Quote Originally Posted by Gabeed View Post
I hear what you're saying, and, in fact, I said what you're saying. I don't care immensely about the nitpicked historical inaccuracies, but I do care if it looks good, as does just about everyone else. This is why we don't see tons of TV shows based around being historical epics--there's an obligation to show the grandeur of the age which a TV show budget is hard-pressed to meet. ROME did an amazing job overall with this, but its' battles were History Channel-esque in presentation, almost laughable in certain examples (such as the aforementioned Alexandria siege night scene). Maybe I've been spoiled by movies such as Gladiator and whatnot, but if you're going to attempt a historical tale with major battles in TV or in movies, you can't half-ass it. So while I appreciate that the producers managed to get an elephant for the aftermath of the battle against Cato and Scipio in North Africa, it and the mere dozen bodies around it pulled me from the immersion of the show.
Well, one might dispute if the grandeur of the classical age is not a bit of a romanticism dating back to the Neoclassicism. As I already said, I like the very classical theatrical approach of focusing on characters and plot and not wasting time with cgi-masturbation. I'm perfectly fine if that is being left for Hollywood-bogus like Gladiator.