Those Biblical "epics" of the 1950's and early 1960's usually fell into two categories. There were the lavish, big-studio productions such as "Quo Vadis" and "The Robe" and then there were the lesser, sword-and-sandal productions exemplified by the "Hercules" movies.
"Revolt of the Slaves" is one of the few productions to fall in between these two categories. It has the big-budget look of a Hollywood spectacle -- sharp wide-screen photography, handsome sets and costumes, etc. -- coupled with the kind of script and direction more closely identified with those made-in-Italy mini-epics.
Even the star of the show, Rhonda Fleming, is something of an "in-betweener." She's not quite up in the Deborah Kerr or Jean Simmons league but she's clearly a notch above, say, Sylva Koscina. Unfortunately, she's about ten years too old to be playing this part, especially since she's matched with an obviously-younger Lang Jeffries. (Though about to be married in real life, there's not much on-screen chemistry between these two.)
As is often the case with these pious-Christians-vs-pagan-Romans affairs, the plot works best when it's content to be an adventure or a romance but turns stilted and even a bit cloying when the religious angle is stressed.
One item of note: the scene early in the movie when slave-boy Lang Jeffries is whipped across his bare chest is unusually well-staged, especially in terms of the physical relationship between the whipper, the whippee, and the camera. Seeing this scene on TV without the benefit of letter-boxing will not do it justice. (It ranks 2nd in the book "Lash! The Hundred Great Scenes of Men Being Whipped in the Movies.") Jeffries also feels the sting of a whip in "Alone Against Rome" but this time on his bare back, thus making him one of the few actors in screen history to be flogged on both sides of his torso.
