ok this is my last post on this subject, so dont chuck a pilum at me
keep in mind i hardly have any resources, and my the internet i use even blocks some boards on this site, and besides i love to read your peoples opinions.
here look at these pics:
http://www.monstersandcritics.com/media ... 9&number=1
http://gfx.dagbladet.no/pub/artikkel/4/ ... rom111.jpg
http://images.igoogle.com/imgres?imgurl ... D%26sa%3DN
ok those were the rome sites now the reenactors:
http://www.esg.ndirect.co.uk/cov/index.htm
the first three is jin the epic hbo series ROME
the others are roman reenactors
this is not against the reenactors, just to tell u now i appreciate the work they do
and also i used the search function and read a long previous board about this hbo series
its already been pretty much confirmed that the armor (lorica hamata) and plot is pretty much historically accurate. but one thing that the reviews dont seem to answer
so you have the pictures of a soldier a some civilians, from both the rome series, and from a reenacment.
can you tell the difference? the rome pics, just seem more (dare i say epic)
at once you can tell that the rome sereis pics are from some movie, and the others just from some reenactments. but WHY? why is it so obvious that the two soldiers and tow civilians are from some movie?
did they use MAKEUP on those two soldiers on horesback, or two civilians, what makes them kind of stand out ? what makeup was used? is it possible that is i whizzed back to ancient rome and took a picture of tow calvary men, that thye could look EXACTLY like the pic from the rome series? and keep in mind, im trying to ask which one is more relevent to the REAL ROMANS.
its hard to explain and i know i sort of made a previous post on this so dont get mad.
please reply
i want this issue resolved
I think I get your point Francis. I can only guess that this is the effect of shot composition, casting (need to find actors that look the part to fill the suits), make-up, lighting, set dressing.....
shot composition?
what makeup?
lighting?
this is kind of what i feared, so the real romans couldnt naturally of looked like the rome sereies characters?
Shot composition: directors and cameramen carefully think of how to take their shot, what's to be in the background, from what angle to take the picture, etc, etc. Reenactors do not always have the knowledge or care about such things
Makeup: as Tarbicus said elsewhere, actors are always made-up too look good on film & to convey the atmosphere in the scene. I have no doubt that the make-up department is at least partially responsible for making Pollo & Vorenus look worn in that shot.
Lighting: again, cameramen are miracle workers where it comes to lighting out there scene in such a way that the lighting of the photo/film fits the atmosphere the director wants.
what makeup was used in the civilians?
if makeup, makes it look more realsitic, could the romans look like that naturally.
what lighting can be used outside?
so are those pics realistic?
which set was actually history?
Don't watch HBO's Rome. It churns my stomach (in the two much graphic sex and violence and not in the "I can't believe they put Augustus' arch in the forum!!" sense, I feel the same way about CSI, and 24 which are corpse and torture porn respectively)
But I have some comments.
First, J.C.'s (Julius Caesar, not the OTHER JC!) gear is horrible. A baldric on a chain? what, he couldn't put his wallet on one? Pteruges are leather and anemic, worthless, pitiful, etc. And the Eagle standard on his chest is more nuremburg than Roman.
On the other image, the guy's hamata on the left is pretty good actually, but the one on the right has a greek shoulder harness which is just plain weird.
Again, I get Woadwarrior's point. I think the re-enactors look too clean to be on campaign, but then I think all recent period pieces (other than Jane Austen period pieces) assume that everyone rolled in piles of filth before going to work every day. Since the 60's, American Westerns are horrible at this. Everybody is filthy. The farther back you go, the dirtier they get. Dirt just says 'authenticity' I guess. Kinda like 'black' says Manhattanite.
As far as the Ermine Guard pictures. I think this one is great.
http://www.esg.ndirect.co.uk/cov/pages/ ... pg_jpg.htm
I think it feels very natural, although it would be neater if the legionaires were more in the foreground and sharper in formation.
I love this shot though.
http://www.esg.ndirect.co.uk/cov/pages/ ... pg_jpg.htm
That's just a neat dichotomy with the blurred soldiers as background. (And the foreground ain't too bad either!) Notice also that the scenes are labeled "Civilian" so the emphasis is clearly not on the men.
But then I don't like the whole "Epic" label anyway. For me, my favorite part of Roman art is the unepic quality of daily life.
For example, here is scene of baking from the tomb of M. Vergilius Eurysaces in Rome:
http://www.geocities.com/mp_pollett/WALLS030.JPG
Now this seems pretty mundane and "non-epic" to us, but it's infinitely more accurate in its "Roman-ness". So is the graffiti, genre scenes, bakers, sellers, prostitutes, and just plain ordinary people.
Bottom line, if you like Hollywood fine, but some of us like the genre scenes, the ordinary scenes. Life isn't always epic.
Travis
hollywood is not history, in know this
for historical accuracy, i rather go to the reenactors, than hollywood
on the roman lady dont you think she would be using richer fabric than that grey over her shoulder?
oh i cant go to geocities, because it is banned
do u mind putting some of the pictures on the geocities site, on this site, so i can look at them?
would the historical romans look different from the reenactors, just because they are actually romaNS, and thats the real life there living i mean not pretending?
Why would it be impossible to use make-up? And afaik they often still use lights, possibly reflected on mirrors or perhaps by computer afterwards?
did they use makeup on that shot?
Quote:oh i cant go to geocities, because it is banned
do u mind putting some of the pictures on the geocities site, on this site, so i can look at them?
I've got some pictures of my own.
Send me your e-mail in a pm and I will forward them to you.
Travis
i know i must sound really stupid
but this is actually kind of important
so just answer me this if i went back to rome i saw two calvary men, could they is it possible that they looke exactly like the titus pullo and lucius vorenus on horseback?
this site said that rome series had accurate armor and that makeup is used to look more natural so.......???
Francis, there isn't a film or TV show made today in which makeup is not used, usually HEAVILY. This includes the news, talk shows, and probably even "reality" shows. The reason is that the cameras used require unnatural lighting in order to get a natural effect on film or video. If you grab any camera for a snapshot of something indoors, the flash goes off, right? Light that is perfect for our eyes is not enough for the camera. So there are ALWAYS extra lights of many sorts used, inside and outside, as well as a variety of colored filters that can be used on the camera lenses. With all the extra lighting, human skin tones and facial features tend to wash out and look flat, so the makeup counteracts that and keeps things looking natural. Actors can literally spend hours in the makeup department before any particular shot. If you were on a set and saw the actor up close in person, you'd be surprised at how heavily made-up and unnatural they look!
Do you have any movie DVDs that have "the making of" sections as extras? Those on the Lord of the Rings DVDs are particularly revealing. They show sets being built, camera takes being planned with "story boards" (basically the whole movie drawn out in comic book form, as a planning guide), and lots of "behind the scenes" views of the camera and lighting setups. It shows very clearly that any scene in a movie is made up of dozens of very short shots, each of which is very carefully planned, rehearsed, and possibly shot several times to get the effect the director wants. When you see the actual places these scenes are filmed in, it's very funny because only a small slice of scenery is visible in the movie. It can be surrounded by vehicles, parking lots, modern buildings, power lines, chunks of movie sets, camera and light equipment, and other things that are simply left out of the camera's view.
That's movie magic! It takes weeks or months to get some short scenes. In real life, the real Romans looked like regular people. Probably a little tougher and more grizzled than us modern guys, and they smelled different, too. But Hollywood will not hesitate to throw out history if the director wants something in particular, whether it's script or scene or costuming. Like those silly wrist bands! Effective movie magic draws the viewer in and makes him believe it's real--it has certainly succeeded with you, eh? Reenactors like us are basically teachers, and without Hollywood's budget we can't always compete with the magic. All we can do is show you a very small slice of reality.
I hope you can learn to trust us.
Vale,
Matthew
Quote:Francis, there isn't a film or TV show made today in which makeup is not used, usually HEAVILY. This includes the news, talk shows, and probably even "reality" shows. The reason is that the cameras used require unnatural lighting in order to get a natural effect on film or video. If you grab any camera for a snapshot of something indoors, the flash goes off, right? Light that is perfect for our eyes is not enough for the camera. So there are ALWAYS extra lights of many sorts used, inside and outside, as well as a variety of colored filters that can be used on the camera lenses. With all the extra lighting, human skin tones and facial features tend to wash out and look flat, so the makeup counteracts that and keeps things looking natural. Actors can literally spend hours in the makeup department before any particular shot. If you were on a set and saw the actor up close in person, you'd be surprised at how heavily made-up and unnatural they look!
One of the main reason for makeup is that skin is fat and it really shines when the light falls on it. Add some sweat from the hot lamps, and what you get is not a clean look, but something very odd.
Also, bright lights have the tendency to highlight every pimple, dent and bump on the skin, not something what beauty-loving actors (or audiences) want.
But one of the main reasons is that makeup controls the result. For a movie one has to take hundreds and hundreds of shots. Some scenes are shot weeks apart, but in the end result the actors still need to look the same. Not paler, not more tanned, the same (you'd be surprised how often these continuity mistakes are made!). With makeup, you control how the actors look.
thanx for the replies it told me a little but didnt really answer my main question
so the makeup is used so light doesnt reflect off the face
do they add any thing to the armor or something?