this scene was censored in the original version because it alludes to crassus bisexuality (too indecent for the 60's) i think it was reinserted in the film just in the 90's.
Turned out that reinserting it wasn't that easy. The sound had deteriorated so badly that the dialogue had to be re-recorded. Tony Curtis was still alive and did the voice over for his own character. But Olivier was dead. So they looked to Anthony Hopkins, who was a protege of Olivier's. He did a great job, but once I knew, I could hear the difference.
The DVD added the scene back. The film survived without voice work. Curtis was still alive to revoice his share of the track, then aged 66. Olivier was deceased, his voice was done by Anthony Hopkins.
For what it’s worth, even the theatrical cut caught flak from right wing / conservatives because, check this out, HOW DARE THIS STUPID FILM PUT THE HEATHEN UPSTART TO DIE ON A CROSS?!?!?! Like, do they actually believe the Romans INVENTED Crucifixion just for Jesus?
***** Thank goodness for the modern digital age. And the fact that this scene wasn't burned when edited out of the theatrical cut. We're lucky it still exists at all.
@@jeitoots Well, many years later and with director’s control firmly in his grasp, Kubrick would go on to make another “two films in one” in the form of FMJ.
How I love what censorship does to script writers! Brings out their creativity! Such a creative way to come out as bisexual. :) I'll steal it if I ever need to come out as bisexy.
@Romano Coombs Crassus owns Antoninus. He already has complete power over him, legally. Slaves had few rights. He might want to fuck Antoninus to express his feeling of power, or he may just fancy him, and is pointing out to him that he really doesn't have a lot of choice in that setup. He's already enslaved. He's property. So the power relationships are very different from modern, free people who have rights under law. Anty is already diminished and degraded, every day of his life. His only choice is to run away, and that makes him a criminal under Roman law.
Anyone knew that Anthony Hopkins did an impression of Laurence Olivier. The sound of this scene was originally lost, but was recovered for DVD release.
+Second Residence Productions Explains why the majority of bathing is done in long shots and we hear only the dialogues from both characters mainly! A scene like this would've originally had close ups of the faces of the principal actors in a scene like this in question, right? So they took easier on themselves and cut back by not showing any closeups while the dialogue from the scene itself plays out by Tony Curtis and Laurence Olivier/'Anthony Hopkins' (verbal dialogue *'*). This remastering of Spartacus took place back in 1990/91, so there wasn't any digital editing computers that could've blended even the best audio dubbing (ADR) with the facial movements in a film running at 24 frames a second. audiences would've noticed it moreso. but had they actually risked it looking kinda "off" and weird, the closeups would've been reworked yet still years later (into the 2000's and as of today i.e. the recent 2015 remastering etc) possibly they could've used blur-motion and made absolutely sure the audio dubbing matched the facial movements once it was all edited together more smoothly. And finally be made to be 99% undetectable perhaps?, who can say for sure had more closeups and different camera shot angles, been used here for the 1991 remastering!
The restored bath scene only. And it reportedly took the restorers quite the while to find an Olivier impressionist. They then asked his widow Dame Joan Plowright who said that Hopkins did an impression of Olivier in front of Olivier...and Olivier never spoke to him again. Moral: Sometimes it IS a gift, but you'd better know when to give it. P.S. That's a much older Tony Curtis dubbing himself.
"During the film (Spartacus), Curtis and Laurence Olivier shot a very controversial scene. The scene where these two lather one another was full of sexual chemistry and implied an attraction towards each other. Producers decided not to film the scene since censors would probably cut it out anyway. This was a decision that enraged Tony and he fought to have to scene filmed. In an attempt to keep the peace, the studio agreed and the scene was shot. What they didn’t tell the actors was that they didn’t bother to use sound because it wasn’t going to be used anyway. However, Curtis’s fight raised some questions about his personal life."
@@spacemanski Olivier's wife Dame Joan Plowright recommended Hopkins for the restoration recording because she had heard his eerily accurate impersonation of her late husband's voice, and praised Hopkins' mimicry when it was released. I'd say that her opinion was authoritative.
@@robertedson2374 It was re-released in 1991. A team of 30 archivists restored several violent battle sequences that had been left out because of the negative reaction of preview audiences. Among the deleted footage was a bath scene in which the Roman patrician and general Crassus attempts to seduce his slave Antoninus, speaking about the analogy of "eating oysters" and "eating snails" to express his opinion that sexual preference is a matter of taste rather than morality. The four-minute scene had been removed following an objection by the National Legion of Decency. When the film was restored (two years after Olivier's death), the original dialogue recording of this scene was missing; it had to be redubbed. Tony Curtis, by then 66, was able to re-record his part, but Crassus's voice was an impersonation of Olivier by Anthony Hopkins, who had been suggested by Olivier's widow, Joan Plowright. A talented mimic, Hopkins had been a protégé of Olivier's during Olivier's days as the National Theatre's artistic director, and had portrayed Crassus in the Jeff Wayne musical album. The actors separately recorded their dialogue.
You'd never drink a chianti w/ snails & oysters, you need a white. A red wine was chosen for the guy's liver b/c it was red meat. Remember cannibals, always eat people w/ red wine. Red also goes w/ Soylent Green for some reason.
Powerful message and display of psychology. Crassus can take whatever he wants. Him trying to relate the symbolism of his power over his servants reflects on the ideological views of the Roman Empire. Showing Glabrus and his cohorts depart for battle is the power. The sentiments and words are the laws he is speaking. As you see Antoninus wasn't having that.
He actually was grooming him. Wen he talked about snails and oysters (aphrodisiac) he means heterosexual and homosexual. He said he liked both. Edit: he questioned how taste would have morals. And then he compared himself to Rome. you must love her. Pple didn’t understand it when it first came out but Hollywood did.
@@hissonggirlmoni5706 'People' understood it perfectly, there was picketing and protests outside of movie theaters, until the premise of the dialogue was removed
I think oysters imply a vagina and snails a penis. Thus, when Olivier says he likes both oysters and snails he basically means he likes men and women. :)
Saba T It is not that these food creatures physically represent or resemble human genitalia, it IS rather a moral metaphor in the sense that oysters are a more common, mainstream, conventional taste, and until recently in "modern" history, "snails"and/or homosexuality was an "acquired", unusual and improper, ie: immoral "taste". Listen to the dialogue again.
oH mY! "You must love Rome. Bow to her and eat snails and oysters!!" Yep Boy Servant knew what time it was. That bath was just foreplay. "Fetch me the snails and oysters man boy body servant!" He ran off like a thief in the night! Guess he wasn't feeling old dude....
I would like to know the history on this scene. People below say it was cut from the theatrical version, but I swear I saw the movie on T.V. as a kid and this scene was in it. Only once--it never was in any version again. I actually more or less figured out what it meant, and for the 60s-70s it was a bit of a shocker, so it stuck in my mind and I'm pretty sure it was broadcast at some point. I think also the scene with Woody Strode hanging by his feet was also in that broadcast, and I didn't see that again either for years.
It's interesting if a documentary confirmation can be found. However it is to be kept in mind that memory is unreliable, sometimes new knowledge combines into past events and changes the way they are remembered. Even the emotion that you found the scene shocking may have been caused by something else and later merged in memory.
Historically, Antoninus would have been naked in the bath with his master and probably in the lounge afterward. Unfortunately one could not do that when the film first came out and still not to this day.
Oh how creepy! Now I can't only think "How do we begin to covet? We begin by coveting what we see every day. Don't you feel eyes moving over your body, Antoninus?"
Audio was lost in this scene. In 1991 Tony Curtis dubbed his own voice an Anthony Hopkins dubbed Olivier. They used Hopkins because Rich Little wanted too much money
That was Kirk Douglas' casting choice: Brits playing Romans and Americans playing slaves. The only two exceptions were Jean Simmons as a slave girl who became the mother of Spartacus' child and John Gavin as a young Julius Caesar.
I guess it makes sense. A lot of the decisions made in historical movies, like Greek statues being marble white instead of painted, are for the benefit of the modern audience. I bet a fair few people heard the slaves' accents in this movie and thought, "Oh, the poors," in that way people tend to class regional accents.
To me, this just sounds like Hannibal Lecter talking about eating sweetbreads. Creepy. Before I knew for certain it was Hopkins, I immediately thought of him rather than Olivier. It's a decent imitation, but not great.
wait... is this about sex? is oysters whoha and snails (slugs) are weenies? and as the young buck slave is rubbing his naked body, he's inquiring about his sexual proclivities before announcing he likes both oysters AND snails? And do men REALLY like both or does culture require they eat oysters when really... all they want is snails? you never hear a man tell a woman he likes oysters and snails. They're always asking the boys.
Who besides the Romans of all race & culture enjoys gluttony, lust, and probably the biggest sinners; yet hypocrisy during these times. Ironically, it's them who enforce the power of the Catholic Law amongst their civilization. I fine this movie and this scene well played and script for it's time metaphorically. Loves it!!
Amanda there is duality and moral conflict present in all civilizations. Especially those who seek to attain absolute power under the guise of a republic and to have the rest of the world "bow to her" in an effort to spread and maintain that civilization's way of life. I love this scene as well. Thanks for sharing it and your opinion.
This isn't the first time that an older male character tries to seduce a younger male character in a Kubrick film. In "A Clockwork Orange," a social worker made a pass at "Little Alex" while he was only wearing his underpants! Censorship wasn't an issue at that time, so I guess it was permitted if the seduction is primarily physical and not overtly verbal.
@@DavidTSmith-jn5bs Spartacus was super early in Kubrick's career, 1960. I think the Hays Code ceased to exist in 68 or 69, a few years before A Clockwork Orange. Assuming also that the former is an Americna production and the latter a UK one so different ballparks.
Ancient Rome "gay" didnt exist. They borrowed from ancient Greek culture where men would use sex as a teaching tool for adolescent boys, but they would all marry women. It was not "gay" rather, a part of being a man. The upper classes would throw parties and hire lute girls (prostitutes) for the guests. Higher classes would have boys. It wasnt a bisexual thing, rather a status thing of the ruling class to have sex with both. There were orgies, decadent Dionysian festivals, Saturnalia and so on, but this is just alluding to ancient culture rather than the boss being bisexual.
Want to know something slightly creepier than what this scene portrays? Tony Curtis was only nine years younger than Kirk Douglas. Olivier plays his role in this scene to perfection ('Hmmm?"). Small wonder this scene awaited the film's restoration.
This is a ridiculous, anachronistic scene, totally incomprehensible. Why this game of words to "convince" a slave to have sex? Crassus, as a Roman citizen and the richest man in Rome and perhaps ever, everywhere, had only to order his slave to submit and have sex with him. The prohibition against sex among men only applied when both partners were Roman citizens. Roman men had sex, were expected to have sex with slaves male and female and children, male and female if the children were not Romans. So long as the Roman was the "top", the penetrator, the active partner, he did not have to ask. Especially if he wanted sex with his property. The terms Homosexual or heterosexual nor those concepts existed in Rome.
+manzilla48 Reality has to enter somewhere in order for "well crafted" to exist. Even in Science Fiction. Without the proper motivation, the great Lord Olivier's little ironies and Tony Curtis's embarrassments fall flat, even under the magisterial touch of Stanley Kubrick. The scene, done 18 times until deemed right, is, in itself, perfect. But it must rest, like all art, on the bedrock of truth. The premise is that the powerful Marcus Licinus Crassus is powerless to convince a mere pretty boy slave to have sex, but that Curtis' character, because of his "human dignity" of simply humanity (despite the condition of a slave) firmly refuses. That refusal is an impossibility completely bizarre to a Roman. Trumbo imbued the slave with an impossible, non-existent "quality."
+Diego Visconti Sorry, but you completely missed the point here. Crassus is not trying to "convince" Antoninus of anything. The scene is divided in two parts: in the first, Crassus makes Antoninus understand that he is bissexual, and, as so, appreciates homossexual favors. He asks, in a veiled manner, if he also likes it, which he denies. In the second part of the scene, Crassus then makes explicit his point that he is going to sodomize Antoninus by force, whether he likes it or not: "No man can withstand Rome. No nation can withstand her. How much less... a boy!" Crassus is not being "ironic", he is being gracefully cruel, as he should (i.e, as is demanded by the character Olivier is playing) ; Antoninus is not "embarassed", he is filled with terror ("The might, the majesty, the TERROR of Rome"), and that´s why he risks his life escaping. A perfect scene indeed, perfectly resting "in the bedrock of truth", as you can see. Of course it is not a gross atempeted-rape scene. It is done, in fact, in a sublime way, worthy of the genius of the man involved (Trumbo, Kubrick and Olivier). Perhaps a little too subtle for most people, but nonetheless (or because of this) perfect.
+João Paulo No, no no. There was NO such thing as bisexual in Ancient Rome. The lord, the is Licinus Crassus or any other male Roman, so long as he was the penetrative partner, was perfectly permitted to have sex with ANY slave he so wished. There was no "convincing." To be a passive participant was another story. And Crassus was immensely rich, immensely powerful, perhaps the richest man that ever was. All he heeded to do was summon the slave and have sex with him as Roman men did, without this convoluted stuff about shell fish or whatever. The scene does not work because it would have been impossible. A slave is property, chattel. And a slave leaving without being dismissed? Crassus wouldhae sent him to the mines in Numidia where he would have lasted 60 days.
Diego Visconti I think you're forgetting that this is just a film that's made for artistic and entertainment purposes. Not a documentary. This is an interesting and well done scene.
Why oh why didn't Tony Curtis try and change his accent in this film?!? It's ridiculous hearing a Roman with a Jewish "Noo Yawk" accent! Oy! So grating...and ruins the believability of the scene...
Antoninus, I hear in your accent you are from New York. Then which New York State legal pronoun do you choose then as my bathboy, Gender Blender or Gender Bender. (this is not a joke people.)
Sorry but I see nothing Bisexual in this scene! If Curtis is this guy's slave and he MUST be since he keeps calling him Master...he's just washing him like a slave would do or a servant. There's no kissing or sexual touching at all here. WTF????
this scene was censored in the original version because it alludes to crassus bisexuality (too indecent for the 60's) i think it was reinserted in the film just in the 90's.
It's really an important scene for antoninus. It makes me mad that they cut it.
Turned out that reinserting it wasn't that easy. The sound had deteriorated so badly that the dialogue had to be re-recorded. Tony Curtis was still alive and did the voice over for his own character. But Olivier was dead. So they looked to Anthony Hopkins, who was a protege of Olivier's. He did a great job, but once I knew, I could hear the difference.
we know what was reinserted
@@michaelmcguinness10 No, no. Antoninus made sure nothing was reinserted.
@@VictorLepanto Thats what he told you !
The DVD added the scene back. The film survived without voice work. Curtis was still alive to revoice his share of the track, then aged 66. Olivier was deceased, his voice was done by Anthony Hopkins.
And Sir Anthony got a SPECIAL THANKS TO credit in the restoration end credits.
Well, the restoration was in the 80s so it was on that late 80s/early 90s VHS as well
Hopkins killed it with both the voice and the accent.
That must have taken a lot of balls doing this scene, knowing the censors would be on their ass for it.
Apparently Sulla would have enjoyed that.
For what it’s worth, even the theatrical cut caught flak from right wing / conservatives because, check this out, HOW DARE THIS STUPID FILM PUT THE HEATHEN UPSTART TO DIE ON A CROSS?!?!?!
Like, do they actually believe the Romans INVENTED Crucifixion just for Jesus?
I love the way he buggers off at the mere mention of loving Rome 'Fuck this shit Im off'
Buggers???!!! LOL!!
@@robertedson2374 Yes Buggers 😆😆😆
This is Anthony Hopkins (Silence of the Lambs) dubbing Laurence Olivier's lines since the original audio had been lost.
knightsintodreams ' Wow
I was right then.. about a year ago I was watching Spartacus and noticed this is so Hannibal Lecter I mentioned it on fb... :)
No way
I want to have your snails w/ fava beans & a nice chianti.
@@quantumofconscience6538 Whereas the other actor was still alive and he simply redubbed himself in this.
This is probably the most Kubrickian scene in the entire movie which is otherwise, not very Kubrickian for a Kubrick directed film.
+Zem XXI This really wasn't a Kubrick project. Kirk Douglass was in creative control which is why it doesn't seem "Kubrickian."
***** Thank goodness for the modern digital age. And the fact that this scene wasn't burned when edited out of the theatrical cut. We're lucky it still exists at all.
@@popvinnik always feels like a film split in two. The Kirk Douglas scenes and the Kubrick / Rome scenes. Always fascinating to watch for the latter.
@@jeitoots Well, many years later and with director’s control firmly in his grasp, Kubrick would go on to make another “two films in one” in the form of FMJ.
How I love what censorship does to script writers! Brings out their creativity! Such a creative way to come out as bisexual. :) I'll steal it if I ever need to come out as bisexy.
Good point.
@Romano Coombs Crassus owns Antoninus. He already has complete power over him, legally. Slaves had few rights.
He might want to fuck Antoninus to express his feeling of power, or he may just fancy him, and is pointing out to him that he really doesn't have a lot of choice in that setup. He's already enslaved. He's property. So the power relationships are very different from modern, free people who have rights under law. Anty is already diminished and degraded, every day of his life.
His only choice is to run away, and that makes him a criminal under Roman law.
... I think you just did...
as a bi guy I'll a 100% use this someday to come out
"Do you steal, Antoninus?"
"No, Mastuuhhh."
Anyone knew that Anthony Hopkins did an impression of Laurence Olivier. The sound of this scene was originally lost, but was recovered for DVD release.
Second Residence Productions So this isn't Hopkins' impersonation we're hearing but the original audio with Olivier?
GreenGretel No, this is Hopkins.
+Second Residence Productions Explains why the majority of bathing is done in long shots and we hear only the dialogues from both characters mainly! A scene like this would've originally had close ups of the faces of the principal actors in a scene like this in question, right?
So they took easier on themselves and cut back by not showing any closeups while the dialogue from the scene itself plays out by Tony Curtis and Laurence Olivier/'Anthony Hopkins' (verbal dialogue *'*).
This remastering of Spartacus took place back in 1990/91, so there wasn't any digital editing computers that could've blended even the best audio dubbing (ADR) with the facial movements in a film running at 24 frames a second. audiences would've noticed it moreso. but had they actually risked it looking kinda "off" and weird, the closeups would've been reworked yet still years later (into the 2000's and as of today i.e. the recent 2015 remastering etc) possibly they could've used blur-motion and made absolutely sure the audio dubbing matched the facial movements once it was all edited together more smoothly. And finally be made to be 99% undetectable perhaps?, who can say for sure had more closeups and different camera shot angles, been used here for the 1991 remastering!
***** Fair enough then!
The restored bath scene only. And it reportedly took the restorers quite the while to find an Olivier impressionist. They then asked his widow Dame Joan Plowright who said that Hopkins did an impression of Olivier in front of Olivier...and Olivier never spoke to him again. Moral: Sometimes it IS a gift, but you'd better know when to give it. P.S. That's a much older Tony Curtis dubbing himself.
"During the film (Spartacus), Curtis and Laurence Olivier shot a very controversial scene. The scene where these two lather one another was full of sexual chemistry and implied an attraction towards each other. Producers decided not to film the scene since censors would probably cut it out anyway. This was a decision that enraged Tony and he fought to have to scene filmed. In an attempt to keep the peace, the studio agreed and the scene was shot. What they didn’t tell the actors was that they didn’t bother to use sound because it wasn’t going to be used anyway. However, Curtis’s fight raised some questions about his personal life."
You must love my snail Antoninus.
And my oysters....both of them.
LOL I bet he'll like bananas too....
Anthony Hopkin's mimicry of Olivier's voice is amazing. You can't tell the difference even when you know.
Really? To me it sounds like Hopkins Welsh tones and not at all like Olivier
@@spacemanski Olivier's wife Dame Joan Plowright recommended Hopkins for the restoration recording because she had heard his eerily accurate impersonation of her late husband's voice, and praised Hopkins' mimicry when it was released. I'd say that her opinion was authoritative.
Maybe I missed it, but why did they need to dub his voice?
@@robertedson2374 It was re-released in 1991. A team of 30 archivists restored several violent battle sequences that had been left out because of the negative reaction of preview audiences. Among the deleted footage was a bath scene in which the Roman patrician and general Crassus attempts to seduce his slave Antoninus, speaking about the analogy of "eating oysters" and "eating snails" to express his opinion that sexual preference is a matter of taste rather than morality. The four-minute scene had been removed following an objection by the National Legion of Decency. When the film was restored (two years after Olivier's death), the original dialogue recording of this scene was missing; it had to be redubbed. Tony Curtis, by then 66, was able to re-record his part, but Crassus's voice was an impersonation of Olivier by Anthony Hopkins, who had been suggested by Olivier's widow, Joan Plowright. A talented mimic, Hopkins had been a protégé of Olivier's during Olivier's days as the National Theatre's artistic director, and had portrayed Crassus in the Jeff Wayne musical album. The actors separately recorded their dialogue.
@@argustuft2394 I definitely seem to remember seeing that scene on tv, but I can't say when that was!!
My taste includes both snails and oysters... with some fava beans and a nice chianti.
You'd never drink a chianti w/ snails & oysters, you need a white.
A red wine was chosen for the guy's liver b/c it was red meat.
Remember cannibals, always eat people w/ red wine.
Red also goes w/ Soylent Green for some reason.
The unsurpassedly accomplished ancient accent of Tony Curtis From whom I also learned duh classics...
You had me going there for a sec...
Powerful message and display of psychology. Crassus can take whatever he wants. Him trying to relate the symbolism of his power over his servants reflects on the ideological views of the Roman Empire. Showing Glabrus and his cohorts depart for battle is the power. The sentiments and words are the laws he is speaking. As you see Antoninus wasn't having that.
He actually was grooming him. Wen he talked about snails and oysters (aphrodisiac) he means heterosexual and homosexual. He said he liked both. Edit: he questioned how taste would have morals. And then he compared himself to Rome. you must love her. Pple didn’t understand it when it first came out but Hollywood did.
@@hissonggirlmoni5706 'People' understood it perfectly, there was picketing and protests outside of movie theaters, until the premise of the dialogue was removed
^How to come out as bi.
I think oysters imply a vagina and snails a penis. Thus, when Olivier says he likes both oysters and snails he basically means he likes men and women. :)
Saba T It is not that these food creatures physically represent or resemble human genitalia, it IS rather a moral metaphor in the sense that oysters are a more common, mainstream, conventional taste, and until recently in "modern" history, "snails"and/or homosexuality was an "acquired", unusual and improper, ie: immoral "taste". Listen to the dialogue again.
Good lord thank you thank you thank you for lightened us all!! 😂😂😂
oH mY! "You must love Rome. Bow to her and eat snails and oysters!!" Yep Boy Servant knew what time it was. That bath was just foreplay. "Fetch me the snails and oysters man boy body servant!" He ran off like a thief in the night! Guess he wasn't feeling old dude....
lol
The most awkward conversation.
The music in the background is mesmarising
Andy Thorpey any idea what it's called?
Not a clue? I'm a rich roman twat?
Andy Thorpey Lmao true true
Antoninus was clever enough to just flee the scene in no time!how wise of him:-D just as well he was an educated slave!!
I would like to know the history on this scene. People below say it was cut from the theatrical version, but I swear I saw the movie on T.V. as a kid and this scene was in it. Only once--it never was in any version again. I actually more or less figured out what it meant, and for the 60s-70s it was a bit of a shocker, so it stuck in my mind and I'm pretty sure it was broadcast at some point. I think also the scene with Woody Strode hanging by his feet was also in that broadcast, and I didn't see that again either for years.
It's interesting if a documentary confirmation can be found. However it is to be kept in mind that memory is unreliable, sometimes new knowledge combines into past events and changes the way they are remembered. Even the emotion that you found the scene shocking may have been caused by something else and later merged in memory.
Yeah...I saw it on TV also!!
If you didn't realize it, you'd swear it was SLO. But knowing it was SAH, you can hear his voice.
Historically, Antoninus would have been naked in the bath with his master and probably in the lounge afterward. Unfortunately one could not do that when the film first came out and still not to this day.
Great video. Thanks for sharing. The discussion came up in a screenwriting group. Glad I found this.
You know your jobs sucks when you have to wash your boss down with a sponge in the bath.........
😂Best comment here!
If there wasn’t censorship back then this scene wouldn’t be half as good; the subtlety makes this work so well.
Curtis said, "You a booty bandit! See ya!" lol
How might this scene differ if it were shot within the present era?
Might the handsome slave receive a "snail job"?
I guess Curtis didn't fancy being buggered!
Actually he did, this is just good acting.
Tony Curtis's distracting Brooklyn accent ruins this scene for me.
& not Olivier's English accent? Maybe they should have affected a Roman accent?
He was from the Bronx
He re-recorded his dialog for this scene over 30 years after the original release which is why he sounds different
@@humps678 The question is, does he sound different than the rest of his character’s scenes in the film.
I never had oysters or snails. I had fried clams once and got all clogged up.
Oh how creepy! Now I can't only think "How do we begin to covet? We begin by coveting what we see every day. Don't you feel eyes moving over your body, Antoninus?"
Do you like gladiator movies Antoninus?
Probably the best scene of this great movie, specially the final part.
yeah you would enjoy it, groomer.
Bruno Lima
For people like you.
Audio was lost in this scene. In 1991 Tony Curtis dubbed his own voice an Anthony Hopkins dubbed Olivier. They used Hopkins because Rich Little wanted too much money
Roman slave with a Brooklyn accent! Kind of funny.
is it funnier then a Roman general w/ an English accent? Perhaps Olivier should have painted himself blue for this scene?
That was Kirk Douglas' casting choice: Brits playing Romans and Americans playing slaves. The only two exceptions were Jean Simmons as a slave girl who became the mother of Spartacus' child and John Gavin as a young Julius Caesar.
I guess it makes sense. A lot of the decisions made in historical movies, like Greek statues being marble white instead of painted, are for the benefit of the modern audience. I bet a fair few people heard the slaves' accents in this movie and thought, "Oh, the poors," in that way people tend to class regional accents.
have you ever seen a one eyed snake, did you kiss it ???
he brought over a couple movies, some like it hot and sporadicus...
To me, this just sounds like Hannibal Lecter talking about eating sweetbreads. Creepy. Before I knew for certain it was Hopkins, I immediately thought of him rather than Olivier. It's a decent imitation, but not great.
wait... is this about sex? is oysters whoha and snails (slugs) are weenies? and as the young buck slave is rubbing his naked body, he's inquiring about his sexual proclivities before announcing he likes both oysters AND snails? And do men REALLY like both or does culture require they eat oysters when really... all they want is snails? you never hear a man tell a woman he likes oysters and snails. They're always asking the boys.
Obviously oysters represent women and snails represent men. Tony Curtis only likes oysters.
glad he got away...it was almost an ancient deliverence situation....l always wondered why men wore skirts in those days...😩
The guys in Deliverance apparently preferred pork.
@@VictorLepanto🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Is this where Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron invented their "Good Person" Test?
Antoninus was the favorite lover of Crassus, for that they deleted this scene.
Oh Larry love, just come out with it. Not like ol Tone don't know what to do with it the minx.
Came here from Better Call Saul!
Who besides the Romans of all race & culture enjoys gluttony, lust, and probably the biggest sinners; yet hypocrisy during these times. Ironically, it's them who enforce the power of the Catholic Law amongst their civilization. I fine this movie and this scene well played and script for it's time metaphorically. Loves it!!
Amanda there is duality and moral conflict present in all civilizations. Especially those who seek to attain absolute power under the guise of a republic and to have the rest of the world "bow to her" in an effort to spread and maintain that civilization's way of life.
I love this scene as well. Thanks for sharing it and your opinion.
Ron; well made point. I whole-heartedly agree w U..
This isn't the first time that an older male character tries to seduce a younger male character in a Kubrick film. In "A Clockwork Orange," a social worker made a pass at "Little Alex" while he was only wearing his underpants! Censorship wasn't an issue at that time, so I guess it was permitted if the seduction is primarily physical and not overtly verbal.
@@DavidTSmith-jn5bs Spartacus was super early in Kubrick's career, 1960. I think the Hays Code ceased to exist in 68 or 69, a few years before A Clockwork Orange. Assuming also that the former is an Americna production and the latter a UK one so different ballparks.
you're catching on...
Dalton Trumbo ? Je croyais que c'était Gore Vidal ?...
you sir, are a genius. christ.
This scene amounts to: OK groomer.
Based Antoninus.
SEE YA!!!! LOL!!
Ralph & Ted in The Fast Show
Anthony hopkins does the voice
Oh my eyes.
The Romans knew how to live in luxury
Ancient Rome "gay" didnt exist. They borrowed from ancient Greek culture where men would use sex as a teaching tool for adolescent boys, but they would all marry women. It was not "gay" rather, a part of being a man. The upper classes would throw parties and hire lute girls (prostitutes) for the guests. Higher classes would have boys. It wasnt a bisexual thing, rather a status thing of the ruling class to have sex with both. There were orgies, decadent Dionysian festivals, Saturnalia and so on, but this is just alluding to ancient culture rather than the boss being bisexual.
Jimmy McGill sent me here lmao
Slippin' Jimmy? How so.
Want to know something slightly creepier than what this scene portrays? Tony Curtis was only nine years younger than Kirk Douglas. Olivier plays his role in this scene to perfection ('Hmmm?"). Small wonder this scene awaited the film's restoration.
crassus is so me
Thparticus....oh, Thparticus!
"slight difference"? are you kidding???
I've somehow dropped the soap could you reach in and get it for me I believe it's somewhere between my loins !!!!
So, is Tony Curtis a snail or an oyster?
You'd never see homosexuality portrayed this way today.
Oysters and snails what apposite metafors ;)
This was the controversial scene.. Today's music is much, much worse than this. Boy have our morality retracted.
I love the soundtrack in this scene.
So are snails penises?
The fall of Rome..
Hot Larry ❤
You're hilarious korgri.
This is a ridiculous, anachronistic scene, totally incomprehensible. Why this game of words to "convince" a slave to have sex? Crassus, as a Roman citizen and the richest man in Rome and perhaps ever, everywhere, had only to order his slave to submit and have sex with him. The prohibition against sex among men only applied when both partners were Roman citizens. Roman men had sex, were expected to have sex with slaves male and female and children, male and female if the children were not Romans. So long as the Roman was the "top", the penetrator, the active partner, he did not have to ask. Especially if he wanted sex with his property. The terms Homosexual or heterosexual nor those concepts existed in Rome.
It's well crafted scene in a movie mate it's not that deep
+manzilla48 Reality has to enter somewhere in order for "well crafted" to exist. Even in Science Fiction. Without the proper motivation, the great Lord Olivier's little ironies and Tony Curtis's embarrassments fall flat, even under the magisterial touch of Stanley Kubrick. The scene, done 18 times until deemed right, is, in itself, perfect. But it must rest, like all art, on the bedrock of truth. The premise is that the powerful Marcus Licinus Crassus is powerless to convince a mere pretty boy slave to have sex, but that Curtis' character, because of his "human dignity" of simply humanity (despite the condition of a slave) firmly refuses. That refusal is an impossibility completely bizarre to a Roman. Trumbo imbued the slave with an impossible, non-existent "quality."
+Diego Visconti Sorry, but you completely missed the point here. Crassus is not trying to "convince" Antoninus of anything. The scene is divided in two parts: in the first, Crassus makes Antoninus understand that he is bissexual, and, as so, appreciates homossexual favors. He asks, in a veiled manner, if he also likes it, which he denies. In the second part of the scene, Crassus then makes explicit his point that he is going to sodomize Antoninus by force, whether he likes it or not: "No man can withstand Rome. No nation can withstand her. How much less... a boy!" Crassus is not being "ironic", he is being gracefully cruel, as he should (i.e, as is demanded by the character Olivier is playing) ; Antoninus is not "embarassed", he is filled with terror ("The might, the majesty, the TERROR of Rome"), and that´s why he risks his life escaping. A perfect scene indeed, perfectly resting "in the bedrock of truth", as you can see. Of course it is not a gross atempeted-rape scene. It is done, in fact, in a sublime way, worthy of the genius of the man involved (Trumbo, Kubrick and Olivier). Perhaps a little too subtle for most people, but nonetheless (or because of this) perfect.
+João Paulo No, no no. There was NO such thing as bisexual in Ancient Rome. The lord, the is Licinus Crassus or any other male Roman, so long as he was the penetrative partner, was perfectly permitted to have sex with ANY slave he so wished. There was no "convincing." To be a passive participant was another story. And Crassus was immensely rich, immensely powerful, perhaps the richest man that ever was. All he heeded to do was summon the slave and have sex with him as Roman men did, without this convoluted stuff about shell fish or whatever. The scene does not work because it would have been impossible. A slave is property, chattel. And a slave leaving without being dismissed? Crassus wouldhae sent him to the mines in Numidia where he would have lasted 60 days.
Diego Visconti I think you're forgetting that this is just a film that's made for artistic and entertainment purposes. Not a documentary. This is an interesting and well done scene.
When they had political power
Why oh why didn't Tony Curtis try and change his accent in this film?!?
It's ridiculous hearing a Roman with a Jewish "Noo Yawk" accent! Oy! So grating...and ruins the believability of the scene...
Brilliantly gay :)
Eh, home boy was fittin to rape Anti.
* bi
Gay escene cut
Antoninus, I hear in your accent you are from New York. Then which New York State legal pronoun do you choose then as my bathboy, Gender Blender or Gender Bender. (this is not a joke people.)
BISEXUALITY
Sorry but I see nothing Bisexual in this scene! If Curtis is this guy's slave and he MUST be since he keeps calling him Master...he's just washing him like a slave would do or a servant. There's no kissing or sexual touching at all here. WTF????
Kinda gross....
They were right to have deleted that scene, and they were wrong to have brought it back.