tourneur's direction is assured and Bava's camera-work gives the film fine visual splendour. While the plot may be familiar, even interchangeable stuff, GIANT OF MARATHON is still a fine piece of solid entertainment.

Why is this epic so good? Because it has J. Tourneur as its director, thus even in a genre movie the director still makes a great difference. This lavish epic is one of the best of its genre, doubtlessly because it has been directed by J. Tourneur, whose consummate knowledge and intelligent subtlety shows, and who restored here the glamour of the genre, somewhat irrespective of the actual script, as if a less schematic, more dramatic script was required, the one he got is passable, the political turmoil is well conveyed (dissensions between Athenians, between Greeks, the Persian threat), but a bit schematic; thus we verify the principle that the director makes the movie, because he makes everything come together and gives it style, even in the unpretentious genre cinema, where a good director is still needed, is still indispensable.'Marathon''s style is very smooth, J. Tourneur taking the script as an occasion for displaying his mastery, thus giving it an almost generic and refined feel, very suitable for an eminently classical story, and highly representative for how the French generally feel the classical age. The evening scene, when Philippides visits the courtesan while the Athenian girls gather at an altar, is refreshing. Prior to the battles, the plowman has two fight scenes, one with a wrestler, another with the henchmen sent to stop his travel to Sparta. This might be the one s & s movie that, by its smoothness and elegance, doesn't resemble structurally the '30s B movies, like most other s & s installments do.The travel, the messaging are a running theme. The leading character is Philippides, and the story ends with his triumph. The lavishness gives poignancy to the landscapes and the sea views.The surreal look of the underwater scenes was ably emphasized.Here Daniela Rocca reminded me of Stefania Sandrelli's look, perhaps the same youthful plumpness.The leading bodybuilders of the '50s and '50s genre cinema were handsome, unlike many of those of the '80s and '90s; even Ursus looked like Dudikoff. The fashion and trend of having athletes and bodybuilders in suitable movies did begin in the '50s, but has been preceded by kindred fashionable movies, like the early epics and some jungle yarns, therefore something else was needed other than showing undressed bodybuilders to begin a trend and a fashion, and one could wonder why the '20s and '30s athletes didn't start this trend ….There are avoidable anachronisms, like the style of Philippides' country home. Also, it seems likely that the director believed less in this movie, which results in it having the look of a trailer, of a video, until the Persians arrive, then the battle scenes, either on ground or on sea, are unrivaled.

Giant of Marathon could have been a really good movie. It's got a lot going for it. Steve Reeves, fresh off his stint as Hercules, is good and dependable in this kind of movie. He did Sword and Sandal as good as anyone. The movie also has some very nice action sequences. I'm far from an expert, but the battle scenes in Giant of Marathon are the best I've seen in a Sword and Sandal. My favorite bit had to be the ship equipped with James Bond style pinchers that were used to sink other ships. Nice touch. The movie also features a "good" bad guy. Teocrito is about as villainous as they come.But the movie isn't what I would call "really good". It has far too many problems. The first is the love story underlying the action. The love scenes are so corny that they are difficult to watch. Cringe inducing is the best way I can think to describe it. Another real and more important problem is that parts of Giant of Marathon can be incredibly boring. When the battle scenes aren't on screen, nothing happens - a lot of ridiculous talk that isn't in the least interesting.