Ancient Rome: the Rise and Fall of an Empire

[Tarbicus]

Ancient Rome: the Rise and Fall of an Empire

Starts tonight, six episodes, and seems to have pretty good actors in it.

THURSDAY 21 SEPTEMBER
9:00pm - 10:00pm
BBC1

VIDEO Plus+: 3841

1/6 - Nero

One of the complaints about last year's scintillating BBC2 drama Rome was that it messed with the facts. Commentators grumbled that it literally lost the plot and that the real events of Roman history were more worthy of the BBC's budgets than a scriptwriter's whims. This new series might be seen as a response to those critics. It starts, for some reason, at the story of Nero, and promises the real deal: authentic history (as far as we know it) acted out by a quality cast, with a fact-based narration to usher events along. After early hiccups, this opening episode takes off brilliantly, thanks to yet another riveting performance from Michael Sheen. As Nero, he gives a memorable portrayal of a maniac with a rampant ego and a glint in his eye, convinced he's an artist and, oh by the way, a god. Scenes such as the one where he commands that a slave take the place of his dead wife ("Make him a woman!") chill the blood and give a real sense of power unhitched from reality. If the rest of the series can keep up this standard, we're in for a treat.

[Niedel]

They just never learn (from the BBC site):

The same can be said of costume. So often in depictions of Ancient Rome, the clothes people wear look pristine and spotless. But modern-day clothing doesn't always look like that, so why should Roman? All the clothes in the series need to look worn – even if it means they are grubby. In particular, the battle clothing – the tunics, chain-mail and segmented armour of the Roman army – would have been dull and tarnished, not burnished and shiny.

Sounds like they used the same sets from the Emperor series (Augustus etc.). Oh well. Let us non-Brits know how it was/is.

[Kate Gilliver]

I rather enjoyed it, and watched the whole thing (which is more than I can say for Rome). The literary device of 'Nero goes completely off the rails when the restraining factor of Seneca is removed' was hinted at but not over-pushed. I liked the interpretation of the burning of Rome which did seek an alternative to the intensely hostile literary tradition, and the stress on the importance of the imperial blood-line. I was disappointed that Agrippina's 'shipwreck' was missing, and thought Tigellinus' breastplate looked a bit too much like duraglitted chrome. But it was good, and I'm looking forward to next week's (not sure what I think of the BBC being unshackled by chronology and going 'back' to Caesar next week).

[Caballo]

I agree- while the details were dodgy in a few cases, I (and my teenage sons, more to the point) watched it and really enjoyed it-despite them missing Ricky Gervais (a UK comedian) on the other side. Looking forward to the next one. Good acting as well- I'd put it up there with "I , Claudius".

Cheers

Caballo

[Tarbicus]

The hour passed quickly, which usually means I enjoyed it. I liked the drama, which was a nice change from talking heads, and focusing on a particluar set of events helped keep it going.

Looking forward to next week's with Sean Pertwee playing Caesar. If I'm not mistaken the brief preview showed his troops wearing Monterfortinos and holding proper Republican scuta. Thumbs up if so.

[mcbishop]

They forgot to paint the buildings... again. Megabucks on the CGI and they don't paint the buildings. I ask you; next thing you know they'll have a skinny Nero with no beard. Hang on... !

Mike Bishop

[Graham Sumner]

They forgot to paint the buildings... again. Megabucks on the CGI and they don't paint the buildings. I ask you; next thing you know they'll have a skinny Nero with no beard. Hang on... !

........and Gladiators fighting in an arena that looked suspiciously like you know what!

In fact the same Gladiators who fought in the BBC documentary on Gladiators depicting the opening games at you know what before Titus.

I was disappointed that Agrippina's 'shipwreck' was missing,

She was missing as well along with the Christians!

[Tarbicus]

:wink: Everyone's a critic.

I suspect they re-used old shots and cgi assets to keep costs down. Obviously that applied to the beard as well (very expensive those beards).

So, finding it impossible not to think "Tony Blair" whilst watching it, who was Gordon Brown? Tigellinus? All things considered over the past few weeks and years. "I had an idea for raising more taxes..."

And for the non-British here, the actor playing Nero has a regular slot now playing Tony Blair in film and TV, before you jump on me for a modern politics thing.

[stevesarak]

Airs in the U.S. Oct 2

[Niedel]

Do you know which channel, Steve? I can't find it on the BBC America schedule...

[Gaivs Antonivs Satvrninvs]

Sounds great.
Yes,PLEASE keep us informed as to
when and where.

Just did a search of BBC America,too.
Some very interesting shows coming up
but no Ancient Rome.

[stevesarak]

Do you know which channel, Steve? I can't find it on the BBC America schedule...

Oops, sorry about that. :oops:

On Oct 2 History International http://www.historyinternational.com/
Will air “The Fall of the Great Empiresâ€

[Niedel]

Hmm, then I guess we won't see this over here in the U.S. for a while. Maybe only on DVD?

[Kate Gilliver]

It was Caesar last night, with a slightly wooden performance from Sean Pertwee (son of Doctor Who), John Shrapnel (who seems to be type-cast as 'a Roman' now) as Pompey, and confusingly Marcus Marcellus being played by the bloke who played Cato the Younger in Rome.

Again, pretty good, if rather simplified; among other things I liked the far too brief hair plucking scene-let and the bickering Republican senators in Pompey's entourage. Discussions on the RAT thread notwithstanding, I was unconvinced by the presence of un-armoured legionaries in the front rank of battle; these guys are all Gallic war veterans and had probably all got armour of some kind by now. At least the rest had mail and montefortino helmets, even if they were too uniform. In my opinion the narration pushed too far suggestions that Caesar was a democratic revolutionary out to destroy government by the aristocracy, but I guess it did highlight the democratic element of the Roman republican state.

The Gracchi next week - wow! What an 'un-cool' topic to choose, good on the BBC, and great timing since I'm teaching them this term!!

[Robert Vermaat]

and confusingly Marcus Marcellus being played by the bloke who played Cato the Younger in Rome.

Yes, that wás confusing, since he almost payed the same sort of scenes. I found it very simplified, all in all, almost a Rome 'light', shot in the same scenery.

At least the rest had mail and montefortino helmets, even if they were too uniform.

And small! All these helmets left most of the cheeks unprotected, as if they made them all one size too small...

In my opinion the narration pushed too far suggestions that Caesar was a democratic revolutionary out to destroy government by the aristocracy, but I guess it did highlight the democratic element of the Roman republican state.

Well, a bit, there were of course hint and snide-remarks that the 'republicans' were only against Caesar for their love of money!

Did the citizens of Rome indeed all leave the city when Caesar marched on Rome - the streets were deserted and the directors really suggsted that all Romans had fled.

Caesars wars in Spain were a bit more highlighted here than they were in 'Rome'. The decimation of Legio IX (was that historical? The 1st c. BC is not my forte) was also never seen before. Caesar's was also not that invincible as he seemed to be in 'Rome'.