Jump to content
UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums
  • Time Travel Rome

Recommended Posts

what do people think of the new historical movies which are coming out? like King arthur,alexander,troy and gladiator.Are they accurate? i didnt really get the King arthur one,i allways imagined arthur as a pagan.And in that movie the celts were portrayed as savages covered in mud! i enjoyed troy and looking forward to the alexander one ......L ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll see about Alexander. I heard that they really cut down on the Hephaestion angle just to try and preserve action/adventure box office draw.

 

I found Arthur silly, Troy boring and badly re-written, and Gladiator, while written better than the others, suffered from dislexic history.

 

So, while I like the big budget looks PLEASE get a writer!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are generally all quite bad from a historical perspective. I've learned to try and ignore and just enjoy the theme. It's difficult, but it got me through Gladiator.

 

I think one of the best historically themed movies recently is Passion of the Christ. I thought it was an excellent film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They are generally all quite bad from a historical perspective. I've learned to try and ignore and just enjoy the theme. It's difficult, but it got me through Gladiator.

 

I think one of the best historically themed movies recently is Passion of the Christ. I thought it was an excellent film.

yeah,p.o.t.c. was a good movie,but the roman torturers disobeyed there commander when they got carried away with the wipping.would they have been punished for that?what would the punishment be ?if any.The 13th warrior was ok,the one about the norsemen. :2guns:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rolling with the theme is genrally what I try to do, but it was hard with Gladiator when you suck in history by involving an emperor. I don't know why, but I like Quo Vadis better than Gladiator . While I loved the house gods bit and the fatalism of Maximus but, Senator Gracchus? Elected by the people of Rome? BWAHAHAHAHAHA....>sigh<

 

In the Passion, it looked like that was a Centurions whip not a regular scurge. People died after 5 strokes, much less dozens. Sorry, nitpicking... Gibson put virtually every iconic image I've seen into that movie. That impressed me even if I thought the subject material was improperly presented.

 

Longbow I liked 13th Warrior too, simply because it made no pretense but action adventure with NON-comedic norsemen.

 

Now I'd like to see a remake of Waterloo with full tilt costumes and CGI battlefield. I'd propably faint away at the Charge of the Scots Greys or the French Lancers. Or bleed dry with the repulse of the Old Guard. Ah, well...if only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say I liked King Arthur a lot. The battle scenes were very impressive IMO, especially when only 7 cataphracts supported with Celtic archers destroyed a Saxon infantry division. The battle-over-ice scene was quiet impressive too.

 

However, there were a few things that caught my attention:

 

- Where were the Sarmatians' lances? What is a cataphract without a lance?

 

- I thought crossbows weren't used in Europe until the late 11th century (there were only two Genoese crossbowmen even at the battle of Hastings in October 14 1066), the arbalests the Saxons used in the movie were even an improved version not seen until the High Middle Ages.

 

- Wasn't the legion system abolished in the early 4th century?

 

- To my knowledge, the Romans had already withdrawn from Britain by 400 AD.

 

- Were there independent Briton tribes in Britain by the mid 5th century? Shouldn't those "Britons" be Picts who kept raiding the Hadrianus' Wall in real history?

 

- AFAIK Sarmatians serving to the Roman Empire were born and raised inside the Empire, they weren't all taken from the Steppes, raised in the empire and released back to Sarmatia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wanted to let you guys know about another historical film coming out by Ridley Scott. Its called Kingdom of Heaven and it tells the story of Balian of Ibelin, a young blacksmith in Jerusalem, who rises to protect his people from foreign invaders during the Crusades. This movie wont be out til late 2005 i think but I am interested to see how realistic they can make this movie, considering that the Crusades are my second favorite historical period (first being the Roman Empire of course).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm. I once watched a three hour movie on the battle of Gettysburg that tried to be as historically acurate as possible. And it darn near put me to sleep.

 

On the other hand, "Sparatacus" took liberties with Roman history, but was one of the best movies I've ever seen.

 

As long as movies don't try to pass off fiction as history, I can live with a few liberties. The trouble is I don't think modern Hollywood is worth much. Usually the actors are pretty to look at but not much else, the scripts and dialogue are mindless and cliche, and the fight scenes look like something out of the WWF. Movies try to draw in the younger crowd who only care about pretty people, silly action, and trite love scenes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

movies are good because they get younger people interested in history,i remember watching all the history movies on sunday afternoons (spartacus,cleopatra,etc).have been hooked eversince. L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just wanted to let you guys know about another historical film coming out by Ridley Scott. Its called Kingdom of Heaven and it tells the story of Balian of Ibelin, a young blacksmith in Jerusalem, who rises to protect his people from foreign invaders during the Crusades. This movie wont be out til late 2005 i think but I am interested to see how realistic they can make this movie, considering that the Crusades are my second favorite historical period (first being the Roman Empire of course).

Its not looking good im afraid,prof riley-smith,dixie professor of ecclesiastical history at Canbridge university said the plot was "complete and utter nonsense its Osama bin ladens version of history". Is it such a good idea making a movie about christian/muslim wars in todays climate???L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it such a good idea making a movie about christian/muslim wars in todays climate???

 

 

People should ask Theo Van Gogh his opinion of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it such a good idea making a movie about christian/muslim wars in todays climate???

 

 

People should ask Theo Van Gogh his opinion of that.

Whos he ??????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't think to much about this subject but why does Hollywood feel the need to be fictitious, or embelish? The true story is often more fascinating. Wouldn't you all love to see a factual movie about P. Clodius Pulcher, what a story. Or an account of Scipio, or Claudius Marcellus, I could go on and on, but I'm sure you get the picture, I just wish Hollywood would too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Map of the Roman Empire

×