GamerTab That was an excellent one.

Odelecol Pretty good movie overall. First half was nothing special but it got better as it went along.

Tayloriona Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Francene Odetta It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

jacobs-greenwood A pre-code epic by director-producer Cecil B. DeMille featuring one of my favorite actresses, Claudette Colbert in the famous milk bath scene, as well as the great Fredric March. It's near the end of the Roman Empire, Nero fiddles while Rome burns, and Christians are fed to the lions. Karl Struss received an Oscar nomination for his Cinematography. Another version of the story can be seen in Quo Vadis (1951).In 64 A.D., Marcus Superbus (March) is the great warrior of Rome who falls for Mercia (Elissa Landi), a Christian girl. However, Marcus is coveted by Poppaea (Colbert), the wife of Nero (Charles Laughton), who can influence the Emperor. Another with this ability is Tigellinus (Ian Keith), a warrior jealous of Marcus's power. Tigellinus asserts his influence over Nero to have the blame for Rome's burning blamed on the Christians, so that they can be rounded up and/or executed.Titus (Arthur Hohl) brings news from Jesus's disciple Paul, making the acquaintance of fellow Christian Favius (Harry Beresford) by making the "sign of the cross" on the ground. Nat Pendleton, a loyal Roman "thug", witnesses this as well as Marcus's saving of Mercia, Titus, and her father Favius, and reports it to Tigellinus. Meanwhile, the Christians are planning a big meeting for Titus's report, and Favius's son Stephan (Tommy Conlon) will be used to pass the secret location & time to others. However, he is captured (by Pendleton) and tortured by the Romans to reveal the information such that Tigellinus takes his troops to ambush and kill the Christians.When Marcus hears of this, he and men loyal to him rush to the scene, but are delayed by Poppaea, who is jealous of anything which draws him away from her. So they arrive too late to stop Tigellinus's slaughter of many of the Christians including Titus and Favius. The rest are imprisoned to later be fed to the lions, bears, alligators, and even crushed by elephants as entertainment for spectators in the Colosseum.However, Marcus has his second in command, Lecinius (William Mong), take Mercia to his home where she can be protected. There, she witnesses debauchery as he tries to get her to renounce her religion to be safe and live with him. She resists and instead tries to "save" him. There's a great dance sequence featuring Ancaria (Joyzelle Joyner) as she and Marcus's house guests try to corrupt Mercia. There's another scene in which Poppaea (with Colbert dressed to kill;-) tries to sway Marcus's favor, only to be rejected such that she uses her influence with Nero to have Mercia taken from his residence.I won't reveal the ending, except to say that it's both tragic and hopeful. Also, Charles Middleton plays Tyros, and Mischa Auer and John Carradine appear uncredited in this large production.

David Atfield How did DeMille do it? How did he make a film that is wildly decadent, revelling in the debaucheries of Ancient Rome, while still making it a moving tribute to the Christian martyrs of the time? The way he balances spectacle, comedy, drama, moralising and debauchery is pure genius! If you've never seen a pre-Hollywood-production-code movie before you may be surprised to see a glimpse of Claudette Colbert's nipples as she's bathing in milk, to see an erotic lesbian dance sequence, to see a naked young man sitting next to the very gay Nero of Charles Laughton! And then DeMille joyously recreates a whole day of gruesome spectacles in the arena in all their gruesome detail. But then, somehow, he switches the whole mood and, thanks to excellent performances from Fredric March, Elissa Landi and young Tommy Conlon, creates a deeply moving finale, that tragically anticipates the horrors of the Holocaust. An amazing film in every way, and so much better than "Quo Vadis"!

oldblackandwhite Cecil B. DeMille and others who made movies about Bibical and Early Christian subjects very well knew that they could get away with a lot more sex and violence in this type of picture. In The Sign Of The Cross Cecil B. pushes both to and over the limit that was allowable in the early talkie era.The basic plot is quite similar to the now better known Quo Vadis (1950): high-ranking Imperial Roman official (Fredrick March) falls madly in love with pious, aloof Christian girl (Elissa Landi) in the time of Nero's cruel persecution of Christians. The outcome in this earlier epic is quiet different and much grimmer.As with all of Cecil B.'s epic productions, The Sign Of The Cross is big, glossy, splashy, sexy, exotic, exciting, and tasteless. His extravaganzas are usually great fun, even in their tastelessness -- much in the same way the better spaghetti westerns are. This one unfortunately misses the fun angle with the tasteless angle unusually in the forefront. It is a very handsome production with sensuous black and white cinematography by Karl Struss, a rousing score credited to Rudolph G. Kopp, rich sets, and striking costumes -- especially those of Claudette Colbert (as the wicked Poppaea).As in other DeMille Bibical or early Christian epics, he attempts to contrast the purity and faithfulness of God's people with the empty, hedonistic debauchery of the pagans. Unfortunately the comparison here misses the intended mark. The Christians come off as grim and joyless, stoically awaiting death to deliver them into the Promised Land and never enjoying the peace, freedom, security and other blessings of leading a Christian life. On the other hand the scenes of debauchery, including the gorgeous Miss Colbert's famous (or infamous if you will) ass milk bath just make it look as if the pagans have all the fun and never suffer because of it.The violence of the arena scenes is incredible and disgusting for a movie of this era -- human beings decapitated, speared, forked, impaled, crushed by elephants, eaten by crocodiles, and raped by a gorilla. The camera continually panning to the crowd and showing the sadistic pleasure of the spectators heightens the horror of these scenes. Since most of this carnage is visited upon the followers of Christ, it will no doubt be much enjoyed by both gore hounds and Christian-hating modern-day pagans (known as New Agers, secular humanists, and atheists). My Christian bothers and sisters who doubt this need only read the message boards for The Sign Of The Cross and Quo Vadis.The Sign Of The Cross is not a good movie for most Christians. Along with the gross violence, there is much near and partial nudity, including bare breasts and see-thru dresses. A Christian girl is subjected to a lesbian assault, and other scenes picture implied lesbianism and homosexuality. Children and you more sensitive adult Christians will not want to watch this movie. It is loaded with exactly the type of sex and violence you are trying to avoid by watching old-timers like this instead of newer movies. True, the scenes of the Christians bravely meeting martyrdom with a hymn on their lips is moving, but this and the rest of the theme were done much better in Quo Vadis. Besides which Quo Vadis has a better-developed, more believable plot, better-cast leads, a better burning of Rome, a more fleshed out Nero, and it is an even more beautifully turned out production.Nevertheless, The Sign Of The Cross will be especially enjoyed by two other classes of modern pagans who are more sensuous than sinister. First that great mass of mostly young, simple-minded savages who worship the alluring goddesses Slutcia and Pervertcia and the great gods Gore and Bore. They will be thrilled to find in this ancient movie's gratuitous sex and violence the great-great-grandmother of the digital trashoramas now turned out by the hundreds just for them. The priests and priestesses of the great god Auteur (film class graduates) will lead them as they prostate themselves before a giant freeze-frame of Caludette's glorious ass milk scene and chant, "Pre-code....pre-code...pre-code...precode..."

hist2313 Lots of people here have criticized CB for the arena scenes.I, myself, found these scenes disturbing. On the other hand, CB is simply using the Roman accounts (primarily Suetonius) of what actually happened in the arena.In other words, the horror that CB shows on film is what happened.Sorry if the accuracy of this film disturbs some folks; but what happened in the arena was disturbing. The apes, the women, the children, all these events are described to us by the Romans themselves.If you get your dander up with this film, what of "The Passion of the Christ?" Also an accurate depiction of Roman Justice.