10-03-2003, 11:00 AM
<strong>Sassanid:</strong> I really cannot agree with you. My personal definition of a good book, play or film is simply <em>a good story told well</em>. Boudica fell well short on both points.<br>
<br>
I am quite able to overlook non-historical events, costumes, sets, modes of speach etc. Most dramas require compromises of some sort or other and as I suggested above, I am not averse to a non-historical plot provided there is some point to it.<br>
<br>
Braveheat and Gladiator may have had historical inacuracies that one could drive a bus through as does every historical play by Shakespear. But these works have redeaming features such as capturing the feel of the times, spectacle, acting and above all <em>a good story told well</em>.<br>
<br>
The production was not cheap, ITV claims to have spent £3 million (about US$5 million) on Boudica. I know that putting together a drama is an expensive business, but that money could have been far, far beter spent. <p></p><i></i>
<br>
I am quite able to overlook non-historical events, costumes, sets, modes of speach etc. Most dramas require compromises of some sort or other and as I suggested above, I am not averse to a non-historical plot provided there is some point to it.<br>
<br>
Braveheat and Gladiator may have had historical inacuracies that one could drive a bus through as does every historical play by Shakespear. But these works have redeaming features such as capturing the feel of the times, spectacle, acting and above all <em>a good story told well</em>.<br>
<br>
The production was not cheap, ITV claims to have spent £3 million (about US$5 million) on Boudica. I know that putting together a drama is an expensive business, but that money could have been far, far beter spent. <p></p><i></i>
