05-21-2009, 10:16 PM
I agree that the switch between Octavians was abrupt, but given the years that were supposed to pass between the siege of Alesia (where the series began, IIRC) and the end, with Titus Pullo talking to Cesarion, they couldn't possibly stay with the same young (but admittedly good) actor who started as Octavian.
And once the change is deemed necessary, when better to do it than between seasons?
The jarring note comes because of the way the series compresses time -- even if we ignore the enforced rush of the second season, the first season took us, in a few months, from Alesia (52 BC) to Caesar's assassination (44 BC) -- eight years. While it made it look like it all happened in a few weeks, I guess the producers didn't want to go so far into stretching history as to have Octavian taking on Marcus Antonius while seeming 14 years old. (He was 19 in 44 BC, and should be 32 when Antonius is defeated at Actium.)
Given the realities of producing a show or movie, I don't think we'll ever see 100% accuracy. But while I agree a lot of things could be better, I still think HBO's series is one of the better portrayals.
And once the change is deemed necessary, when better to do it than between seasons?
The jarring note comes because of the way the series compresses time -- even if we ignore the enforced rush of the second season, the first season took us, in a few months, from Alesia (52 BC) to Caesar's assassination (44 BC) -- eight years. While it made it look like it all happened in a few weeks, I guess the producers didn't want to go so far into stretching history as to have Octavian taking on Marcus Antonius while seeming 14 years old. (He was 19 in 44 BC, and should be 32 when Antonius is defeated at Actium.)
Given the realities of producing a show or movie, I don't think we'll ever see 100% accuracy. But while I agree a lot of things could be better, I still think HBO's series is one of the better portrayals.
Wayne Anderson/ Wander
