Movies about Ancient Rome

File: 7cef606d873a981763274dcb2618d609--roma-imparatorluğu-empire-romain.jpg (131KB, 630x1200px) Image search: [Google]

131KB, 630x1200px

>>3335278
nothing rustles my jimmies more than seeing soldiers in lorica segmentatas in the 5th century

>>3335278
They're movies made by non-experts. What do you want? Omnes dicunt Latinam?

>>3335278
Watch the Rome series. It's one of the few to actually get it right. "British accents" aside.

>>3335278
>everyone speaking in British accents

That gets to me because Romans weren't languid, quiet people, they were deafeningly loud, energetic and passionate, just like modern Italians.

>>3335278
>everyone speaking in British accents


"Hurr muh accent"
You'd rather have them speak Latin?
It's about immersion
Same reason why they make Lionheart speak English in Crusades movies

>>3336111
It's just a generic arbitrary accent. Most people, including English, can't tell where the actors' accents originate. So it's like giving them a clean slate.

Could you imagine a Roman emperor with a thick New York accent? It'd be ridiculous. Also, Brits tended to make more high-brow shows than Americans, hence the accents.

You had M.A.S.H, we had Tenko. You had T.J Hooker, we had The Sweeney. Both countries collaborated with Rome. And it now appears that the US market has changed, hence shows like House of Cards (a UK rip-off btw).

>>3335278
>legionaires in leather armour
>always tortoises, all the time

>>3336157

Well, I hope that you are not one those guys who goes mad agaisnt people who watches dubed movies.

>>3336111
>>3336157
Guess who's behind these posts...

>>3336199
I'm not
Dubbing/making characters speak in your native language is logical when action takes place in an environment in which all characters speak the same language

That way you feel immersed and not like a foreigner

>>3336212
Tom and Felipe made those posts.

>"FORM TESTUDO!"
>enemy isn't even using archers
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Ae9Pj2JIero

>>3336164

The Romans in The Eagle all had American accents, to the pointof it almost becoming an Iraq war allegory.

Same with Keifer Sutherland in Pompeii.

>>3335278
Just watch Rome, it avoids all your peeves aside from:
>everyone speaking in British accents
I don't mind that one btw. In the end it just means that the whole cast is using one accent instead of a different one for each actor, because brits are picky about that unless it's a modern day setting.

>Statues are unpainted

Why do people keep recommending HBO Rome when I, Claudius is far better?

>>3336264
There are exceptions.

I'm not dissing American cinema, don't get me wrong.

>>3336379
>because brits are picky about that
What are you even saying?

>>3336164
>Could you imagine a Roman emperor with a thick New York accent? It'd be ridiculous. Also, Brits tended to make more high-brow shows than Americans, hence the accents.

It's not so much about the accent as much as the general demeanor of Brits extending their imperial character of stoic and disdainful. I expect Romans to give rousing speeches, banter, holler, bicker and vocalize naturally, not feel out of place when they do it. In that sense American accents sorta work better unlesd you go full chav gibberish.

Also they were disciplined... To a point. Romans in war are also made too "British" by showing them as mechanical and restrained instead of rowdy and hyper-aggressive, when historically they were far more of the later than the former. The legions killed emperors for not letting them go to war fast enough. Honestly, despite their civilizing task they were quite barbaric on their own and that duality is their defining trait.

>>3336438
Also, when most Americans hear a 'posh' Shakespearean British accent it implies to them intelligence and antiquity (although not necessarily the case). The Queen, for instance, sounds like she's from the middle ages. It's helpful when making an historical drama.

Very few people actually talk like that in England.

I, Clauduis, is the way to go, short, neat and historically accurate. It even has Brian Blessed, he plays Augustus.

File: sexy-costumes.png (819KB, 1024x512px) Image search: [Google]

819KB, 1024x512px

>>3335278
>>movie about Ancient Rome
OK so far, but noting the word "movie," as opposed to, say. "historical reconstruction."

>>legionaries in lorica segmentata regardless of era
Just googled up 'Roman movie armor," you seem to be mistaken, I see a pretty wide variety of armor depicted in a wide array of movies. Since I don't know most of the movies on sight, I'm not sure how anachronistic any of it is -- but your complaint about a specific sort of armor being the only one shown seems to reflect more on how few movies you've seen.

>>everyone speaking in British accents

What would you prefer? Some number of them are British actors, of course. And British accents sound "classical" to audiences. Again, circling back to noting the word "movie," as opposed to, say. "historical reconstruction." Maybe if they all talked like they were on Hee-Haw you'd like it better?

>>gladiator matches are mindless and gory slogs to the death using unwilling participants

>>no obscene graffiti on the walls or color on the architecture

You need to see more of the movies, I guess.

>>indicating favorable/unfavorable with thumbs up/down

Yeah, that's a movie convention. Again, you are watching a movie.

>>3335372
Not OP and I totally see your point but these big budget films are made with at least one or two experts as consultants. The least the studios could do is be accurate.

>>3336432
Production values on "I, Clavdivs" render it almost unwatchable to anybody not raised on crappy BBC production values of that era.

The books are fantastic.

>>3336664
>The least the studios could do is be accurate.
Being accurate is not the point of a movie -- naming it entertaining, and making the production elements into a unified whole, and at the end of the day making shit-loads of money, are what is important.

Movies are fiction, even those inspired by history.

>>3335278
>everyone speaking in British accents
This. If anything, if you want to appeal to people in a wide demographic using the English language have them speak with American accents. At least "Yank" English sounds closer to the flatter tones of Latin than "British" English accents.

>>3336111
YOU WUZ A MADE MAN

>>3336688
>At least "Yank" English sounds closer to the flatter tones of Latin than "British" English accents.
Kek, no.

The way y'all speak with constant adenoids would be way too distracting.

Fyi, it's Garage, not Garaaaaaaage

File: breastplates-cuirasses_leather-lorica-segmentata_1660.jpg (36KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 500x500px

These fucking things are everywhere and I don't understand why

>>3336688
Like said previously it's both due o the productions being with in the U.K. Or Americans associating thick Posh English accents with Classical times. Very few in the U.K. sound anything like we do in films. I don't mind though don't really expect Augustus to sound like some miner from Doncaster.

>>3335278
You forgot: people with blue eyes.

>>3336706

Because they're cheap and can be easily modified to fit many different body sizes and shapes.

>>3336614
>historically accurate.
Well yeah, if you only read Tacitus and literally ignore any sort of extra-Roman sources and the last 100 years of research.

Don't get me wrong I love both book and show. They are however just a retelling of senatorial historiography and hardly "accurate".

File: Crixus-Spartacus-Manu-Bennett-Gaul-gladiator-f.jpg (51KB, 500x550px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 500x550px

JUPITER'S COCK

>>3336703
>Kek, no.
No.
>y'all
90% of the US is not the Mid-West or Deep South, Britbong.
>it's Garage, not Garaaaaaaaaaaaage
And its knife not "n'ife".
And its cooler not "kowler".
And its counter-clockwise not "anti-clockwise".
And its cookie, not "biscuit".
And its train, not "trolley".

>>3337118
The only people who say y'all in the midwest are niggers. Midwestern English is the type of language you hear from newscasters, it's default American English.

>>3337125
>Midwestern English is the type of language you hear from the newscasters, it's default American English.
Are you from the Midwest? Because that's neither how we sound here in the Mid-Atlanatic/Eastern seaboard here.

File: yall you guys.jpg (41KB, 634x450px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 634x450px

>>3337220
Yes I am from the Midwest. Nobody says y'all here.

File: 81ADn9euBSL._SY445_.jpg (51KB, 318x445px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 318x445px

>>3335278
Not a movie but this documentary series was p good. Really wish they made a second season.

>>3336466
>The Queen, for instance, sounds like she's from the middle ages
no she doesn't. The closest we have to Medieval English is in the West Country, parts of the East Midlands and other small rural areas

>>3335278
>Roman patrician
>talks like a stereotypical 19th century British lord
>Roman pleb
>OI M8 SPARE A SESTERTIUS OR I'LL SHIV YA WITH ME SICA I SWARE ON ME MATER
Doesn't help that fucktarded Americans do the same for medieval or early modern period regardless of setting.

>>3337118
>kowler
What?
>trolley
We don't call trains trolleys. Oh sorry, I forgot that I can't use the internet in my motorised rollingham

>>3337118
Colonel should be pronounced co-lo-nel, not "kernel".

>>3335278
>movie
its not art you HACK get some taste what did you expect?

>>3337436
All of cinema is dogshit.

>>3337452
Incorrect, but there are only three good films ever made. La Passion de Jeanne D'Arc, Strasty po Andryeyo, and Batman v Superman.

>>3335278
>segmentata
Late principate was the time period where they were most widely in use
>British accent
Technically it's called "transatlantic" and is no more British than Texan is. It's a made for tv "posh sounding" accent to distinguish them from the common rabble.
>gory gladiator slags
The games were different things at different times, but during Commodus's time they were at the the height of their extravagance and depravity.
>unwilling
For most of them (except a privileged minority) that was the case. Seneca writes about a gladiator who committed suicide by choking himself with a lavatory sponge. Imagine how bleak and desolate your life would have to be for you to seriously consider jamming the thing everybody wipes their ass with down your throat, and then doing it because the lavatory is the one place in your life where you're allowed privacy.
>hollyRome
HBO did a much better job
>flaming arrows
Rule of cool. It's not completely out of bounds to think that they might be engaging in psychological warfare against the literal forest apes
> battle tomfoolery
The biggest offense are all the one on one duels that broke out.
>thumbs up/down
We don't know the exact gesture made but there was at least a "yes, do it!" And a "no, stop!" Gesture

Those are trifling reasons to hate the movie Gladiator. Hate it for fucking with history by having a fictional Gary Stu protagonist and a Bush era parable about republics verses empires, something the Romans never fucking debated. The real Commodus had all the legless crippled in the city rounded up and tied together so that they resembled a giant, and after Commodus went around clubbing them all to death one-by-one, he proclaimed himself a giant-slayer. That's the kind of shit that should have made it into the movie.

>>3335278
>battles not employing the famed front-line rotation tactic

How did it worked? Ive read about it several times in some novels, but i cant imagine how could they replace their mates without breaking the formation.

>>3337601

Look at Rome for a good representation.

Basically, men were in a checkerboard pattern with some spacing instead of a straight wall of shields, after the guys in front got tired they'd move aside for a fresh legionary to pop out like a PEZ candy and they'd keep rotating in chain until the enemy had sustained too many casualties to resist a charge.

File: Ashur.jpg (40KB, 402x374px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 402x374px

>>3335278
>no MENA characters even though MENA made up 50% of the Roman Empire

>>3336111

AY GAIUS WATCH ME BREAK DIS CARTHAGINIAN GUY'S FUCKIN KNEE CAPS

>>3336664
It's expensive to be accurate and only historical autists give a fuck about shit like segmentata.

>>3337689

Even cheap aluminum strips could be done efficiently and look better than those leather fagjackets.

Seriously they look godawful.

>>3337430
Its highway not "motorway".

>>3337396
My point was she sounds old, from a different era. It's an accent nobody in the real world uses unless you're Camilla Parker-Bowles style rich.

>>3337757
It's "boot", not "trunk". "Rubbish", not "Trash". "Americlap", not "Americunt".

Oh wait, that last one...

>>3336157
Passion of the Christ is art partially because Mel had the Jews speak Aramaic, pray in Hebrew and had the Romans speak Greek or Latin.

>>3336742
there were germans in the roman empire and a lot of them were military

>>3337426
Kek

>>3337667
>Gets ambushed in Teutoburg Forest
Ayyyy OOPSADISILIANO

>>3337629
this is highly disputed and the specifics are unknown. Legionaries were assigned a spot that they were always in, the centurion for instance was always in the top left, this stuff definitely didnt happen when they were still using the phalanx. It could have happened, it wasnt always like that if it did, it was probably less of a consistent, organized thing and more of a personal "take my spot" sort of thing, as actually organizing that over the noise of a battlefield would be impossible. The hastati would retreat behind the principes and so forth but they opened lanes and it was a massive, drilled situation rather than a natural tactical move that would just happen willy nilly .There's no mention of the whistle they showed in the show in any historical records, seems like it could be exploited once the enemy realized what was going on and decided to push hars
d right when they were trying to switch. Its not like you can just effortlessly pull the whole front line off in unison.

>>3337815

>Lost legion

FUHGED ABOUT IT

>>3335278

>everyone speaking in British accents

It's always better to have an actor speak in their natural accent then have them try to speak in a foreign accent and butcher it. Also, you forgot that there should also be shit fucking everywhere on the roads.

>>3337464
>Batman v Superman
Logan beat it.

>>3335385
I tried but it pissed me off
>Octavian's character
>His whore mother
>Cuck storyline

Dropped it 4 episodes in maybe I'll try again idk

>>3337689
>>3337746
Segmentata is actually pretty cheap. It costs like $200 for a set of it

>>3337952
I watched Rome when it first came on BBC and loved it. I tried to rewatch it recently and couldn't even manage 1 episode.

>>3337629
Yeah im not sure i buy the HBO Rome scene, i doubt battle was that organised.

>>3336111
>>3336157
They should have given everyone cockney accents instead of RP.

>>3337987
I think my approach of learning about rome before watching the show was a mistake

>>3336841
What a good show

File: turned thumbs.jpg (957KB, 1920x1291px) Image search: [Google]

957KB, 1920x1291px

bro it's a fucking movie. art has the right to be as expressive or liberal with interpreting historical events as it wants. are old romantic paintings bad too because of their inaccuracies ?

>>3338286
They should have given everyone scouse accents.

>ey, cccaam down, Julius
>yew feckin tellin mey to caam down??!

>>3336841
>plays and looks the part of the meathead so well it took me a few episodes to realize he was acting

he was also good in Death Race 2050

Rome (the tv show) was just Game of Thrones without dragons.

Or to be precise, Game of Thrones is just Rome with dragons.

File: 325610_20161218055400_1.png (3MB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1920x1080px

>100+ years after the invention of cinema
>still no movie with accurate Late Roman troops
>no documentaries with accurate Late Roman troops
>like one video game
being a late romeaboo is suffering

>>3336664
They hire one or two nerds to say they had historical accurate direction but then disregard everything they say. Just like crime shows who hire tech consultants - have you ever seen any one get computers right regardless? No, they just ignore the nerd because muh aurtistic licnese plate to jizz all over the history books.

>>3337601
>>3337629
>>3337837
This, the way the Romans actually used the tactic is unknown, only conjecture

>>3335278
>>3335363
Could i have some kind of timeline of roman armor? What did they use during the punic wars? what about the wars of the late republic?

>>3338942
What's there to like about late Rome? It's just kinda backward and shitty, filled with people who don't understand the enormity of their situations digging their own graves. It ceases to be a Roman empire and becomes the proxy through which Lombard and Germanic mercenary conflicts are settled.

>>3336111
those Irish accents in Alexander worked so well

File: 1475600942526.png (165KB, 327x316px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 327x316px

>>3337667
This made me laugh way harder than it should have

>>3335278
>>battles not employing the famed front-line rotation tactic
We have virtually no evidence they actually did this, unless rotating the entire unit off the front.

>>3339505
>who were Stilicho and Aetius

>>3339505
>It's just kinda backward and shitty
Yes, using a combined arms force with better cavalry, better light infantry, and excellent heavy infantry is so backwards.

>>3339476
>>3339476
I suggest this book. First half focuses on the Greeks, second is on the Romans. It's excellent for understanding the equipment and tactics of the Greeks and Romans across different eras.

https://www.amazon.com/Warfare-Classical-World-Encyclopedia-Civilizations/dp/0806127945

File: 619Z+Xbu6-L._SX359_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (61KB, 361x499px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 361x499px

>>3339676

>>3339676
Add soldiers and ghosts to that. Required reading.

File: 1502099150688.jpg (3KB, 125x116px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 125x116px

>>3339682
>>3339678
>mfw /his/ keeps making me buy books because I can never find free pdf's online
I've actually had to clear out a bookshelf in past year. Granted it was all a bunch of shit fiction I had as a teenager, but still.

>>3339950
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00AHITZHE/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1

GET THAT WALLET READY FAGGOT

>>3337979

And the leather version costs $50. Which will you get when you need to outfit 300 extras for a one off battle scene?

>>3337979
And it will still look like shit at that price, while also fitting like absolute shit and being horrible to wear.

Bad leather is inherently easier to deal with or even unfuck than bad metal.

>>3338954

If your source for that is Lindybeige, take it with a massive grain of salt. Even in the same video he inadvertently says he acted like a dickhead and then wondered why he wasn't listened to.

>>3339963
At least it has a Kindle version, as much as I despise e-books. My wife's going to kill me if many more books show up at the door.

>>3339994
You'll need a notepad. It's dense. Not hard to read, just very detailed. The man can tell you the EXACT diameter of a dory, and how he knows it.

>>3340004
>implying I don't literally carry a notebook with me everywhere I go, including work
My wife went through it one time to "see what I was always scribbling," and asked me seriously if I was doing drugs, I'm a very stream of consciousness note taker.

Reading the reviews kind of made my dick hard though. I love shit that gets really nitty gritty. I've been known to read Vietnam and WWII era combat manuals just to get a better understanding of how men fought and the reason they did it.

Which brings me back to sort of on-topic for the thread. It makes it a little hard for me to suspend my disbelief with certain movies sometimes. For instance, when I see a WWII film, and a soldier draws a side arm and holds it in a two handed isosceles stance, it trips me up, since they taught a one handed, side face stance to minimize your silhouette, or make you a smaller target. The entire reason the isosceles stance gained popularity over, say, the weaver stance is because of body armor. Things like the black bad guy having his thumb jammed into the bolt of an MAC-10 while "firing" it on a show like The Walking Dead doesn't bother me since my mind rationalizes it as a completely untrained actor in a split second scene, but someone using techniques and training that didn't even exist during the period triggers my autism fierce. The same goes for sword fights in most media, I totally understand why it's much safer for the actors to swing at each other's swords rather than each other's faces, so my mind just sort of ignores it.

That's more /k/ related autism though. Thanks for the recommendation.

>>3337416
Kek

>>3336111
>Aye augustus you wanna head out for a slice afta dis bonehead get his ass wiped

>>3337416

Modern Americans don't get the concept of a classist society. The accents help us figure out the difference between a patrician and a pigfucking savage.

Can someone advise, were gladiator games a part of decline of Rome? Or was it a height of roman power thing?

My brother was trying to make a half assed attempt at comparing fall of Rome to contemporary USA, equating these violent spectacles to indulgent American culture and leadership ( i.e. Trump). He lives in Europe now, go figure.

>>3341140
Well we do get the accent thing, especially in the South. There's definitely a "Gentleman's drawl," and a "cuzin fuckin hillbilly," accent that is pretty easy to pick up on that tells you what kind of upbringing a person had. Think of it as the difference between JFK speaking as opposed to some re-taad from the Southie projects.

>>3341252
They became much less popular at the around the end of the 4th/beginning of the 5th century, which is when western Rome started to decline. It didn't have anything to do with the decline of the empire as a whole, they were equally unpopular in the east where the empire was still going strong, being supplanted in popularity by chariot races.

>>3341414
In video form:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=th5A6ZQ28pE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0IQCLQDfKw&t=47s

File: FotE Dux.jpg (299KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

299KB, 1920x1080px

>>3339666
>ywn see an epic about or at least including EITHER of them
Just end me.

>>3338942
It's a real travesty considering just how cinematic some of the moments of Late Antiquity may be. I think the most popular movie of the period in recent memory was Agora, if not, it was Beowulf and that was a legendary tale that has nothing to do with Rome, the migrations or the Empire.
Fall of the Eagles for Attila would have to suffice until then I suppose.

>>3339505
Except for the fact that there were in fact generals (Flavius Aetius and Stilicho) and even an emperor (Majorian) who did understand the gravity of their situation and were actively trying to preserve the Empire. Even then, the doom-and-gloom apocalyptic narrative of Late Rome is a very epic era. Think about it:
>Cataclysmic battles like the Frigidus and Chalons
>Titan-like figures like Attila, Alaric, Stilicho, Theodoric,Geiseric, Childeric etc.
>Migrations of people and displacements of cultures throughout Europe and North Africa
>literally a whole new order being established by the Germanic kings, each with their own story to tell
>Backdrop for legendary, heroic epics like the story of King Arthur, Siegfried and the Nibelungenlied, Beowulf

File: 1479233462946.jpg (276KB, 1010x960px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 1010x960px

>>3339950
Here, anon, I found this just for you:
http://dlx.b-ok.org/genesis/286000/343f3d8bde2e2f1bc1f9cffaca476629/_as/[John_Gibson_Warry]_Warfare_in_the_Classical_World(b-ok.org).pdf

>>3341439
Ok cool I'll do my own research on it

>>3341252
i fucking hate these comparisons so much, i always hear them from ignorant people.the gladiatorial games declined towards the fall of rome and were eventually banned because Christians didnt approve. if anything you can argue that the romans got more moral during the decline, because an empire falling has nothing to do with what entertainment/sex/drinking culture is like, and everything to do with economics and geopolitics.

Are there any good Roman movies that DON'T feature racebending or using people with shitty brit accents?

I unironically don't like any /tv/ portrayals of Rome because they don't speak latin. The same goes for any historical piece where they don't speak their actual language.

>>3337952
>2017
>Calling him "Octavian."

He was Gaius Octavius before the murder of Caesar the Dictator, he became Gaius Julius Caesar when he accepted his inheritance, and later became Imperator Caesar Augustus, with added bits of name salad.

Although it would have been standard practice for him to append "Octavianus" to his name after his "adoption," he never did so and refused to acknowledge the name, which was only used by his enemies and political opponents.

Sure it is somewhat confusing to cal him Gaius Julius Caesar after the death of the Dictator, but if you can't sort out which of several guys with the same name is which, you are going to be in trouble studying Roman history anyway.

>>3339966
Point made in irrefutable fashion.

>>3342155
What about Passion of the Christ?

>>3341675
What a fucking lad, teach me your skills senpai

File: 1491947321220.jpg (18KB, 248x189px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 248x189px

>>3337667
top kek

>>3342482
never seen it, Im guessing they speak latin in it? Makes sense considering he did something similar with apacalypto

File: 890.jpg (60KB, 636x355px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 636x355px

>>3336111

>>3343739
yes, watch it

>>3343739
The Jews spoke Aramaic and the Romans spoke Latin, iirc

>>3336111
AYE BRUTUS BRO WHADDAYA DOOOOOIN?????!!!!

>>3343845
>>3343786
>>3341029
>>3337843
>>3337815
>>3337667
>>3336699

I swear it actually works

Roman names are literally Mafioso monickers, just add the hand gestures and these Romans would be perfect

File: 1485705591622.jpg (79KB, 436x399px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 436x399px

>Caligula (1979)
>movie about ancient rome
>cast a-list actors
>film actors scenes
>film a bunch of edgy porn separately
>edit film post production to turn it into rapegore porn fest
>achieve epic lulz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qB3El5K_Pk

File: 7b1e06be32add0322416bff6ade30763.jpg (119KB, 736x591px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 736x591px

>>3335278
>>3335363
>>3338942
>>3339505
>>3339666
>>3339674
>>3341651

I'm actually surprised that the Late Roman Era isn't more frequently, nor better represented in cinema and TV/documentaries. This time period, coinciding with the Migration Era, was truly one of epic proportions, with lots of warfare, battles, and skirmishes. Political tensions were high, as well. I'd definitely take a TV series along the lines of Rome or Game of Thrones trying to depict the Late Roman Empire, including fine details, such as the distinctive weapons, armor, and clothing used by those times. I like Roman history as a whole, but I find the most frequently chosen periods, between Julius Caesar (and often, they go with later or otherwise inaccurate armor styles) through Commodus. I have to give points to the people behind Gladiator for at least moving the typical Roman Empire setting about a century beyond the 1st century AD norm. The Passion of the Christ did very well for a 1st century Jewish-Christian-Roman depicting film, however, with the people actually speaking their proper, ancient languages.

I feel that it's mostly the same with the historical reenactment scene, and has been for years. You often see Roman reenactments depicting roughly Augustan through Trajanic or Hadrianic times, but rarely much before or after this time period. Despite how popular he may seem as a historical figure, Caesar's own time is underrepresented, compared to the one shortly after him. Also, the Late Roman reenacting scene seems to have very few people portraying anything, compared to the rest of the periods, Late Republic, and Early Imperial. I think Late Roman usually includes anything from around circa 250 AD through most of the 6th century AD (Justinianus' reconquests of the Western Roman territories, with General Belisarius).

>>3336239
also leather segmentatas

I thought Ben-Hur (2016) was pretty cool
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D5zmUSz4isE

>>3336111
Yo, Vitus help me toss this dead beat into the Tiber river.

>>3336772
For someone who is only interested in knowing the history from watching movies, I, Claudius should gave him what he needs quicker than boiled asparagus.

Nothing is historically accurate anon, it's just great enough to grab the general picture.

>>3345295
Give*

>>3344452

The late Roman era isn't popular because the empire is Christian at that point and they can neither be the bad guys because Christians arent a fringe minority under persecution and western audiences wont sympathize with either barbarians or parthians, nor be the good guys because they are still an overbearing, corrupt entity and they lose in the end.

And moral greyness doesnt sell.

File: icee2.jpg (41KB, 400x489px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 400x489px

>>3345295
>quicker than boiled asparagus.

>>3337118
>And its knife not "n'ife".
>And its cooler not "kowler".
Wtf?

>>3337579

> The real Commodus had all the legless crippled in the city rounded up and tied together so that they resembled a giant, and after Commodus went around clubbing them all to death one-by-one, he proclaimed himself a giant-slayer. That's the kind of shit that should have made it into the movie.

WHAT

>>3341446
>baby fukkin wheel

File: 1487399770328.jpg (60KB, 480x563px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 480x563px

>>3335278
>3335372
They had experts on set and didn't listen to them.

You know why?

Because movies are about putting asses in seats.

Not accuracy, quality, or the niche interest groups.

This is like begrudging coke for not being a nutritional drink.

I want to write a history of spergs failing to understand normie fun.

>>3336111

Now, I am not sayin dat Jesus was a fink. But he wasn't no god capiche?

>>3336111

>Rome and Carthage

https://youtu.be/IKmSEFhrJ-8

>>3344266
>▶
Interestingly enough as a lay historian of Rome I find Caligula to be one of the more accurate aesthetic reproductions of Rome. Particularly in use of color.

>>3337795
Mel Gibson to me is better than Spielberg.

Of course the brainlets love Spielberg, it's what (((they))) want.

>>3336742
why wouldn't they have blue eyes? Oh do you think they were black?

>>3337430
>aluminium
>alouminem

>>3338942
>late rome
you mean around the fall of WRE or ERE?

>>3341675
mah nibba. What site do you use?

>>3343501
not him, but this site unlocks papers behind paywalls.
https://sci-hub.cc/

>>3337430
you guys only pronounce colonel and lieutenant the mainland europe way, because your army was trained by a homosexual prussian...

>>3335278
>British accents
as opposed to what? Surfer drawl? Italian accents?

>>3344452
on this topic I think Clive Owen's King Arthur movie doesn't get enough recognition. I mean, aside from some eyebrow raising decisions (all about Keira Kmightley for instance) how they manage to put the legend of arthur in the late roman era (and not in some kind of fantasy middle ages) should be loable.
Also how they did the sarmatian foederatii= Arthur's knights thing

>>3337430
Lieutenant should be pronounced lieu-te-nant, not LEFTENENT
literally where did brits pull that f from?

>Using swords instead of spears

>>3348853
Arkansas.

File: sidxnTDHL1s.jpg (37KB, 350x430px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 350x430px

>>3345551
I suppose Pagan Rome is more appealing and recognizable to the masses, at the moment, but why shouldn't a mostly Christian population in the West glorify the era of Constantine the Great and his Christian successors, against the invading barbarian hordes? For that matter, films about the Crusaders are barely made, with the most notable one, Kingdom of Heaven, being over a decade old at this point.

>>3348784
I enjoyed seeing that movie the first couple of times, but now I just think it was a barely-decent attempt at doing a historical King Arthur depiction. My reasons for this are that they took a Roman officer from the 2nd century AD (up to early 3rd century), and placed him in the late 5th century Britannia as the leader of Sarmatian auxiliaries (which would have made more sense in the 2nd and 3rd centuries, as by that point, the Roman Empire historically left Britannia around 410 AD). Why couldn't they get Clive Owen's character to be based on Ambrosius Aurelianus or Riothamus (maybe the same person with different titles, and even Arthur was supposed to have been a noble title, derived from "bear" in the Welsh Celtic language)? Yet, it's possible that the two individuals I've mentioned had a son or nephew in fact named Arthur, and they very well could have went with that, instead. What we've got is an Arthur based on someone from centuries ago, transplanted to a later time. The music and scenery was great, however, and the acting was not bad, although I thought only Clive Owen delivered a very strong performance in that film. Arthur's knights were not portrayed as the noblemen they should have been, but rather, as the anachronistic 2nd century Pagan Sarmatian auxiliaries. The Romano-British civilization at that point, without being under the rule of the Empire, would have probably had heavily armored cavalry, but in limited quantities, which may as well have been Arthur's knights, and the Round Table, a Roman arena.

>>3348784
Just consider young Keira wearing very little clothing a bonus.

File: 1492151680074.jpg (40KB, 540x322px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 540x322px

>>3348714
>>3343501
Libgen.io, that's where I got it from. It has over 2 million books for free, you'll find most shit you need there.

>>3343786
BRUTUS YOU FRICKIN SKIFOOZA STABBIN A FRIEND LIKE IT'S NOTHIN FUCK YOU

>>3347205
Normies care about a good story. Getting the details right is red meat for turning people interested in the movie's topic into raving fans. It's the difference between a summer popcorn flick which nobody remembers in 2 years verses a classic which stands the test of time.

>>3336157
>Romans speaking like Anglos
>immersive
top kek