Rome

[vinraith]

Good show by and large, though season 2 was weaker than season 1 (partly because Octavian 1 was better than Octavian 2, not just in acting presence but in the actual writing of the character). Still, the whole thing was good, it's a shame they canned it.

[grumbler]

Good show by and large, though season 2 was weaker than season 1 (partly because Octavian 1 was better than Octavian 2, not just in acting presence but in the actual writing of the character). Still, the whole thing was good, it's a shame they canned it.

The writing was hurried in Season 2 because they had to end the series far sooner than they had planned.  At least they got to end it, unlike what happened to Deadwood.

Interestingly, the series was supposed to shift to Judea in the third season.

[fhdz]

I enjoyed it as well, understanding it to be a drama based on history, but not historical per se.

Yep, that was my feeling as well.  I liked it a great deal, and would watch it again.

[Sheilbh]

Do you mean just in the way they look or in the way they think and act? Because for the latter, IMO Rome does quite well, reflecting the totally different morality and way of life.

Yeah this is what really impresses me, especially about the pleb characters.  There's no ironic 'wink, wink' stuff about people behaving weirdly (as in the first couple of episodes of Mad Men).  They present an utterly alien world and mindset with little to no explanation.  I have a Classicist friend who loves it for the way they've tried to place what we think Roman customs and morality were into a real setting.  In that sense I'd say it's better than I, Claudius which is primarily worth it for the acting (John Hurt as Caligula is a particular favourite of mine).

It's a shame they didn't continue.  It really is a series that could run for some time more.  Season 3 in Judea, season 4 about Tiberius and Sejanus and so on.

[Sheilbh]

Also, Cicero isn't portrayed very flattering.

Yeah I noticed that.  I think it's a good choice.

Generally the acting and the portrayals of these characters has been superb.  I think Ciaran Hands as Caesar is brilliant.  I love the characterisation of the young Octavian.  Mark Anthony to me seems interestingly Shakespearean, but very good.  I love Verinus (I think, the centurion) and his wife - that seems a really strong line.

As I say I have some issues with the way Brutus has been portrayed but I trust that it'll get more interesting.

[Ed Anger]

Also, Cicero isn't portrayed very flattering.

The real Cicero was a hack and a dick.

[Grallon]

We had a (long) thread about this in the 'other' forum, before the Change(TM); and I expounded at lenght about the various reasons why I detested the series.  Though by the end of season two it had reached a unity of its own and I could bear Attia's antics, especially since they were alleviated by genuine drama (her last scene was poweful).

But I can't swallow the gratuitous liberties they took with what is known of the period:

Cleopatra whoring herself;
Octavia being used as a sex commodity;
the incest between Octavius and his sister;
etc

I have deleted the series from my hard drive but suffice to say that placating a modern american  mindset on people dead for over 2000 years old is extremely annoying.




G.

[citizen k]

I have deleted the series from my hard drive but suffice to say that placating a modern american  mindset on people dead for over 2000 years old is extremely annoying.


G.

I guess Sheilbh has that modern American mindset since he enjoyed the show. 

[Sheilbh]

Cleopatra whoring herself;

I don't think she's done that, in the first season.

Octavia being used as a sex commodity;

Well, she sort of was.  A commodity to keep peace between families.

[Grallon]

I don't think she's done that, in the first season.

She fucked a ranker legionary...  A Ptolemey smoking opium and getting banged by a common soldier - and not even a macedonian at that !  If you think english aristocrats were/are class conscious - try a queen of Egypt whorshipped by millions like a living godess.  No, that was simply inconceivable !  And inserted there as a crass plot device. 

Well, she sort of was.  A commodity to keep peace between families.

You shouldn't confuse marriage commodity with sexual commodity.  A daughter of the Julian house - albeit of a minor branch - paraded almost naked like a slave !?!  And to another member of that very closed knit circle of roman aristocrats ?  Yet another clumsy appeal to contemporary sensibilities fed with endless reality TV shows. 

And don't get me started on how they portrayed Caesar !

Tcha !



G.

[Josephus]

Grallon is exactly what I meant earlier when I said "grogrards and historical accuracy geeks."

I don't think anyone watches HBO to catch up on history. When producing a show, as others can attest, you have to appeal to as large a number of people as possible. Otherwise you're not going to get a return on your investment.

And the best way to appeal to the lowest common denominator (ie Languish) is to have lots of gratuitous sex...even if it's unhistorical. Hence all the outrageous historical inaccuracies in both the Tudors and Rome. But as long as there's lots of sex...and the babe's arent' historically hairy....who's complaining?

[Caliga]

and the babe's arent' historically hairy....who's complaining?

Why are people going on about this point?  The Greeks, Romans, etc. did practice depilation.

[Caliga]

I enjoyed Rome after a while. It took me some time, though. First couple of episodes, I was really more interested in Polly Walker (Atia) and her boobs than the plot.

[Josephus]

and the babe's arent' historically hairy....who's complaining?

Why are people going on about this point?  The Greeks, Romans, etc. did practice depilation.

You have proof of that? I've seen modern day Italian and Greek women and if you're right,they certainly don't take after their ancestors.

[Caliga]

Not handy, no.