I\'m working on a short film with a Roman soldier

[Steve Schonberger]

That sound like a nice project - tell us more?

It's a comedy. The two main characters -- movie nuts, as I mentioned -- are trying to walk from one movie theater to another, in time for a movie at the second theater. They start out with plenty of time, but various encounters slow them down to the point that they are risk of missing the second movie; the theater doesn't allow people to enter late.

1. Is Gladiator the best example of a movie to pick on as one that messes up the costuming? ... Was it just ordinary bad, or Really Really Bad?

Well - it depends on what you expect. Some third-rate movie or TV-series would make me groan, say OMG and get on with my watching. A Discovery documentary would get a harsher verdict because they reach so many people. A BBC documentary would receive a scathing verdict from me because they should have known better with all their experience and contacts. See e.g. the comments on this forum about 'Rome - the series'.

That makes sense. One sets expectations on the basis of the ambition, budget, and purpose of the project. Documentaries get a tougher standard than fiction based on fact, which in turn get a tougher standard than fantasy fiction.

'Gladiator' was a big, BIG Hollywood production that was a remake of an earlier movie (Fall of the Roman Empire) that actually landed this forum (as well as many re-enactment groups) many new members. So we're grateful. But some details were very bad, while (with just a teeny weeny more research and money) that could have been much better. Gladiator lacked the proper attention for historical detail, whereas we have seen from 'Alexander' how good a movie can get it right when that attention exists.
In my opinion, Gladiator was not that 'bad', but I fear 'Gladiator II' will be.

In that case, it seems like a very good fit for the dialogue in question. It had the budget to do everything right, was marketed as sensitive to history, and still got a fair number of things wrong. (Its worst shortcoming, in my opinion, was that the story wasn't nearly as interesting or dramatic as a lot of stories they could have drawn directly from history. But that's not the sort of complaint we're discussing.)

Anyone with an eye for detail, awareness of the sorts of historical details they messed up, and a fondness for catching mistakes could find fault with it. But at the same time it's good enough that "Way better than the ones in Gladiator" is clear praise; "Way better than King Arthur" might sound like sarcastic praise.

In the case of Alexander, movie fans still have plenty to complain about, or so I understand from reviews. But those complaints are about tiresome storytelling. Getting the equipment right would be great if it were meant as a documentary about the equipment, but since the primary goal of the movie was to tell an entertaining story of Alexander the eye for detail goes to waste. On the other hand, if it's that good in the details maybe I should take a look at it with that in mind.

'King Arthur' was really really bad. 'Last Legion' will be worse. :evil: Maybe your script won't be produced before Glad II hits the silver screen. In that case, i fear you'll get to use that one.

I didn't think enough people saw King Arthur for it to be sufficiently familiar as an object of scorn. But looking it up, I was surprised to find that it grossed around $52M in the US and $203M worldwide, so more people saw it than I had expected.

My hope is to find a crew fairly soon, although Seattle weather may prevent that.

I have doubts that Gladiator 2 will be made at all, so if I set myself in a race against it I should have little trouble winning. (Given the Roman setting, it seems it should be Gladiator II, but apparently the proposed title uses an Arabic numeral.)

I'm not surprised that expectations for The Last Legion are low. It had the title The Enchanted Sword for a while, which suggests a tone closer to fantasy than history -- and titles are easier to change than prop details.

Hollywood foul-ups (where to begin):
leather armour (argh!!)
metal shields or enormous metal shield rims
wrong helmets (Gladiator had fantasy helmets and even medieval ones lying around)
guys fighting with two swords (almost every movie seems to have that these days)
whole populations dressed in shades of brown
invulnerable heroes while the enemy falls in droves (Stormtrooper Syndrome)

Good examples. I'm not sure if any of them quite fit the context I'm looking for, which is "He even [got some often messed up detail] right."

One thing that might fit would be for her to say, "But it's nice to see an accurate Roman helmet."

The audience will see the character in a shot from the characters' points of view. He'll be a part of a crowd, but he'll stand out because he's the only one dressed like a Roman soldier. ...

Best use an officer to attract even more attention - the 'bling bling' effect.

Good point. I already had it in mind to include a crest, which is one of the flashier parts of an officer costume.

... If anyone wants to suggest something else for the scene, I welcome it.

Two Romans?

That would actually improve the scene, since they could then talk to each other. But I'm not sure I could scrounge up another one on the exact shooting day, whenever that ends up being. Even assembling the gear for one Roman has turned into a big project.