Hbo Rome Second Season

[DecimusCaesar]

I, Claudius" is engaging and dramatic and should be part of any Roman buff's collection

 

I watched the entire I, Claudius series about a week before I recieved 'Rome', It really is quite good (even though the sets look a little wonky these days) and I think a lot of it is to do with the well written script. Humour goes a long way as well as I am rather tired of watching historical epics with characters who never seem to have laughed or told a joke in their entire lives. You'd think their faces might crack if they did.

 

QUOTE -I agree with the comment about "battles" - we don't really need to spend a whole lot of money on battles, since this is bound to be incredibly expensive and could derail the entire production as a single battle scene of a few minutes (without CGI) involves weeks, if not months of planning, pre-production, construction of sets, scouting of locations, etc. etc. - Spend the money instead on getting the best actors you can (for your budget) and hire a team of experienced historians / writers who can bring this era to life in a way that can modern audiences can relate to. I think "Rome" did an excellent job in that regard and the overall production was very modern, with crisp dialogue and scenes that were filled with dramatic intensity, as the tension was quite palpable between the characters.

 

I agree in part, as I would love to see a depiction of the battle of Actium at the end of the series, but I do realise that this would cost a HUGE amount of money and would be extremly difficult and dangerous to film, so it would be best left out of the series.

 

Damn! I can never quite figure out how to do the quotes! I always end up getting the bubble around my own words not that of someone else,i'll figure it out ....evevntually.

Edited September 4, 2006 by DecimusCaesar

[Primus Pilus]

Not to distract from the conversation at hand, but quoting is simply a matter of using proper brackets. It should look like this...

 

[quote]Damn! I can never quite figure out how to do the quotes! I always end up getting the bubble around my own words not that of someone else,i'll figure it out ....evevntually.
[/quote]

[Plautus]

"I agree in part, as I would love to see a depiction of the battle of Actium at the end of the series, but I do realise that this would cost a HUGE amount of money and would be extremly difficult and dangerous to film, so it would be best left out of the series."

 

 

Speaking of anemic battle scenes and Actium, go get the collectors edition of Elizabeth Taylor's 1963 Cleopatra. The expanded version makes a little more sense than the original, but it's still pretty boring. But there is a documentary about the production that is better than the film.

 

It explains that the director Joe Mankewicz spent so much money on the interior melodrama scenes, including flying out to Italy Liz's favorite chili from Chasens in Beverly Hills, that he ignored any large set pieces, except for Cleopatras grand entrance into Rome. When the film was done Studio chief Darryl Zanuck exploded. Where were the battles? He called back many actors to film the films opening at Phrasalia and the Battle of Actium, which was done pretty low budget, and it shows.

[DecimusCaesar]

I've never seen the 1963 'Cleopatra' film, but I think I read that the Actium scene was one of the most difficult movie scenes to film- did they actually build a 100 Roman war galleys?

 

I haven't seen much of these old productions, I only have Spartacus (1960); I, Claudius; (1976); Gladiator (2000); Julius Caesar (2002) and Rome (2005) on DVD. I have seen some scenes from other Roman films or TV shows, including a TV movie about Cleopatra from a few years ago starring that guy from titanic, whose name I can't recall. Most of them are melodramatic affairs that have little connection with history and seem to be based more on Shakespeare's work.

[The Augusta]

I agree in part, as I would love to see a depiction of the battle of Actium at the end of the series, but I do realise that this would cost a HUGE amount of money and would be extremly difficult and dangerous to film, so it would be best left out of the series.

 

 

I agree - I would love to see a depiction of Actium, but I know it would be sheer self-indulgence to a degree, as I am a huge Agrippa admirer. It would be prohibitive by the cost alone, as you mention, but also, let us be honest, just how historically significant would it be to those of us (all on here) who know the outcome? And from a historical perspective itself, the strategy leading up to the final battle was so well thought out by Agrippa and his seconds that the actual naval engagement was heavily weighted in his favour. Well - there may be those who disagree, but it is my humble opinion. The strategy forced Antony into a naval battle, when Agrippa and his seconds had already proved themselves in the Sicilian War, and the wearer of the Naval Crown and the flier of the blue ensign had gained his reputation. I suppose there was an aura of inevitability about it, once Agrippa had captured Leucas for Octavian. However, symbolically, it was certainly seen in Rome as the apocalyptical confrontation - if that is the right word - the confrontation between east and west, which Octavian won, thus preventing, as the propaganda ran, the Hellenisation of the Empire. For this reason alone they could perhaps splash out a bit and give us something approaching Actium, but I doubt we'll get it.

[DecimusCaesar]

I am a huge Agrippa admirer

 

I've been reading quite a lot about Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa recently, he is a fascinating figure and I was considering making a thread to discuss him in the Imperial forum. The important part he played in finally subduing the pirate Sextus Pompey, his friendship with Augustus and how he subsequently allowed him to become princeps by winning his battles for him and how he married Julia and ended up passing his genes to the members of the Julio-Claudian dynasty. His daughter was even married to Quintillius Varus.

 

That's not to mention his building works in Rome, he helped the Princeps in his construction that turned Rome into a 'city of marble'. I hope he makes an appearance in the next series of Rome, to be played by someone who could do him justice as opposed to the miserable man he appeared as in I, Claudius.

[The Augusta]

Decimus, I would certainly be in favour of a thread about Agrippa. He is, for me, one of the great unsung heroes of history. I was interested to read that one of his daughters married Varus, for I thought I knew all there was to know about 'our Marcus' and have never come across this. Would this be one of his girls with his second wife Marcella?

 

As for someone playing him in 'Rome' - I cannot help seeing a certain amount of foreshadowing in Pullo. I think its a great shame that Ray Stevenson hasn't been saved to play Agrippa. But let's hope we get someone suitably athletic and Herculean. I am just hoping that - given the amount of historical persons who have so far been conspicuous by their absence in this series - that HBO don't dispense with Agrippa altogether and have Pullo 'take his place'. Surely, even they would not dare!

[phil25]

Can I add my voice to the plaudits for M V Agrippa. A truely great man.

 

He deserves more attention. I also think we tend to see him through an Augustan filter - always perceived as the loyal lieutenant, and less as the great general and administrator he clearly was. I suspect that without him, Augustus would have been defeated or had to settle for much less.

 

As I recall, Syme (Roman Revolution) thought that the second Augustan settlement might have been the result of an in-house coup by Agrippa, who was concerned for his own position and power. I don't know how soundly based that hypothesis is, but it appeals because it allows Agrippa to emerge from the shadows as his own man, with a personal agenda and ambition.

 

Even if untrue, I feel that a politician and public servant such as Agrippa would have had his own vision and the will to pursue it. But so much is speculative in the ancient world, and veiled by paucity of sources or veneers of others' propaganda. In Augustus' case we can scarcely make out the historical Antonius, let alone Agrippa!! Augustus lived longer and took good care to ensure that the drama of his career had only one star.

 

There is a statue of him in Venice museum (I think) on which I looked for a long time. A fascinating face. In life his auctoritas and dignitas must have been amazing and awesome to behold.

 

The man in the modern world whom I often thought might have been something like him, was Earl Mountbatten - Viceroy, Admiral, politician and schemer, though Mountbatten did not have Agrippa's victories behind him, and was a lesser (and less loyal) man overall. There was something about the features of the two also that reminded me one of the other.

 

But that's just whistful!! Alma Tadema did a painting entitled "Agrippa's Morning Reception" (or something similar) which shows the great man descending a stairway in his house to meet his clients. The Prima Porta statue of Augustus is there, but the picture appeals to me because it gives Agrippa centre stage for once (however Victorian the ambience).

 

Like Pompeius (Magnus) and Antonius, Agrippa is overshadowed by his contemporaries to the extent that we cannot see them as they were perceived and known in their own day; or as they might have shone in times where a Caesar or an Augustus was less dominant.

 

If only Agrippa's personal diary or his confidential commentaries had survived. We might see the period in an altogether different light.

 

 

Phil

[DecimusCaesar]

It says in the Oxford Classical Dictionary that it was Marcella Agrippinia that married Quinctillius Varus. She was the daughter of Agrippa from Caecilia Attica.

 

After checking it was Publius Qunctillius Varus that she married but he later divorced her and re-married before marching off to be slaughtered at the Teutoburg Forest.

Edited September 25, 2006 by DecimusCaesar

[DecimusCaesar]

If only Agrippa's personal diary or his confidential commentaries had survived. We might see the period in an altogether different light.

 

It is a shame that they are lost. It is true what you say Phil about how very little we know about ancient figures. We almost aways depend on what others say about them, whether it's biographies written centuries after their deaths or the biased words of their contempories (Cicero's opinions on his enemies for instance).

[Gaius Paulinus Maximus]

I too hope that M V Agrippa will have a part to play in the next series of 'Rome', along with Gaius Maecenas.

 

Without the help and advice of these men Octavian would probably never have accomplished all that he did, Agrippa and Maecenas plyed a vital role in turning Octavian into Augustus.

[DecimusCaesar]

I don't know if this has laready been mentioned but according to IMDB they are filming Episode six of the series - 'Phillipi'. It seems old Marcus Junius Brutus will be leaving the series earlier than I thought.

[The Augusta]

I don't know if this has laready been mentioned but according to IMDB they are filming Episode six of the series - 'Phillipi'. It seems old Marcus Junius Brutus will be leaving the series earlier than I thought.

 

Now, you have worried me already, Decimus. How on earth have they filled the previous five episodes (i.e. 5 hours of TV) with the events between 44BC (March) and 42BC (October). OK, so we have Mutina and the Proscriptions, but it seems they may have put an awful lot of padding material in here. I dread to think....

[DecimusCaesar]

Now, you have worried me already, Decimus. How on earth have they filled the previous five episodes (i.e. 5 hours of TV) with the events between 44BC (March) and 42BC (October). OK, so we have Mutina and the Proscriptions, but it seems they may have put an awful lot of padding material in here. I dread to think....

 

I think the new series will run for less than 12 episodes like the last series, which will leave even less space to fit in the events that lead up to actium, if the series ends there.

[Pantagathus]

Now, you have worried me already, Decimus. How on earth have they filled the previous five episodes (i.e. 5 hours of TV) with the events between 44BC (March) and 42BC (October). OK, so we have Mutina and the Proscriptions, but it seems they may have put an awful lot of padding material in here. I dread to think....

 

There is the whole range of issues dealing with Octavia & Antony. Even without the direct aspect of the Cleopatra fiasco, think about his lack of motivation fighting the Parthians, his dealings with the Armenians, etc...

 

It seems to me there is plenty of content to fill up the episodes.

 

However, in considering the 2nd season, I really think they may have done Octavia (and themselves) a disservice by using her as an effete plot device in the 1st. I