Katherine of Alexandria (2014)

Great Film overall

This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties.

A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

Anyone who gets a film made should be commended, this, unfortunately, is where the compliments end.The main fault in the film lies in the script. There is no narrative, the writer/director has essentially cobbled together a bunch of scenes in the hope that they will connect with each other with no real threat or drive for the characters. It is understandable why actors such as the late Peter O'Toole and Edward Fox would be attracted to such a piece, if they were given free reign they'd be munching at the scenery like a rabbit on a lettuce leaf. Yet, they're not. These actors are restrained and make for a dull viewing experience. Seeing actors of this calibre being given the opportunity letting rip is always a pleasure, the fact that they are not is a wasted opportunity.Nicole Keniheart may look the part, but as a unifying presence for the whole story, she fails. There is nothing of interest to her, and the fate that falls on her doesn't have the emotional wallop that the Director was hoping for as we simply don't care for her. She has no character and as such we never truly connect with her. More could have been made of Katherine's affect on Rome and how she changed the lives of others as such it just feels as if her "followers" blindly accept that she is the second coming and go along with her. On the whole the film is flat and the greatest crime of all: dull. Ridley Scott's latest film "Exodus" suffered from a similar problem, yet at least it had spectacle. Granted this is on a lower budget, but there was potential to do so much with the material but fails miserably. We don't care for the characters, we aren't drawn into the story and the script is risible. There is a great story to be told about this woman and the last days of the Roman Empire, but this is not that film.On the plus side, it's in focus.

Not only being unaware of any review but also about any fact of its content, I watched it because Peter O'Toole featured in it. However, this is a movie that requires thorough preparation. Not only does one need to know some of the history, and of course the actual Katerina, no also about Eastern religion should one know at least a bit. Sadly it is only the latter of which I know something about.But first to the movie itself. It was one of Ingmar Bergman's paradigm not to use music unless it is actually played in the scene, e.g. when the stereo plays. This movie is the most extreme antithesis to it. There is a constant stream of string music, occasionally supported by some drums. It would have served the atmosphere simply to not use any sort of music at all. My rating would have gone up at least a star.While the music poses some sort of (bright neon-) red thread, the film itself lacks it. It is some sort of patchwork that especially in the beginning seem like completely random bits of flashy colors. As an ideology driven under-budgeted piece of work it rather feels surreal. This is the most positive feature of the film Michael Redwood has achieved.While I absolutely enjoyed Nicole Keniheart as Katerina from the perspective of acting (was that accent natural? If not: Why, Redwood? Why?), her character entrapped herself in inconsistencies.Not knowing the historical Katerine, I was at first lead to believe she was denouncing any deities, being some sort of atheist. You might think, how I could have done that since it clearly must have been a Christian but I would hold the utter surrealistic atmosphere as possible explanation for this misconception. She does sound a bit like a Buddhist at times. And this is where the grandest mistake of the films writers occurred. Lending from ideologies, philosophies, or religions one should actually have understood their notions. This was obviously not the case here.While it was a strange mix of feminist and Buddhist/Hindu thought to portray her as the incarnation of Nefertiti, and sort of brave, in the end it did not work. She was confronted by this evil guy--sorry, I did not remember that name--showing her a, rather the, bust of Nefertiti which could identify although she had never seen it, nor heard this name in her present life. Okay, for me its fine to, just like that, introduce reincarnation into Christianity. The question whether that can make sense or it is completely contradictory remains.Where she got entangled in inconsistency with the foreign source was when she foretold the evil guy that after this life his soul would end. Not only that but that was even a bad thing. The guy got upset and she felt so sorry for him, that she shed a tear. So why is that inconsistent. Reincarnation is part of Hinduism and Buddhism in which it is a rather clearly explained sort of natural law. Both the Hindus and Buddhist actually try to escape this cycle of existences because it entails endless suffering. At this point we have our first inconsistency--unless Katerina shed tears of joy. Which by the way she did not. She gave that evil guy the prophecy like it was something really bad. Now we need to go a bit further. According to Buddhist belief (I am not well versed in Hindu thought) any sort of conventional happiness experienced within this prison of consecutive lives is impermanent and as such is not desirable. The goal is a sort of ultimate happiness, the utter liberation from suffering, nirvana. So, is the evil guy about to achieve this state after his present life? Rather not. How should we understand this state? Katerina tells the evil guy that he would simply stop to exist. That is of course not Buddhist and, granted, it was not supposed to be. The state one achieves at enlightenment is beyond any sort of extremes. This is already in the sutras, i.e. the earliest Buddhist texts. Later the thought was put into a wonderful system by the Buddhist saint (can we actually say that?) and philosopher Nagarjuna. The Buddha made it clear that when achieving enlightenment he will neither be existent, non-existent, both, or neither. He will be beyond such dualistic concepts.While that was just a bit off-topic, it makes clear that there is much more to reincarnation than what Western media is able to digest. Filmmakers should give such notions more thought before they assimilate truncated, if not completely twisted, versions of them. I mean seriously, there is reincarnation but that one evil guy will simply stop to exist? The last time I was politely told that unbelievers will simply stop to exist after the purgatory at the end of the world was when I actually let in some Jehovah's Witnesses to have a chat with them.

Today I watched decline of an empire (Katherine of Alexandria as the Brits called it)I don't quite understand why they changed the title even though it shows the fall of the Roman empire its clearly about the life of St. Katherine. The film boasts a colorful cast and and a good script, plus it's Peter o Tooles last film and a great performance as always. Without mentioning too much, I thought the trial scene was superb, and I found the Barbarian women amusing. I thought Nicole Kenniheart was great as Katherine and beautiful too. On the negative side, sometimes it gets a bit confusing and jumps to different scenes that makes you feel something was omitted. Overall, a good film with religion action and fun.If your looking for a film with blood and gore and fight scenes like from Gladiator then this film is not for you.

Decline of an Empire, tells the story of St. Katherine of Alexandria, a young woman of noble birth, who was highly educated in languages, religions, and philosophy. Enthralled by her beauty, the pagan emperor Maxentius has her brought to the palace, hoping that she will later become his mistress, much to the dismay of his own wife, Valeria. Meanwhile, in the British isles, Barbarian women have gone to battle against the Romans, as there are no men left to protect their clans. They have received messages from Katherine of the onslaughts of Christians throughout the empire. Back home, the Roman philosophers challenge Katherine on her faith in God, hoping that she will renounce Him, and return to the Roman religion. Katherine's knowledge in Roman religion, makes her victorious over all of them, and for her treason, she is killed for her Christian faith.