More films with Romans to come

[Arthes]

Greetings,
More films coming with a Roman presence.....the story of Boudicca...

Warrior
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0409457/
To be directed by Gavin O' Connor and produced by Mel Gibson, this was originally titled Warrior Queen. This film has been dubbed 'Braveheart with a bra'....lol

There is some confusion as another film due for production by Paramount was also named Warrior Queen, this time with screenplay by David Auburn, I cannot find an up to date reference for this at the moment..

Rachael Weisz and Dougray Scott were originally slated for the lead roles in Warner Brother's Warrior Queen, which I would suspect is the
Mel Gibson production, although no actors are yet listed for this???

Leg II Augusta have location filming listed for "Boudicca" - Indigo Films (California) 2005,
I think this is for television?
regards
Arthes

[Matt Lukes]

Boy I hope, probably in vain, that Hollywood doesn't villify the Romans and deify Boudicca. It's OH so rare that they just tell a story without having to practically propaganize things- just look at King Arthur: he's a saint and the Saxons just are ultra-evil (how stupid)- but I suppose there's always a chance they might be reasonable...

[Arrian]

And Might I add Hurrah!

For our very own Vin Diesel is set to direct and play the title character of HANNIBAL. Not about cannibals this time, but "the Carthaginian general who led an elephant-riding battalion across the Alps to attack Rome in the 3rd Century B.C". :roll:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0382731/

http://www.hannibaltheconqueror.net/

I am afraid. But it might also be good fun.
And i love the idea of a cross- dressing Mel Gibson beating the living daylight out of a lot of romans ( with british accents so that you know they are EVIL, as they surely were).

[Tasciavanous]

( with British accents so that you know they are EVIL, as they surely were).

Why is it as Richard Holmes said the men that coloured half the globe pink are always portrayed as inbreed,sadistic and stupid or just stupid?
But I have always thought as the Roman officers as a stiff upper lip sort of bunch so it could work.
IE "I say magnus those demmed native fuzzes are at it again"
"Blast it all if ye ain't right. Don't throw those bloody spears at me you painted savage" etc etc

[Gaivs Antonivs Satvrninvs]

Vin Diesel hock: Cheez! And people complain about Victor Mature. However on the Boudiccan film I have been hoping someone would make this story. I,too, hope the Romans don't come off badly but if the heroine is the focus well-somebody has to be the bad guy,I guess.Thanks,Andy

[Arthes]

Well,
I said this somewhere else, the Romans were conquering people they believed were inferior and objected when the 'inferior' ones would not go down without a fight...which was perfectly acceptable in the circumstances... :lol:
Now as bloodthirsty as Boudicca was said to be during the rebellion, could you blame her or the Britons after the way many of them had been treated.
Boudicca's husband, Prasutagus lived as a subject of and by the laws of Rome and when he died, Boudicca simply asked for her right to continue as Queen of the Iceni, as per his Will and was flogged, disgraced and her daughters sexually abused. Why? Because some EVIL Roman wanted to show her that Britons and women in particular were little more than slaves (I could think of a more descriptive word) :evil: :evil:
There were good and bad on both sides I know, but if the Romans had been more sympathetic to the feelings of the Britons, things could have turned out differently and a lot of slaughter may have been saved.
regards
Arthes

[Arthes]

just look at King Arthur: he's a saint

well - hmmmmmh, not everyone thought that, some people thought he was a tyrant, bloodthirsty and warlike - but a brilliant soldier and leader of course....!
I would go with that description far more than the 'saintly' aspect and think the truth lies somewhere in the middle...I have had thoughts that the Dux Bellorum who fought with the British kings, may have had some Germanic (covering Anglian, Saxon, Jutish etc) blood himself...
and hey, this is my hero and I don't like the Saxons....
regards
Arthes

[Arrian]

Good sah! I hmust say! I object most strongly! The romans in the case of Boudicca were, admittedly, bastards. But in a hollywood version of the tale, they wuold be portrayed as such anyway.

In "King Arthur" we see romano-celtish people, who are good. The saxons, being the enemy, is evil.
In "braveheart", the scots are celtish. The british are evil ( with accents to prove it.)
In "Boudicca", the celts will be good. The romans must therefore be evil.
In "Hannibal", the carthaginians will be morally ambigious, but their celtish allies will anchor them firmly on the good side. The romans will be evil.

The fact that they are celtish is important, because the celts nowadays are always good, brave, freedom-loving, have an amazing sense of rythm and are one with nature. This have been the case for some time, in the world of hollywood cinema. ( Titanic, braveheart, King Arthur, LOTR).

(Do not get me wrong. i love irish beer. And I love celtish music, especially the fightin' kind :twisted: )

[Matt Lukes]

Well my comment was really just a shot at Hollywood hacks who can't seem to just tell a historical story without demonizing some group or other- and it's NEVER the case that one side was completely evil and the other was saintly good. The Celts did nasty things so did the Picts, the Romans, the Carthaginians, the Macedonians, the Persians... it's only human :lol: The only historical films I truly have respect for are ones that just show everyone as people- 'The Longest Day', 'Tora, Tora, Tora', 'The Eagle Has Landed' all come to mind as good films because they do this... sadly they're very much in the minority. It just irriates me that who's good and who's bad is dependent on the filmmaker's choice of protagonist- all because screenwriters can't seem to tell a good enough story without finding it necessary to make the audience hate someone. Then again, maybe that's just a sad commenary on the average moviegoer who would be bored without some group to hate...

As for the Saxons being bad- tell that to the writers of the Errol Flynn 'Adventures of Robin Hood'- it's those bastard Normans who are oppressing those poor Saxons... :lol: I guess who's bad is totally dependent on the time period, eh? When the oppressor becomes the oppressee :lol:

Vin Diesel as Hannibal? Oh boy... Don't get me wrong- I like Vin Diesel- but after movies like xXx, The Pacifier, The Knockaround Guys, and The Fast and the Furious- I just don't see him as Hannibal... I'm afraid it'll be just as bad as Orlando Bloom in Kingdom of Heaven, or Colin Farrell and Angelina Jolie in Alexander- all big names that totally don't suit the characters they play... IMHO :wink:

Then again, Eric Brana was excellent as Hector, Russell Crowe made Maximus, and even Brad Pitt suited Achilles- so maybe there's hope

Sorry about the rant- but it really bugs me when people mess with history :lol:

Matt

[Arthes]

In "braveheart", the scots are celtish. The british are evil ( with accents to prove it.)

I'm British/English and was on the side of William Wallace and the Scots. I love Braveheart, it's one of my favourite films...
I have a 'thing' about Scotland and loathed the English for what they did to the Scots. William Wallace was convicted of treason and hung, drawn and quartered and worse, yet was innocent as he had never sworn allegiance to Longshanks... :?
With The Patriot I was on the side of the American revolutanaries - again, you had the evil british (with accents to prove it)
(I seem to like Mel Gibson films and dislike the British :roll: )
" Freedom is best, I tell thee true,
Of all things to be won,
Then never live within the bonds of slavery,my son"
(Wallace of Dunipace).
Another piece of information....William Wallace's sword is 5'4" long
he was supposed to be well over 6' tall
regards
Arthes

[Theodosius the Great]

Some good points there, Matt.

The Celts did nasty things so did the Picts, the Romans, the Carthaginians, the Macedonians, the Persians... it's only human.

True - all countries are born in blood. The Iceni were no less 'imperialists' than the Romans.

... and it's NEVER the case that one side was completely evil and the other was saintly good.

Again, true. BUT I think moral equivalency should be avoided at all costs. SOMEONE is the better - to what degree is a matter of debate. Otherwise you get bad films like 'Alexander' and 'Kingdom of Heaven'.

"Troy" was better than those, IMO. And they demonized Agamemnon .

It's impossible to identify with Colin Ferral or Orlando Bloom since their characters are so morally ambiguous at best. At the very least I expected Darius to be portrayed as a tyrant who was behind Philip's assassination. That was probably what really happened historically anyway. But both Scott and Stone wanted to be really PC about their subjects.

The only historical films I truly have respect for are ones that just show everyone as people- 'The Longest Day', 'Tora, Tora, Tora', 'The Eagle Has Landed' all come to mind as good films because they do this

Yes, great movies. But if you'll notice in those films you cite that there's no central character (at least an historical one). Those movies are closer to being documentaries.

About upcoming "Boudicca", I hope they don't go over the top showing her personally killing Romans right and left from her chariot. :roll:
Like Caesar she probably stayed well behind the line as a rallying point. I doubt she was the chief strategist of the rebellion, more likely just a figure head. I don't think Mel will let it get out of control though . :wink:

[A_Volpe]

Hollywood is one-way-minded (profit) and they MUST have 2 sides, Good and Evil, they'd rather kill themselves than even think of letting a movie "end" without some specific conclusion, favoritism, or bias. It's just the way it is. That's what brings in the dough, and that's how dorks like Tom Cruise gets paid 10 bazzilion dollars out of our pockets to stand there and smirk on screen. :? (although I can't say much since I've seen some of "his" movies)

speaking of "Evil Brits" with accents to prove it...The late but great Peter Cushing in Star Wars as Grand Moff Tarkin...Can't get much more evil that that

[Arrian]

I wholeheartedly agree with you Matt.

Arthes; the fact that you (an englishwoman) rooted for the scots in braveheart just goes to show how deviously manipulating hollywood is, doesn't it? :wink:

[Tarbicus]

Arthes; the fact that you (an englishwoman) rooted for the scots in braveheart

I didn't, I wanted the English to win. hock: Good ending I thought :wink:

[Caballo]

Arthes wrote "I'm British/English and was on the side of William Wallace and the Scots. I love Braveheart, it's one of my favourite films...
I have a 'thing' about Scotland and loathed the English for what they did to the Scots. "
Mind you, according to his name and a number of historians, William Wallace's family was actually Welsh! And IIRC, Welsh (or the North British variation ) was spoken in a few parts of Southern Scotland until the 15th century...

Cheers

Britannicus