| Author |
Message |
Gabriel Stevens
|
 Posted: Tue 20 Sep, 2005 1:43 pm Post subject: Rome |
 |
|
|
Has anyone been watching the new HBO series Rome? I've enjoyed it so far but Roman history is not something I'm comfortable addressing. So any critiques/ observations? I'm just impressed that I don't think I've seen any Lorca Segmentata so far.....
|
|
    |
 |
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Tue 20 Sep, 2005 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's not bad for HBO. I'd rather see more combat and less political manuvering, but it is Rome after all. It's nice to see lorica hamata being used, at least something that resembles the hamata as the basic pattern is off. The helms are supposed to be bronze but are obviously plastic, and all of the officers are in the typical Hollywood leather armor. It could be better but I don't think it's a bad effort considering what we usually see. At least the armor is a bit above the Xena Warrior Princess look.
"In valor there is hope.".................. Tacitus
|
|
 |
|
|
Jason Hall
|
| Posted: Tue 20 Sep, 2005 2:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
...
Last edited by Jason Hall on Fri 23 Sep, 2005 9:19 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Martin
Location: Southeastern Pennsylvania Joined: 11 Apr 2005
Posts: 165
|
| Posted: Tue 20 Sep, 2005 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd give it a "B" so far. There are some logical inconsistencies that I don't care for. For example, why inquire about the contents of a wagon when you're not going to search it after killing almost all of the soliders guarding it? Why allow a fairly large group of seedly looking characters into the city, reportedly on business for which they're not equipped? I think the show would greatly benefit from better writing. To me, this is classic HBO: Overly dramatic and sexual, and lacking in substance and quality.
(I don't want to be too specific here just in case someone hasn't seen these episodes)
"When war-gods meet to match their might,
who can tell the bravest born?
Many a hero never made a hole
in another man's breast."
- Sigurd, The Lay of Fafnir
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Wallgren
|
| Posted: Tue 20 Sep, 2005 10:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Patrick Kelly wrote: | | I'd rather see more combat and less political manuvering, but it is Rome after all. |
As a kid (10-11 years of age) I was looked to the screen every saturday when the brittish serie I Claudius was on and the intrigue was all brilliant... at least when I was 11... I think that and being oldest of five gave me my Maciavellian outlook on life... hehe
Martin
Swordsman, Archer and Dad
|
|
 |
|
|
Anton de Vries
|
| Posted: Wed 21 Sep, 2005 2:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
The 'suspension of disbelief' factor is good enough for me to enjoy it. Nice job, HBO!
Btw I don't have a TV either and download the episodes off the internet.
|
|
|
|
|
Matthew Grzybowski
Industry Professional
Location: Madison, WI Joined: 23 May 2005
Posts: 110
|
| Posted: Wed 21 Sep, 2005 9:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
I've been catching it. At first I wasn't sure how I felt about it, but I have to admit, I'm hooked. It took 3 or 4 episodes but I’m so there now. I think they are doing an excellent job of balancing the politics and the fighting. I think it is very worth while.
OlliN Sword Design
Handmade collectible arms, custom swords, and sculpture
www.ollinsworddesign.com
|
|
|
|
|
Steve Grisetti
|
| Posted: Fri 23 Sep, 2005 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I don't have cable, so I will need to wait for it to come out on video.
|
|
|
|
|
|
George Hill
Location: Atlanta Ga Joined: 16 May 2005
Posts: 614
|
| Posted: Fri 23 Sep, 2005 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| David Martin wrote: | | I'd give it a "B" so far. There are some logical inconsistencies that I don't care for. For example, why inquire about the contents of a wagon when you're not going to search it after killing almost all of the soliders guarding it? Why allow a fairly large group of seedly looking characters into the city, reportedly on business for which they're not equipped? I think the show would greatly benefit from better writing. To me, this is classic HBO: Overly dramatic and sexual, and lacking in substance and quality.) |
I think the didn't search the wagon because they didn't really want to bother... they just knew something was off, and then the wagon guys attacked.
As to the seedy charaters... I'm not sure which ones you mean. The guys with our heros (aux cavalry) during the wagon fight?
To abandon your shield is the basest of crimes. - --Tacitus on Germania
|
|
 |
|
Martin Wallgren
|
| Posted: Mon 26 Sep, 2005 11:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In the Ttels to the second episode, is there anybody else who saw the small man with the giant fallos and A R M A under drawn on the wall 
Just a reflection....
Martin
Swordsman, Archer and Dad
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Mortimer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Sat 05 Nov, 2005 8:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
It's been on here for some time. We're now well into the series with perhaps 7-8 episodes so far. Unfortunately the combat you see in the first few opening seconds of the first episode is all there's been so far. A lot of sex and intrigue but very little military stuff shown.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Sat 05 Nov, 2005 8:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Paul,
Your question has been merged with an already existing thread on this subject.
|
|
|
|
|
Paul Mortimer
|
| Posted: Sat 05 Nov, 2005 9:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks Patrick.
The website says that all the helmets are made from brass.
Paul
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patrick Kelly
|
| Posted: Sat 05 Nov, 2005 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Paul Mortimer wrote: | Thanks Patrick.
The website says that all the helmets are made from brass.
Paul |
After watching all of the episodes thus far I strongly suspect that most of them are rubber or plastic instead of metal.
|
|
|
|
|
Hisham Gaballa
|
| Posted: Sat 05 Nov, 2005 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
I quite enjoyed it, although i cringed at the opening battle when I saw Roman soldiers in fantasy helmets and with rectangular scuta (or should that be scutums). I quite enjoyed the rest.
I do wonder though with all the books about the Roman army, not just scholarly works, but books for the general reader like Connolly's Greece and Rome, countless Osprey books, not to mention all the reenactment groups in Europe and the USA, Why do film makers still get the armour wrong? It strikes me as just... I don't know what to say. Surely they must have done some research, did they just not like what they found? Did they think Montefortino-style helmets were boring? The armour was marginally more accurate than the live-action Asterix with Gerard Depardieu. 
|
|
|
|
|
Jean Henri Chandler
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Feb, 2007 9:36 am Post subject: Disapointed in 'Rome' |
|
|
Don't get me wrong, I love the show, but there were some major problems with the big fight in the last episode. It was still entertaining but it could have been so much better. My first big disappointment with this series.
Beefs:
1) No pilum. NO PILUM!!! No missiles of any kind in fact other than arrows at one point, strangely enough (did the Roman army even really have archers at that point? I don't know...)
2) the usual bit about Armor not working. Why wear that mail at all if you can push a gladius through it like a hot knife through butter? I mean ok maybe they could have pierced the mail in some cases, but I saw very slow thrusts repeatedly depicted as pushing right through mail armor with nary any resistence. I really don't understand what lay people think the purpose of Armor was....
3) Where was the cavalry?
4) The armies marched into battle nicely enough, but immediately disintegrated into a disorganized rabble within seconds of meeting in combat. I wanted to see cohorts (maniples?) charging out of the line and retreating back into it in good order (throwing pilum too!) I wanted to see flanking manuevers and penetrations of enemy formations. If this was the best they could do maybe they should have kept the whole fight off-screen. I think that would have been a good choice. In fact they could have borrowed a session of Rome Total War and just cleaned it up or filtered it through smoke or something that would have been way better.
5) All the officers wearing leather body armor, and even what looked like leather helmets. Is there any evidence that the Romans wore leather body armor? I hope Matthew Amt can chime in here...
At least they did the Testuodo but that seems to be a concept Hollywood has grasped, it was done in "Gladiator"
I do commend them for NOT having any scenes where tens of thousands of Roman catapults hurl bathubs full of napalm accross the night sky....
I liked that they used Italian extras to make up the Roman legions who looked like Romans instead of Englishmen.
J
Books and games on Medieval Europe Codex Integrum
Codex Guide to the Medieval Baltic Now available in print
|
|
|
|
|
Chad Arnow
myArmoury Team
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Feb, 2007 9:46 am Post subject: Re: Disapointed in 'Rome' |
|
|
| Jean Henri Chandler wrote: | Don't get me wrong, I love the show, but there were some major problems with the big fight in the last episode. It was still entertaining but it could have been so much better. My first big disappointment with this series.
|
Jean,
This series has been discussed before. I've merged your topic with the existing discussion.
ChadA
http://chadarnow.com/
|
|
|
|
|
Martin Wallgren
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Feb, 2007 9:52 am Post subject: Re: Disapointed in 'Rome' |
|
|
| Jean Henri Chandler wrote: | Don't get me wrong, I love the show, but there were some major problems with the big fight in the last episode. It was still entertaining but it could have been so much better. My first big disappointment with this series.
Beefs:
1) No pilum. NO PILUM!!! No missiles of any kind in fact other than arrows at one point, strangely enough (did the Roman army even really have archers at that point? I don't know...)
2) the usual bit about Armor not working. Why wear that mail at all if you can push a gladius through it like a hot knife through butter? I mean ok maybe they could have pierced the mail in some cases, but I saw very slow thrusts repeatedly depicted as pushing right through mail armor with nary any resistence. I really don't understand what lay people think the purpose of Armor was....
3) Where was the cavalry?
4) The armies marched into battle nicely enough, but immediately disintegrated into a disorganized rabble within seconds of meeting in combat. I wanted to see cohorts (maniples?) charging out of the line and retreating back into it in good order (throwing pilum too!) I wanted to see flanking manuevers and penetrations of enemy formations. If this was the best they could do maybe they should have kept the whole fight off-screen. I think that would have been a good choice. In fact they could have borrowed a session of Rome Total War and just cleaned it up or filtered it through smoke or something that would have been way better.
5) All the officers wearing leather body armor, and even what looked like leather helmets. Is there any evidence that the Romans wore leather body armor? I hope Matthew Amt can chime in here...
At least they did the Testuodo but that seems to be a concept Hollywood has grasped, it was done in "Gladiator"
I do commend them for NOT having any scenes where tens of thousands of Roman catapults hurl bathubs full of napalm accross the night sky....
I liked that they used Italian extras to make up the Roman legions who looked like Romans instead of Englishmen.
J |
Then again they all use the strange cavallery helmets from Trahjans Column, witch have no arcological counterparts what so ever....
Here is the thread on RAT on the topic. http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=2582
Swordsman, Archer and Dad
|
|
|
|
|
Bruno Giordan
|
| Posted: Mon 19 Feb, 2007 1:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I wonder why you worry so much about accuracy of peplum movies.
they will never get it, as long as you don't get one of that british documentaries doing some serious work the rest will just be pulp magazine quality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a standard topic