BBC Ancient Rome: New Docudrama's

[spittle]

I believe its the Gracchi next week. I'll be watching because its still better than soaps or gameshows and, as with the Nero episode, I know nothing of this era so will be wonderfully unaware of the mistakes. Ignorance is bliss!

[soldado]

hello there, i will also be watching the programme.

any idea what the river ceaser crosses before the battle is called? i am playing this interactive game on the BBC web site and i can't remember it.

thanks

[DecimusCaesar]

The River is called the Rubicon.

[Pertinax]

The Gracchi-what did you make of that then? Two top notch actors, Geraldine James and David Warner looking like the real thing , trying to stop a lightweight script evaporating. I noticed that when the camera lingered on James (without dialogue) she looked perfect as the epitome of the Roman Matron, when she was speaking to her son early in the film the realisation was excellent. Warner had gravitas and skill with frugal dialogue, once again though the lead was lightweight with a lot of emotional "acting" and the story was told too fast.Why does the BBC not have the courage to dig deep and present a full blooded realisation like "The Caesars? "That was short on battles and epic scale but delivered consistently on proper characterisation.

[DecimusCaesar]

I found it better than the Caesar one I (nearly) saw last week, but then again I have very little knowledge on Tiberius Gracchus. Did anyone else think that the opening battle had something very 'Saving Private Ryan' about it? The part where he peers behind a wall and the Carthaginian archers shoot at him, reminds me of the part in 'Ryan' when they are held up at the bottom of the bunker and they send the sniper to shoot the German soldiers with the machine guns.

I found it odd that no mention was made of Tiberius's brother who would go on to shake the foundations of the Republic after his death. The program also seemed to suggest that Rome was a democracy in one scene where a man tells Tiberius about the large crowd that has gathered and he replies'good...that means more votes.'

I was pleased to see that they had decided to show the Roman army as it was during that era, with Triarii, Hastatii and so on instead of it being a army that consisted of Legionnaires.

 

Perhaps someone with a better knowledge of Tiberus's day will be able to give a better description of what was and wasn't accurate.

[Pertinax]

Two very good points , the "Saving Tiberius Graccus" was very noticeable, did you see the reference (inadvertent im sure ) to "Alexander" last week?

The soldiers gear was good, someone really does care about physical authenticity.

Where they get the principal actors from is another matter.

Caesar was so bad it must have set a benchmark for uselesness.I wouldnt be so scathing normally but the BBC holds itself up as a paragon of excellence, frankly this is lousy given the resources they have.

[Gaius Paulinus Maximus]

I think we can all agree that this was better than last weeks effort, but i still find it so annoying that the whole thing is so rushed, like DC says no mention what so ever of his brother Gaius Gracchus, surely he's important enough to at least warrant a mention?

 

On the plus side the acting was a lot better than the previous lot and the battle scenes were more realistic aswell, i'm no expert but the soldiers all seemed to be wearing the correct uniform for that period,it seems to me that the directors are paying more attention to the visual aspect of the show than to the actual storyline.

 

I still dont see the logic of skipping backwards and forwards in time, surely this is only going to confuse the newcomers to Roman history. Hey i've just had a fantastic idea why not start at the beginning and finish at the end!!

 

Looks like next week it's Vespasian and Titus, hope they get this one right as Vespasian is a particular favourite of mine.

Edited October 5, 2006 by Gaius Paulinus Maximus

[DecimusCaesar]

Two very good points , the "Saving Tiberius Graccus" was very noticeable, did you see the reference (inadvertent im sure ) to "Alexander" last week?

 

I didn't see much of that show and I seem to have forgotten a lot from it. I also have a very vague memory of Alexander as I only saw it once about a year ago. What was the referance?

 

I also noticed that one of the actors from tonight's program had died shortly after the filming. I don't know what he is called as he isn't listed on film sites.

[longbow]

The soldiers gear was good, someone really does care about physical authenticity.

 

Indeed,i was glad to see some of the Hastati with the Pectorale (heart guard) armour,you dont often see them on the screen.The general mix of Infantry equipment has impressed me,the soldiers in this period wore what they could afford and tonights episode showed that well i thought.Some of the Infantry only had a Helmet and shield wearing no body Armour at all,some with the Heart guard and the odd well to do Pleb wearing chain,excellent!

[phil25]

I believe the actor who died was Tom Bell.

[WotWotius]

Damn it! I missed it

[DecimusCaesar]

I believe the actor who died was Tom Bell.

 

Thanks Phil, I was curious about that.

 

After reading up more on Tiberius Gracchus, it seems like the BBC did make quite a good job even if some of the ideas about him were outdated- The show suggested he ran for Tribune of the People as revenge for the Numantaine debacle, but modern scholarship has rejected this theory somewhat.

 

Other stuff was very good such as Scipio Aemillianus ordering a painting of the storming of Carthage as well as some of the speeches made in the TV show was based on actual speeches told by Tiberius according to Appian in the Civil Wars.

 

Now let's see what they do with Vespasian's story.

[spittle]

According to the show:

"Carthage was demonlished stone by stone and salt was ploughed into the earth to prevent anything being grown there again. The survivors were sold in to slavery and it was as though Carthage had never existed"

 

Hasn't this been exposed as hyperbole?

Wasn't there reports of life in Carthage dating from much later than this time?

 

ALSO The GRACCHI. Not Tiberius.

Gaius played a part as important as Tiberius. Thats why history remembers the two brothers together under the joint name THE GRACCHI. It was a sin to leave Gaius without a single mention.

[Pertinax]

Spittle: I tidied up your post, it seemed to have doubled up in size!

 

Correct the "salting" would now seem to have been a symbolic gesture, not a wholesale destruction of land. Secondly this was not a genocidal episode , thought the fight was bloody enough, Carthage as a province continued to function.

 

Yes there two brothers-was it too difficult to write a second part?

[DecimusCaesar]

I've noticed that the series tries to keep the amount of characters down so that they concentrate on the lives of some figures in more detail. If they add too much people then the story becomes too complex to explain in an hour. This would put off a lot of viewers who have no knowledge of ancient Rome so I guess that some people (including Gaius Gracchus) had to be cut out of the story. Whether this decision was made by Mary Beard or the BBC is another matter (I think its the BBC's decision - they care more about viewing figures than historical accuracy).

 

Still, they did very good considering the budget and time they had to do the series. Plus you have to admit, it is probably the most accurate depiction of Ancient Rome ever attempted by a documentary series or Film for that matter.