HBO has produced this series and it starts with Caesar returning to Rome after his victory over the Gauls. The cast of this series is pretty much all british, which lends a greater credibility to the characters in a way an American accent just couldn’t. The aristocracy has the more refined accents, while the lower class have the harsher dialect.
The plot of this series is very interesting and follows Roman history well enough. What I like is that it doesn’t just show the aristocracy but also characters of lower classes. It does a very good job of showing how Rome really was, a violent, and from our modern view, a very immoral society. It shows crucifixions, dirty brothels and the like. I can’t wait for my brother to buy the 2nd season.
Sounds interesting.. is it in its third season now? Or did it only have the two seasons? Sorta makes me wish I had cable.. but alas, I refuse to pay for it! To get any of the chanels I WANT, I have to pay for all the ones I don't want (or the ones I get shitty reception on for free).
I watched Rome session 1 episode 1 and 2. I'll admit, my expectations were high after Hawkeye's review. I was really not impressed by the repeated gratuitous use of young naked actresses to show acts of hatred and sex. I don't think any audience really needs to see repeated rapes/sodomy..quite frankly the suggestion is enough. I think most people can get a sense of the craziness/barbaricness of the times without the graphic detail. Enough is enough... certainly don't need to degrade women down to flesh items for some documentary.
The producer definitely has a double standard on nudity for men and women. A good example is the scene in which the Celtic chieftain has turned himself over to Caesar. No close up of the nude Celtic chieftain equal to any of the naked women in the first two episodes AND that has got to be the tamest account of Fall of Alise....I have ever heard of or seen! Caesar ....Here hmmm...kiss my golden eagle to Vertingetorix. Yeah, that happened and a lot more.
I quite frankly suspect that the male producers added the female nudity in to fulfill some personal fantasy or in hopes of raising their series ratings.
HBO and NOVA have both aired series on Rome..and there are many discrepancies between the historical events so far. NOVA claimed it series was based on accounts from historians of the time, I don't know where HBO got its information.
As for double standard for nudity, my favourite character, Marc Antony, is shown in full frontal nudity.. (he's not my favourite character for that reason BTW). Having watched the entire first series the nuditiy aspect is lessened.
The Battle of Alesia, yes the gaulic leader surrendered, but they didn't show the battle at all... I suspect they had only a certain amount of money and time and devoted more to the political mechenations of the characters.
As far as what the producers wanted that's beside the point...
Now that I am thinking of the first 2 episodes, what was the act of hatred and sex against women? I remember a brothel scene...
As far as a sense of the craziness/barbarity of rome, I DON'T thnk people can get a sense of it by suggestion alone... I don't recall which episode its in, but Attia's prayer scene in which a bull is slaughtered above her and the blood drips all over her is something I would have a hard time envisioning.
As far as historical accuracy is concerned, I hardly ever watch a historical series or movie with the hopes of seeing something perfectly accurate. The major historical events are correct, the rest is made up for filler.
What I would like to know is, do you like it or not?
The battle/series beginning after the conquest of Gaul is irrelevant. The point is that the producers showed the Celtic Chiefain kissing the standard of Casear but failed to show the degrading/torturous treatment of the Chiefain in front of his people. (no extra shooting cost involve there-the set was already in place). But the producers allowed two rapes per episode of women shown in great detail, really advancing that political mechnations of characters. The level of degradation shown for a man and woman is different. "As far as a sense of the craziness/barbarity of rome, I DON'T think people can get a sense of it by suggestion alone"-should abuse be done, so that imagine-less-ones get the historical picture?
The degrading aspect to the chieftian comes later, in front of the roman public at Ceasar's triumph in which he appears dirty, starved, and is garotted. My question to you is, does he need to be naked to be degraded? Is nakedness/sexual exploitation the only degredation you give kudos for? If you aren't raped, then no matter how debauched you are treated you're not degraded?
I don't remember exactly, but what are the four rapes? (The sexual degradation of men does happen and is shown in later episodes)
Quoted from Chiquita
"As far as a sense of the craziness/barbarity of rome, I DON'T think people can get a sense of it by suggestion alone"-should abuse be done, so that imagine-less-ones get the historical picture?
What did you expect? This is an HBO series after all and not Liz Taylor and Richard Burtons Cleopatra. Besides, as I said before that was how Rome was, for all it's glory was based on a moral-less foundation. The women aristocracy were equally as dismissive of their slaves as men. Slaves were property to be done with however they saw fit.
WOW, got enough tagents? I find it strange that a father of two daughters cannot comprehend how the combined sexual/physical/mental abuse would be far more damaging than a degrading public humiliation (which from the HBO account of the chieftain's treatment at the hands of Ceasar). And, no rape is not the only degradation. I expect individuals (and HBO) to protray historical events with accuracy and respect the actors/actresses in the protrayal. I am saddened that individuals accept exploitation as the norm and therefore acceptable.
If you don't remember the acts of rape, you have to box set..watch them.
I find it strange that a father of two daughters cannot comprehend how the combined sexual/physical/mental abuse would be far more damaging than a degrading public humiliation.
I really don't know how I should take this... First, I can comprehend, in so far as one can who has not been a victim of it, that combined all those things are far more damaging than public humiliation/exectution. No where did I assign degrees of degredation. No where did I say they were even EQUAL. I would not want this kind of thing to happen to anyone. That being said, we are watching a fictionalized account of historical events.
In the context of the Gaul leader, who had been the generalisimo of his clan, the mighty warrior leader, I would suggest that for HIM, the five years of imprisonment and the public riducle he endured in the final minutes of his life, for him that was a great insult, a tremendous degradation.
Your argument is one track, there is more degradation for women then for men, to that I would dispute (granted If I only watched the first 2 episodes I would tend to agree with you, but I have watched more of the series and found there were nudity for men as well).
As for expectations for individuals and media to portray historical events with accuracy. They are not in the business of education, but of entertainment.. the term poetic licence is the one most often used in this kind of scenario.
And as for respect for the actors/actresses in the portrayal, they signed a contract to act in the series, they would have (though I am assuming here) known what the role would entail. They would have known about the nudity, rape scenes etc before actually doing them.
I don't have the first series, I only borrowed it from my brother, and as you can see that was over 2 months ago and I am getting old you know... memory just ain't what it used to be.