Jumping the Shark
Entry posted by The Augusta
368 views
Inspired by the disenchanted posts now appearing from our UNRV members, I take the liberty of cutting and pasting a blog I actually wrote on 18th January this year, originally posted by me on 'Why Space'. It's harsh but it is how I feel.
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Decline and Fall - another closet-opening admission
Current mood: disappointed
Category: Movies, TV, Celebrities
So the second series of the HBO/BBC collaboration, 'Rome', has finally premiered in America. So far, we have no date for it to be screened on the BBC, and who knows - if the gods are kind, maybe we won't get it at all.
Don't get me wrong: I am like any other member of a minority whose beloved subject does not receive enough quality TV time; we seize upon what is offered us like grateful dogs squabbling over scraps and attempt to bring all our intellectual powers and insights to bear upon the offering, in an attempt to turn it into art. 'Rome' is as far from art as 'Dynasty', and as far from history as 'Asterix the Gaul' - in fact, Asterix has the nod.
I am not just a crusty old classicist/ancient historian with my nose buried in Tacitus and Dio. Of course I want my beloved Roman boys to live and breathe on the screen, and in an authentic setting, and this is where HBO have triumphed. Like Roman Abramovich, they have put in the money; and like Roman Ambrovich, they expect their millions to have some return. To do this it is necessary to sacrifice intricate and complex historical narratives for gloss, soap opera style dialogue and glittery bitches - in other words, entertainment for the masses, so the masses will tune in. In Britain, alas, for Series 1 the masses tuned in for a couple of episodes and rapidly tuned out again. This was a pity, for the series is certainly not aimed at historians.
As with most US/UK collaborations, our American cousins want to involve us when they require 'class' (their interpretation - not mine). They put in the money, they gave us and the Italians the casting, and even called a historical adviser to give their soap opera that aura of authenticity. The historical advisers have done well. The enormous budget has been spent on accurately reproduced sets full of authentic details such as religious rites, wall-paintings, a grimy Aventine and Subura, and the changing of the calendar on the wall of The Regia. All of which, to we historians, adds the right flavour and seduces us into believing for a moment or two that we are really in the Rome of the first century BC. I'm even prepared to overlook the anachronisms in some of the female costumery and coiffure, for I generously allow that glittery bitches from whatever era must have a certain sex-appeal, and no-one looks sexy in a stola. I am not a prude, and love a good sexy scene as much as the next full-blooded human, but some of the sex in 'Rome' has been purely gratuitous - with even the obligatory titillating lesbian scene to hook in the men. Did Octavia (that paragon of ancient rectitude whom even the most scurrilous Roman chronicler could find nothing against) ever really shag Brutus's mother? I am pretty sure she didn't shag her own brother, but what the hell - trying to prove that she didn't is something akin to trying to prove the existence of God. Octavia, however, certainly shagged her first husband Marcellus, who was not in the first series at all - his place was taken by a mythical person called Glabius, who was done away with to advance a thin plot. Atia, mother of the future Emperor Augustus, was busy shagging Mark Antony, when she should have been happily shagging her second husband Phillipus - another non-person in Series 1. None of this did anything to help us understand the history; it was purely for 'entertainment'.
When the show first aired on the BBC last year, I watched the first two episodes and gave up. Later, I thought I'd give it a fairer go and bought the boxed DVD set. I did give it a fair go. I carefully watched each episode about three times each, and the more I saw, the more I began to hate this overdone soap. Poor scripts can be given some life and weight by superb acting, and like its sets, the acting does rescue 'Rome' to a degree, but the liberties taken with the history have finally tipped me over the edge. I read an American review online today, in which the reviewer told us that Marcus Agrippa declares his love for Octavia. I think that may just have been the breaking point for me.
If you know nothing of the history (which is fascinating in itself if dealt with properly), and wish to see good performances and impressive sets; if you can engage with Alexis Carrington in a long frock, and two largely fictional characters who seem to be changing the history of the world, then you will enjoy 'Rome'. As for me - I am putting this one to bed.
3 Comments
Recommended Comments