Movie Centurion

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Yeah, despite its flaws that only us re-enactors notice, Gladheateher is still the best Roman movie I've seen in the cinema. the opening scene was great!

[Forty-One]

Yeeeees... that's exactly what I meant ... After all a star is a star and art is art no matter the time period....
Proving once again that "Artistic License" was alive and well even in Ancient Rome.

I have my doubts that, given a choice, one would enter into battle without their helmet, but ...
:? | wink:

Narukami

I can imagine two grizzled old Dacian wars veterans talking: "Yeah, I went to Rome once and saw the column. It's crap. None of the officers have their helmets on, everyone wears a 'lorica segmentata', and they even made some of them look like they're made out of leather! And you should see how they did the Sarmatian horse armours! Oh ha ha ha ha ha!"

[Graham Sumner]

Better than Gladiator ..? That's not hard to do. Worth your time? Well, we fall back to that old saw: Even a poor film about ancient Rome is better than no film about ancient Rome. I know, some films stretch that maxim to the breaking point, but I don't think Centurion is one of them. However, when I have finally had an opportunity to watch the entire film I may revise and extend my remarks.

I agree with David here. I actually found I enjoyed the film overall but there were inevitably niggles that could so easily have been either changed or avoided without detriment to the rest of the film. Why call an isolated fort-let Inchtuthill? Why give a date and then have the name of a governor long dead by then. In either case the majority of the audience would not know or care, so what harm would it have done to have avoided these errors. Or was it simply a case that research was no more than 'wikipedia Roman Scotland'! I very much doubt a legionary commander would mix with his men as depicted and I am pretty sure a governors wife would not serve drinks. However as movie Roman armour goes apart from the legion commander this was probably the best looking since Cleopatra in 1963. My main disappointment with the film was that it was not as good as two of the directors previous films 'Dog Soldiers' and 'The Descent' with werewolves in one and human salamanders in the other. The female antagonist was simply not in the same league. What happened to the cavalry before the ambush and finally was there any point to the revelation that the Centurion had been a Gladiator? It did not add to the story or reveal itself in any special way such as fighting skills.

Cant they make a hisorical movie nowadays with body armor that works and without nubile Amazons ?
its not the worst movie about Romans ever made but its pretty close. I would nominate for the worst: "The last Legion'. The best is "Gladiator" .

You have obviously never seen 'Amazons and Gladiators'!

However If Gladiator is the best then obviously a good script, great acting and high production values beat accuracy every time which in a way proves what the film-makers keep telling us, although it is rare that they do get all three.

For similar chase movies in a historical setting try 'The Naked Prey' with Cornel Wilde and more recently 'Apocalypto'.

Graham.

[Forty-One]

[
You have obviously never seen 'Amazons and Gladiators'!

Or "The Viking Queen": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgSaGmNOYKI

[MARCvSVIBIvSMAvRINvS]

The Viking Queen is BRILLIANT !



M.VIB.M.

[Narukami]

For similar chase movies in a historical setting try 'The Naked Prey' with Cornel Wilde and more recently 'Apocalypto'.

Graham.

Indeed, the later Gibson film is a direct (if unacknowledged) remake the earlier Wilde film.

Sometimes directors and writers get tripped up as the attempt to parade their historical erudition.

In Spileberg's WWII opus, Saving Private Ryan, when the Rangers link-up with the paratroopers of the 101st, Ryan makes the comment that the Germans they just ambushed were from the 2nd SS Panzer Division Das Reich. It is an interesting historical tidbit, intended (I believe) only to those who really know their WWII history, and yet these are they very people who would also know that it was incorrect.

Why make this mistake?

In a film touted for its historical accuracy such a simple, and pointless mistake baffles.

The writer / director John Sayles said it best: "If historical accuracy were the thing people went to the movies for, historians would be the vice presidents of studios. Every studio would have two or three historians."

We should be so lucky.
:|

Narukami