Rome on HBO [Archive]

iberus_generalis

09-09-2006, 02:11

i've seen it, at least 5 times...it's awesome...
it shows Rome for what it really was, a place where the rat eats the cat, with agressive politics, and cultural values quite diferent from today's hipocritical values...far from the politically correct, with beautiful blonde maidens, of the american roman period movies of the 50's/60's that although were quite beautiful(loved ben-hur and Spartacus..), were uttely incoherent and inacurate...

but last time i checked the 2nd season was being made, and was to air on 3rd quarter 2007....don't tell me they cancelled it??? i see that historical stories can't be too acurate, otherwise, religious zealots, conservative ppl, and educated ignorants, start to whine about the language used by the ppl, and the attitute towards sex very well retracted in this series... at least here in my country some of this said pressure groups rebeled against this features, but fortunately the channel airing the series, didn't got bullyed, cuz they are a state cultural channel, who (fortunatly) doesn't give a damn about share, and still today pass good, educative and cultural:book: (and not reality shows and hollywood movies) programs...=)

let's then form a pressure group, so that Pullo and Vorenus get into the second series, and we can see Pullo being promoted to one of Octavians centurions, and voreno following M Antony...and see this die hard friends face wich other at war...

therefore i am a:
https://img174.imageshack.us/img174/2469/10qb9xfiq6.gif

Orb

09-09-2006, 02:51

In general:
I much preferred I, Claudius, myself, I thought Rome was good in its own way, but it doesn't really compare...

@Iberus:
Well, the nudity and sex was overdone too much. I think it actually weakened the overall quality of the production because of the excess.

And - how can you praise it, in that it wasn't 'inaccurate' yet complain about the complaints of history buffs who know what they are talking about. The people who complain about the historical accuracy (I'm not one of them) might well be right, but the intention of the series was drama/ratings rather than accuracy.

EdwardL

09-09-2006, 03:41

Yes it was a good series.. just checked HBO.com and reads that they are still shooting the second season

-Praetor-

09-09-2006, 03:45

Yea, I haven`t heard that they were going to cancel the series... for all I know, they were filming the second season as we speak.

Hope they show it up here in Chile, I`ve been waiting too long for the second season...

Geoffrey S

09-09-2006, 11:58

I enjoyed it; in particular, the episode in Egypt and the final episode were absolutely brilliant. The stabbing of Caesar by Brutus (oh, spoiler) at the same time horrific and sublime. There were historical inaccuracies, and I personally missed Pharsalus not being shown in full (budget constraints, probably), but I felt it gave a very atmospheric impression of what Rome may have been.

As for a second season, I heard they were filming a new season documenting the rise of Octavius, but that was a long time ago.

Simmons

09-09-2006, 12:15

As for a second season, I heard they were filming a new season documenting the rise of Octavius, but that was a long time ago.
This is what I heard as well I look forward to the 2nd season the 1st was quite enjoyable.

Dayve

09-09-2006, 12:31

iberus_generalis

09-09-2006, 13:12

yep, atia is hot, those eyes and that red hair...woo lol, let me stop being a pervert...but i think i've never seen any other movie of her...any well known movie featuring her?

pezhetairoi

09-09-2006, 13:44

Apart from the fact that most of the Romans speak with freakin' obvious British accents (especially Verinus, but he's such an adorable character it's hard to mind), Rome was excellent. Caesar's death throes were stunningly shocking, and very very bloodily realistic, down to his veiling his own face before dying. That was a wonderful touch.

Obelics

09-09-2006, 13:44

I saw it in our first state channel (a channel for general audience, and it was at 9 o'clock in the evening, so it was censured a bit), but i liked it, expecially the first and the last episode... Tito Pullo was a good charachter (but it was as usually a bit too "Marines/Green Berets" like, but it was good in the end), and i found it a good product, liked also Kaesar (It was the best charachter in my opinion), it was a very good approximation of the real charachter, it was kaesar as i imagined him... so i liked.

iberus_generalis

09-09-2006, 14:13

pullo was in my view both a son of Fortune, and a forsaken of Fortune...he is a good guy, but sometimes his almost simple mind made him do bad things, i loved his character...he loved to play hard, get drunk and was loyal to his friends, even if sometimes they tended to forget him cuz of POWER(vorenus)...i identify myself with him, i guess we are a bit alike..both are loyal and both enjoy getting drunk...=)

Geoffrey S

09-09-2006, 14:15

It was absolutely brilliant and i bought it the first day it was released on DVD. There wasn't too much sex/nudity in it at all... Back in those days before christianity ruined the west, nudity and sex were normal things not to be frowned upon, so don't come in here whining about nudity and sex like they're bad things that spoil everything.
I found the amount of sex (particularly in the first episode) unnecessary and gratuitous; the fact that it was so prominent in the first episode and the amount and intensity declined from that point on shows that the makers also viewed it as such and purely used it for shock value at the start of the series. Later on in the series the use of sex and nudity was far more effective and felt less contrived.

Simmons

09-09-2006, 14:22

Apart from the fact that most of the Romans speak with freakin' obvious British accentsI understand it was filmed there sort of like how the original starwars has lots of extra's and minor characters with british accents.

Foot

09-09-2006, 15:21

HBO stuff is usually in partnership BBC so there are quite a lot of British actors. Band of Brothers, for example, had quite a large number of british actors playing american roles; the main guy himself was a british actor.

Foot

Krusader

09-09-2006, 15:27

I liked Cato, Caesar, Pompey & especially Vorenus.

The three senators were IMO well acted, not superbly, but still I liked how Cato was a conservative bastard & how Pompey was shown as a a bit self-centred man (like the scene where he is talking about his battles against pirates and seems to think the ladies are interested).

Vorenus though, was kind of a good guy, but a bit naive. He fervently believes in the goold old days and mos maiorum and thinks the aristocracy and Rome is as good as the propaganda says it is, even though he witnesses several things that contradict his beliefs, and he ignores or suppresses that.
And as a sidenote, the scene where he orders the crucified men to be taken down again and with the legionarie sighing at the extra work made me laugh.

Roderick Ponce Von Fontlebottom

09-09-2006, 15:36

Foot

09-09-2006, 15:50

"et tu brvte"

I swear thats just from Shakespeare's play and not something actually recorded as something he said. Which would explaing why it wasn't in the Rome.

Foot

iberus_generalis

09-09-2006, 15:58

The "et tu Brutus" is shakespeare added material....even the pompei statue and the face covered is questionable and hazy, but the truth we may never know....

Dayve

09-09-2006, 16:28

So they are making another season then! :sweatdrop: YES!:laugh4: :juggle2: :2thumbsup: The series was excellent, and I agree that the sex was necesary, and before christianity it was a very normal thing, even down to those people watching Pullo and Cleopatra getting it on LOL! that was funny that noise they made.lalalala!!
I though the scene with Caesar was definitley the best scene yet, it was horrifying, and made one absolutley hate those old bastard senators! But did he say "et tu brvte"? I dont think he did oh well, cuz i dident hear it. Im surprised so many people have got to watch it. I though it was only watchable here in the states, and in the U.K. But anyway excellent news of another season its a fine testament to accurate Roman history. And oh yea Attia has go to be one of the hottest characters. But shes kinda old. Well im only 17 so its different. lol ttyl

She's not too old... I'd say she's about.. Late 30's maybe... I'm 18 and i find her absolutely stunning... She's got an awesome figure and she's pretty as hell man... I want a poster of her for my wall.

The amount of sex is not unnecesary in the slightest bit. They had no TV or video games and life was hard, what else was there to do other than sex? Also women could use sex to gain power or things they want, as Atia does, so no, the sex isn't over the top.

And they all have posh English accents because they couldn't do it in ancient Roman latin and English is the next best thing i guess since 90% of the actors were English.

toxicseagull

09-09-2006, 16:37

just so you know the accents are becouse as stated previously it was a joint production by HBO and the BBC. it came out on the BBC about 6 months ago from memory

Redigo

09-09-2006, 17:01

Direct from HBO's website (http://www.hbo.com/rome/): "Rome is back on the set at Cinecitta Studios filming season 2." Cinecitta's actually located in Rome, so apparently they're filming on location...or on location but two thousand years off.

Orb

09-09-2006, 17:49

Dayve, if you want to rant against Christianity, go to the Backroom.

I thought the series was excellent, I thought the nudity was overused - removing some of it and replacing it with something relevant would have made a better series, imho.

IIRC, Suetonius reports the last words of Caesar as Greek 'kai su, teknon' ('and you, child').

I agree that Polly Walker is stunning, albeit a little old for me. I think I also saw her in one of the Poirot films/episodes a while back.

Obelics

09-09-2006, 17:52

well, tu quoque brute fili mihi, is from Shekspeare, i forgot to mention i liked also senator Kikero, (not the charachter itself, but the way it was transposed in the movie, it was just what you can call nowadays a sort of Centrist, i dont know the exact english word, somethink beetwen Rightist and Leftist)

Edit: checked my italian version of G.C. there is written Et tu Brute? bah...

Roderick Ponce Von Fontlebottom

09-09-2006, 17:53

Dayve isent bashing Christianity hes simply stating the truth, that yes! the catholic church did and does indeed shun sex, and the human body, and that after Christianity came along it was a darker thing. Thats not opinion thats fact. :book:

iberus_generalis

09-09-2006, 17:53

servillia, might have been pretty a some years ago too, but now you can clearly see she's 50..ish... i was expecting for Cleopatra to be much more beatiful than she is the series...well a pretty beatiful brat, but beautiful all the same..the actor the casted for her, didn't filled my fancy.. and niobe although looking like a peasant girl, looks good too..but Attia beats all the girls of the series...

yes the catholicism as well as all the hebrew based religions(islam, jews, and cristians) devilish the human body, sex, and speacilly women..acording to this religions the woman is a weak sorry excuse for a being, being the agent of the devil, tempting men to sin, and bla bla...it also states that killing is wrong and bla bla..it's a fact... and i defend that it was cristianity that utterly destroyed the roman empire, and not the economical stagantion and the barbarian invasions..when the barbarians took the western empire, Rome as a state of mind was long dead, substituted by a bunch of christian zealots, who couldn't live with thei'r neighbours who adored Mitras, and the original Roman gods, as well as Endovelicus...many endovelicus, mitras and roman temples were vadalised by this ignorant mobs who couldn't see past the "teachings" of priests, and Rome was no more...Constatine you should have burned your mother in the circus...Octavian, you should have exterminated the jerusalem province when you got to the power...=)

in great part our hipocrisy, and our tight view of sex and the human body is a seed of the first puritan jews(who said were the followers of christ) that spread the "Word"..in ultimate annalysis i find it dificult to believe anthing the church says...every disciple said a diferent thing, some gospels of certain disciples were banned, some disciples even devilished by its brothers...it's dificult for me to believe any of the things the church pushs on us...
if there was a gospel of jesus, that i might happily believe but i would have to be able to be sure it was really his, and not the words of a greedy, grumpy, and jealous peter...

and the hebrews is the same story, i can't read the old testament and belive much of it..a merciful god, but this merciful god destroys the world with floods, encorages the genocide of societies, takes the hebrews away from the most fertile place in miles round, destroys cities...and stuff...devilishes again the human body, and women...

i'm not agnostic nor am i atheist..i do believe there is divinity in the bible, but not all of it, i believe there was a man Jesus, and he made great things, and had a filosophy that was create to bring ppl to heaven and end suffering, but i don't believe, being jesus the son of god, would like for ppl to treat each other the way they do cuz of religion, and would want women to be devilish...

....
...
https://img440.imageshack.us/img440/2044/imagesjpg2nb6.jpg

oh crap..i'm Inocent!!! lol

Orb

09-09-2006, 17:59

Roderick, the statement that 'christianity ruined the west' is bashing Christianity. And I, at least, disagree with it.

iberus_generalis

09-09-2006, 18:24

but you must agree that cristianity caused extremely important unrest and unstability in the empire...

and im not bashing anyone, as im a catholic cristian, but unlike many of my countrymen and some abroad i see my religion for what it really is, and for what it really has been doing through out history....

Sargon the Great

09-09-2006, 18:42

Polly Walker is in Robinson Crusoe alongside Pierce Brosnan.

Orb

09-09-2006, 18:44

but you must agree that cristianity caused extremely important unrest and unstability in the empire...

I don't exactly see how that's related to 'ruined the west'. Also, didn't one later emperor try to revert to paganism, which turned out to be extremely unpopular.

You could, equally, say that Christianity was what led to the Byzantines and Franks repelling the Muslims where the Pagans had been completely unable to.

iberus_generalis

09-09-2006, 19:03

in military conquest, and military tactics(or lack of them) religion is a minor factor...the pagans pagans of todays turkey, must have had lousy strategists, and don't forget that the turkish armies were so massive, and bizantium only endured a bit more because of the geographical factors that allowed them to thrive and defend their places esialy...
as for the muslim conquests in Iberia, well they were lousy strategists, were not prepared for war, so unprepared that they only were able to stop the muslim advance in high ground and do to temperatures the muslims were not familiar with..and we must of course give franks credit for stoping them from invading south france...=)

but in my view was cristianity that killed Rome from within, and the barbaric hordes did the rest sacking the dead remains of the empire...cristianity killed the roman state of mind, and the roman identity...

Sdragon

09-09-2006, 19:10

Corruption from within and tragic leadership is probably the biggest factors to its death. Once the senate was replaced how many worthless emperors did the empire have to endure?

iberus_generalis

09-09-2006, 19:17

lost count...

cunctator

09-09-2006, 19:22

Ii's very doubtful that the roman empire could have endured to the present day without christianity. But christianity killed ancient, graeco roman, egyptian etc. culture.

-Praetor-

09-09-2006, 19:52

I`m no moderator, but could we please go back to the topic?

It`s very annoying to read that a thread about HBO Rome degenerates into a religion discussion.

Tellos Athenaios

09-09-2006, 21:21

Foot

09-09-2006, 22:38

To fullfill your request: the series was great, and I'm looking forward to see the second on Canvas. Btw, the Canvas broadcasts were longer than the BBC ones, so aren't the BBC versions censured a bit too? :inquisitive:

The BBC is a publically funded corporation and doesn't have any adverts. Were you looking at advertised times? It is possible that the BBC censored Rome, but I highly doubt it.

Foot

iberus_generalis

09-09-2006, 22:46

actually i remember that when it air, in my country it was said in the journals that in BBC they aired a censored version, without the introduction, some parts were cut(sex and fowl language), so that the first and second episode do to cuts were joined into one a little bigger episode... but that here we would get the full version...
and if you look HBO Rome at wikipedia, it's referenced there...the BBC polemic...

Krusader

09-09-2006, 22:49

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uWEf6G_HX00

pezhetairoi

09-10-2006, 03:55

(sex and fowl language)

XD

But anyhow. Cleopatra was too boyish for my liking, and I seriously think there was enough nudity and stuff to make some people uncomfortable. Me, for example. But I didn't like Atia and Servilia one bit. One was pretty but too scheming, the other too motherly.

Tell me one thing, though. Did Octavian really do his sister like in the show? Curious about that one. And I like the one about how they explained away the idea that J.C. and Octavian were doing, ahem, rear-end things with J.C.'s fit XD

Dayve

09-10-2006, 04:21

There is no such thing as too much sex, on TV or in real life. Women are awesome, sex is brilliant. Screw the bible, screw christianity, long live ancient shamelessness.

Tellos Athenaios

09-10-2006, 11:22

The BBC is a publically funded corporation and doesn't have any adverts. Foot
Neither does Canvas have any during the broadcasts itself, only between one and the next programme. So, still :inquisitive:

Orb

09-10-2006, 11:28

Dayve, if you want to attack the religious, go to the backroom and make a thread where people who don't want to see it don't see it. I'm not going to argue with you here.

iberus_generalis

09-10-2006, 12:31

don't like to read about religion don't read! in a free socity there are no taboo topics..man don't be so stuck up, according to the human rights notion, every human being has the right to free speech...and we are not saying blasphemy, we are not heretics...what we said was the truth...the hebrew based religion demonize every natural act, even the ones you do in the wc are connoted with imperfection, and sex is a sin...its a sin for the human race to multiply??? wait..doesn't one of god's mandates say "grow and Multiply"????how can one of god's will be a sin and reprovable act? as a cristian, or what ever religion you practice, you must see that the church as well as the bible are filled with contraditory arguments, incongroent stuff, and some obvious lies...plus why defend the Che Church and the Vatican? they are parasties, leechs really...when there is some catatrophy or some war, they say, let's help A or B, let's give them money, let's help them, but they never give a penny to anyone, they like to help with the money of others...and don't forget, that the vatican is the more wealthy organization in the world, they are like a black hole for money, it get's in, but never gets out... ofr example take the Fátima, a worldy known sanctuary in portugal, the revenues from the ppl going there, and buying stuff at the sanctuary, go completley to the vatican..some unknown count of bilion of dollars a year(you read correctly..bilions), and not one penny for taxes, plus the vatican also taxes local shops that sell religious items...it's estimate that one year revenue of this sanctuary is enough to pay the expenditures of the vatican during 50 years...yet the church doesn't share a penny with the poor and hungry...when the tsunami of south asia happened, did they give anything like everyone else? americans, japanese, everyone helped the victims, but the vatican gave no monetary help...all they said, was that the world should help the victims...what do they want the money for? to give to god? god doesn't like materialism...man these guys are really greedy!!! the church nowadays is much more a business than anything else..how can i believe blindly in this guys? answer..i can't

why don't you like to see religion discussed? it's a topic like any other...i'm a catholic cristian guy, and i see no problem to discussing it...

and have never you heard the saying that "Neither you nor i hold the Truth, but discussing we can get closer to it."?

Krusader

09-10-2006, 12:40

don't like to read about religion don't read? in a free socity there are no taboo topics..m don't be so stuck up, according to the human rights notion, every human being has the right to free speech...and we are not saying blasphemy, we are not heretics...what we said was the truth...the hebrew based religion demonize every natural act, even the ones you do in the wc are connoted with imperfection, and sex is a sin...its a sin for the human race to multiply??? wait..doesn't one of god's mandates say "grow and Multiply"????how can one of god's will be a sin and reprovable act? as a cristian, or what ever religion you practice, you must see that the church as well as the bible are filled with contrariatory arguments, incongroent stuff, and some obvious lies...

why don't you like to see religion discussed? it's a topic like any other...

and have never you heard the saying that "Neither you nor i hold the Truth, but discussing we can get closer to it."?

Sex is sin yes, but as long as it's outside the framework of marriage. Within marriage it is perfectly allowed and encouraged (just don't use contraception).

There has been some restrictions on sex from the earliest days of history, when soil became more valuable (due to the importance of grain & other crops, wine, olive oil etc.) and you could pass it on to your children.
A man ofc had to know the children were his, so the "women's reprodcution" had to be somehow controlled to make sure that when a man got his wife on the wedding night, she was a virgin and thus sure that the offspring she would get would be the man's.
Don't blame Christianity, Islam & Judaism for this, they just based that on existing patterns.

The Romans of course had a bit more leeway, as biological ties were not that important. Yet, women were also tightly controlled in Roman society.

Note: Religion is a bit touchy subject, but should still be discussed as long as it doesnt evolve into flaming and spewing filth. And try to stay on the subject which is the TV series Rome. If you have any itch to discuss Christianity in a bad light, head to the Backroom.

iberus_generalis

09-10-2006, 12:44

im not flaming anyone, im trying to show ORB why discussing religion in a civilized way is important, and a normal topic...

Simmons

09-10-2006, 13:44

im not flaming anyone, im trying to show ORB why discussing religion in a civilized way is important, and a normal topic...
I think Orb realises that as he did suggest starting a conversation in the Back Room (https://forums.totalwar.org/vb/forumdisplay.php?f=114) which is the appropriate place on the forum for a religious discussion.

As for censorship I would imagine Rome was censored here in Australia for a really laid back society we have some pretty strong laws on naughty words and rude bits. :wacko:

Orb

09-10-2006, 14:11

Andronikos is correct here, I don't have a problem with people discussing it, just let them discuss it in the correct forum. The EB forum is not a place to discuss politics or religion.

:focus:

I thought, as I said before, that the series was pretty good. I thought they used too much sex, especially in the first episode, for no reason whatsoever (later in the series it was much better used).

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

09-10-2006, 18:23

Firstly, let me dispel a couple of myths.

The BBC did not cut the sex, they cut the threatrical tension between Pompey and Caesar, which is why the British press complained. The whole thing is restored on the DVD.

Rome is full of wild inacuracies, not least of which is Caesar's death in the Senate House. Now did Octavian have sex with his sister. Oh, and the uniforms got too me, specifically the helmets, too attic.

To suggest that Rome was a true representation of the epoch is generous to say the least. The sex is way over done, and it was NOT acceptable in Rome to be a sexoholic. Pompey, Caesar and Mark Antony were all ridiculed because of their sex lives and therefore their lack of restraint and dependance on women. Homosexuality was considered demeaning, in that no Roman male should be submisive in such a way.

The famour comment about Caesar being "A man for every woman and a woman for every man" was an insult about time he spent in the East. The fact that the show's American producer prensented it as a voast shows just how far off they were.

That said, its great entertainment and I enjoyed it, I thought the characterisation was particually good.

Dayve

09-10-2006, 20:12

Sex is sin yes, but as long as it's outside the framework of marriage. Within marriage it is perfectly allowed and encouraged (just don't use contraception).

There has been some restrictions on sex from the earliest days of history, when soil became more valuable (due to the importance of grain & other crops, wine, olive oil etc.) and you could pass it on to your children.
A man ofc had to know the children were his, so the "women's reprodcution" had to be somehow controlled to make sure that when a man got his wife on the wedding night, she was a virgin and thus sure that the offspring she would get would be the man's.
Don't blame Christianity, Islam & Judaism for this, they just based that on existing patterns.

The Romans of course had a bit more leeway, as biological ties were not that important. Yet, women were also tightly controlled in Roman society.

Note: Religion is a bit touchy subject, but should still be discussed as long as it doesnt evolve into flaming and spewing filth. And try to stay on the subject which is the TV series Rome. If you have any itch to discuss Christianity in a bad light, head to the Backroom.

Marriage is BS. It means nothing. It's a piece of paper. Marriage is simply another way for the church to make even more money so it's priests can afford large broadband connections to download child pornography. No two people need to have a piece of paper saying they are married to have the right to have sex. Sex is wonderful and is the most pleasurable and natural thing in a human beings life. Sex is nothing to be ashamed of, in OR OUT of marriage.

By Wigwerth -

o suggest that Rome was a true representation of the epoch is generous to say the least. The sex is way over done, and it was NOT acceptable in Rome to be a sexoholic. Pompey, Caesar and Mark Antony were all ridiculed because of their sex lives and therefore their lack of restraint and dependance on women. Homosexuality was considered demeaning, in that no Roman male should be submisive in such a way.

-----------------------

The only people who ridicule men for having a rich and fruitful sex life are people who are jealous because they aren't getting as much as they would like, or they have to pay for it.

Orb

09-10-2006, 20:33

Can you not understand?

TO THE BACKROOM

We all need someone

09-10-2006, 21:59

And that would have been a bad thing to have the Muslims take over the West? For one thing, the advanced technology and medicine they had at the time might have helped contain The Black Death.

No religion is greater than any of the others. The current theocratic states in the Middle East are a lot like the United States today, the people in power thump their holy book to maintain their power and cover up their crimes in "godliness".

Geoffrey S

09-10-2006, 22:08

The only people who ridicule men for having a rich and fruitful sex life are people who are jealous because they aren't getting as much as they would like, or they have to pay for it.
I disagree. In Rome, above most other things, moderation was considered the greatest virtue in all things; it is frequently praised in literature, and particularly in Livy. In the later years of the republic the behaviour of certain (younger) nobles with regard to fashion, food and sex shocked the majority, in a fashion comparable to the way most older generations have difficulty understanding the changing lifestyles of the younger generations.

However, I'll grant that whatever went on in Roman bedrooms is pure speculations, even with literary sources. What I objected to was the gratuitous way in which sex was depicted in Rome, much in the way I object to the exploitative use of sex in Paul Verhoeven movies. I've got nothing against sex, either on tv, net, or (heavens above!) in the wider world, but I disliked the way it was used in Rome for no apparent reason of the plot; as I said earlier, the fact that the amount of sex greatly decreased in later episodes illustrates its shocker/titilation function in the opening episodes. It could have done with less, or at least more functional sex at the start of the series.

Anyway, why should this be the centre of debate? As a whole, I really enjoyed Rome, particularly as Wigferth Ironwall also stated the characterisation.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

09-11-2006, 00:21

The only people who ridicule men for having a rich and fruitful sex life are people who are jealous because they aren't getting as much as they would like, or they have to pay for it.

I suggest you moderate your tone. As Geoffrey said, Roman virtue was about moderation and restraint. You were only supposed to have sex within a marriage because it stopped a lot of unfortunate bastards running around. Particually as a good Roman father would be expected to bite the bullet and adopt any and all offspring.

I suggest you refrain from commenting on things which you have no knowledge of.

Divinus Arma

09-11-2006, 02:39

:dancinglock:

Lost cause. Great show, crappy discussion.

Papewaio

09-11-2006, 03:00

Marriage is BS. It means nothing. It's a piece of paper. Marriage is simply another way for the church to make even more money so it's priests can afford large broadband connections to download child pornography. No two people need to have a piece of paper saying they are married to have the right to have sex. Sex is wonderful and is the most pleasurable and natural thing in a human beings life. Sex is nothing to be ashamed of, in OR OUT of marriage.

Marriage, it is a social contract between the partners and society. You look after each other in a manner which is productive to society, and society in turn will look ater the partnership. Marriage is not limited to those who go to church, mosque, temple or other religious abode.

Sex is nothing to be ashamed of, not taking responsibility for ones actions and the consequences of them is something to be ashamed of. Also confusing pleasure with happiness can lead to problems. When one thinks that happiness is always gained throught the path that is mose pleasurable they are merely being on a short leash of self indulgence.

Roderick Ponce Von Fontlebottom

09-11-2006, 03:03

Too much swearing and I can't be bothered to read the whole thing a second time to edit it all out. So I will just remove it all and the rest of you can use your imaginations... just imagine one of my rants. No warning points will be issued.

Roderick Ponce Von Fontlebottom

09-11-2006, 03:07

oops srry guys i dident know we couldent cuss in the backroom even. my bad.

Divinus Arma

09-11-2006, 03:29

Hmmm. Colorful.

Xiahou

09-11-2006, 04:49

Marriage, it is a social contract between the partners and society. You look after each other in a manner which is productive to society, and society in turn will look ater the partnership. Marriage is not limited to those who go to church, mosque, temple or other religious abode.

Sex is nothing to be ashamed of, not taking responsibility for ones actions and the consequences of them is something to be ashamed of. Also confusing pleasure with happiness can lead to problems. When one thinks that happiness is always gained throught the path that is mose pleasurable they are merely being on a short leash of self indulgence.
Wow, I kinda agree with that. Well said. :bow:

cunctator

09-11-2006, 08:50

Wow, an EB thread has ended in the backrom.

Conqueror

09-11-2006, 13:55

Not that the thread had much to do with EB to begin with.

ShadesWolf

09-11-2006, 19:39

monkian

09-11-2006, 20:02

I am currently watching this excellent series and enjoying it.
I missed it firsd time round. Im on episode 4 so I will catch 5 tonight.

It works nice in conjunction with the emperor books im reading at the moment.

Emperor books are great :2thumbsup:

I bought the boxed set of Rome - well worth getting - the episodes are the longer and uncut 'american' versions. More T + A and background info.

Extras are great too.

Grey_Fox

09-11-2006, 21:23

monkian

09-11-2006, 21:30

Emperor sucks the big one. Poorly written, hastily thrown together and awful dialogue. Pacing is all over the place and the historical innacuracies are laughable. An uberninja Brutus and a fella with magical healing abilities? Dear god...

Rome on the other hand, is great, up there with Battlestar Galactica (the new version) as my favourite show.

In your opinion :book:

If I wanted Historical accuracy I could read my A level/degree History text books.

You history fan boys are worse than Star Trek fans :wall:

Grey_Fox

09-11-2006, 21:42

Kagemusha

09-11-2006, 21:52

Mithrandir

09-11-2006, 22:00

I like Rome very much.The atmosphere in the series is great and they havent tryed to write the characters to have the values of the people of today. Im looking forward to see the second season.:2thumbsup:

Aye to that, I throroughly enjoy it.

I also loved the series of Hornblower and Sharpe.

AntiochusIII

09-12-2006, 00:20

HBO certain have a reputation for developing some really interesting series.

Blasphemous, I know, and very unhandsomely mainstream, but I used to like both Sex and The City and Entourage.

I also love Band of Brothers, one of the greatest World War II shows ever.

Rome is very well done. The sex was overblown early on (I don't mind sex myself, being an adolescent male and all -- but it's way too much early on: I was seeking to watching Rome, not Cinemax porn with a Roman theme) but otherwise the drama and the characterizations are most impressive. Atia annoys me -- I was trying to watch Rome, not a Time-Life Drama -- but I guess I can forgive the show for that simple flaw.

Sasaki Kojiro

09-12-2006, 00:28

Haven't seen rome, but Deadwood and The Wire are really good. Only seen the first 2 seasons though.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

09-12-2006, 00:34

Did someone say Sharpe?

Fetch me my Baker!

rotorgun

09-12-2006, 01:38

I kind of liked the little twist were Pullo is actually the father of the future Ceasarian. :laugh4: What happened to the very sultry and exotic Cleopatra though? She makes about three brief appearances and then we see her no more. Talk about the woman that outraged Ceasar's wife and the public of Rome!

I do think that the actor who portrayed Ceasar did an admirable job of making himself irrittating. If that is how Gauis Julius Ceasar really was, I can see why the Senate wanted to kill him-for his pompousity if nothing else.

All in all, an entertaining way to watch history.

monkian

09-12-2006, 13:39

Hah. I wouldn't mind the innacuracy if the series was actually any good - it is historical fiction after all - but Iggulden is just a crap author, nowhere near as good as Cornwell (who takes many liberties, but I don't mind since he is a great writer, even if he is becoming a bit too formulaic for my tastes).

Does the magical healing not bother you at all? Or the uberninja?

I much prefer Cornwell too - have you read the new Sharpe ?

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

09-12-2006, 15:50

Caesar was badly mis-cast, he shouldn't have been all joully and by the time he died he was bald, but still a dandy.

professorspatula

09-12-2006, 15:52

I've been hearing how Cornwell's latest books all seem samey and tiresome, but I haven't read any yet, so couldn't be a judge of that. I've enjoyed the first two Emperor books, and although they're far from historically accurate, as someone else said, there's history books if you need that. They're entertaining enough and there's plenty of political intrigue and battles for those that like both. And so what if Cabera has the healing abilities of Mr. Miyagi, it's seldom over done and can be taken with a pinch of salt. But the books are no where near as good as Wallace Breem's Eagle in the Snow though. That has to be the best historical fiction book I've read.

What's that Simon Scarrow books like? There's certainly enough of them.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

09-12-2006, 16:11

Have you tried David Gemmel's Troy: Lord of the Silver Bow and Shield of Thunder.

They're semi-historical recountings of what might have happened in the Trojan War.

I would really recomend Cornwell's Warlord trilogy.

Grey_Fox

09-12-2006, 17:24

I much prefer Cornwell too - have you read the new Sharpe ?

Bought it last week but am currently reading "The General's War" first, it's about the first Gulf War and is pretty good.

lancelot

09-12-2006, 17:56

One of my Proffesors lamented the inaccuracies of Rome, although I enjoyed the show for entertainment purposes.

Scurvy

09-12-2006, 18:12

Hah. I wouldn't mind the innacuracy if the series was actually any good - it is historical fiction after all - but Iggulden is just a crap author, nowhere near as good as Cornwell (who takes many liberties, but I don't mind since he is a great writer, even if he is becoming a bit too formulaic for my tastes).

Does the magical healing not bother you at all? Or the uberninja?

the book might be innacurate, but i still enjoyed it, not as good as cornwell (although i'v only read his arthur series) but still good fun to read (but then again most books are good fun to read on the tube)

ShadesWolf

09-12-2006, 19:54

I also like Cornwell, but I have found him after a while to become a bore.

I read the grail quest, first book was excellent, but it went down hill quickly then, the final book in the series, was dire - imho

I also have the current series, about Alfred, which so far i am enjoying. Only time will tell.

However, back to Caesar, I appreciate that this is pure fiction, but I must admit I am enjoying them, and to be honest, thats all that matters. Once I have completed them, I get get the correct historical stuff, Caesars own.........

monkian

09-12-2006, 20:13

Gemmell's books are pretty cut and paste in my opinion

Angry hero with two weapons - sure fire thign that his girl/mate will get raped/killed and said hero gets angrier and choppier.

Loved the first Grail quest book - agree they went downhill.

Really like the Arthur books too.

Just read Men of Bronze (http://play.com/Books/Books/4-/932776/-/Product.html?searchstring=men+of+bronze&searchsource=0) - very good.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

09-12-2006, 21:11

Gemmell's books are pretty cut and paste in my opinion

Angry hero with two weapons - sure fire thign that his girl/mate will get raped/killed and said hero gets angrier and choppier.

I don' know about cut and paste but I admit he can be repetitive. I think he was, on one level or another, influenced by the epic saga's, read Beowolf in verse and you'll see what I'm talking about.

Legend, The Swords of Night and Day, Waylander, Sword in the Storm, Midnight Falcon and Lord of the Silver Bow are all, imo, excellant.

Quest for Lost Heros, Winter Warriors and Stormrider were his weakest books, the rest are pretty good but some do have pacing problems.

I think the thing with Gemmel is Scale, I mean imagine attacking Dros Delnoch.

Slightly more on topic: The BBC Is running a factual series in six parts: Ancient Rome - The Rise and Fall of an Empire, I was looking at the pics in our TV book and the designs for the armour and weapons is way off, agian. They did this with their special on Gladiators, where they had the Romans wearing segmented bibs.

ROME had some uniform wierdness as well, though nowhere near as bad. Its almost as if they haven't moved on from the Seventies.

Geoffrey S

09-13-2006, 15:02

I found the Emperor books okay-ish. The first isn't good at all, but as the story enters the better documented parts of history at least Iggulden has a decent pacing to work with. But the series never rises to a level where I'd say it was good; definitely nowhere near Cornwall's level of either writing or believability.

Caesar was badly mis-cast, he shouldn't have been all joully and by the time he died he was bald, but still a dandy.
Just have to say, I disagree. Of all the cast, I found the actor portraying Caesar perfectly laid down the complex character and made clear how he could inspire blind devotion among his men, yet make deadly enemies.

Philippus Flavius Homovallumus

09-13-2006, 16:24

Caesar lacked the charm and extravagence. Pompey wasn't very charismatic either. Both men were ladikillers.

I'm sorry, I just didn't buy it.

econ21

09-13-2006, 21:31

Just have to say, I disagree. Of all the cast, I found the actor portraying Caesar perfectly laid down the complex character and made clear how he could inspire blind devotion among his men, yet make deadly enemies.

Absolutely - I thought nearly all the acting was excellent, but Ciaran Hinds was the stand-out - portraying a lethal mix of high-minded nobility and low cunning. A lot of the credit must go to the way the part was written, but I thought the actor brought an excellent mix of gravitas and subtlety to the part. He was so good, he even holds his own when compared with the vividly acted Emperors in "I, Claudius".