The movie "Gladiator" was particularly praised for its authentic recreation of the Roman amphitheater. Please name ONE aspect that is actually less than authentic, and elaborate on it a little by giving two or three examples. Make sure not to just repeat what earlier posts say.
The recreation of the Roman amphitheater was fairly authentic, although it was digitally created. However, one aspect that was not particularly authentic was the gladiatorial fight to the death. In "Gladiator," Maximus slays a great number of men in his gladiatorial fights; most notably, Maximus slays Commodus. In the actual Colosseum, a man like Commodus wouldn't have risked his life in such a manner; when Commodus would participate in the games, it is said he would use a wooden sword.
ReplyDeleteGreat example!
DeleteCommodus' character had some inaccuracies. For example, busts of Commodus from Roman antiquity showed that he had a beard, unlike the clean-shaven Joaquin Phoenix in the movie. Another thing that was inaccurate was that in the movie he only ruled for several months, instead of for 12 years.
ReplyDeleteYep!!!
DeleteOne example of an unauthentic aspect of the film "Gladiator" was the Latin that was expressed on various posters and announcements. One said something like "gladitorius violentus" or something similar and that doesnt make any sense in Latin.
ReplyDeleteThe poster says GLADIATORES – VIOLENTIA (Gladiators – violence), so it's at least grammatically correct, but it's a sad specimen, written by and for analphabets, compared to Cecil B. DeMille's wonderful program posters in "Sign of the Cross." Why couldn't Ridley Scott also create something like this and then superimpose the English translation, the way DeMille did. Scott actually had hired a Harvard Professor of Classics, K. Coleman, for his movie, but clearly didn't use her expertise much (which is why she later demanded that her name be expunged from the film's credits).
DeleteAnother aspect of the movie gladiator that was inaccurate was that for the death of Marcus Aurelius there was a reenactment of the "Battle of Carthage". The reenactment of the "Battle of Carthage" itself was extremely inaccurate. The army of Scipio Africanus was played by Algerians in chariots, and in each chariot there was a woman with a cross bow.
ReplyDeleteRight! What's true, though, is that the Romans liked to reenact historical battles in the amphitheater. They even reenacted mythological stories as part of executions!
DeleteThe expert on these matters is Kathleen Coleman at Harvard. If you are interested, here are a few articles on the subject that you can access through one of our databases (e.g., JSTOR) at the Hatfield Library:
“Fatal charades: Roman executions staged as mythological enactments,” Journal
of Roman Studies 80 (1990), 44–73.
“Launching into history: aquatic displays in the early Empire,” Journal of Roman
Studies 83 (1993), 48–74.
“Gladiators: heroes of the Roman amphitheatre,” BBC History Website:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/ancient/romans/gladiators (published 8/19/03)
One big part of the movie that was different from what really happened in history was the life of Commodus. His rule was greatly shortened and the way he died was altered. In Gladiator, there are no assassination attempts by his sister and as a result of there being no assassination attempt, the sister is never banished from Rome. At one point in the film, his sister puts a powder in Commodus' drink that seems to be a poison but nothing becomes of it.
ReplyDeleteExactly! I wonder how many viewers that, unlike you, didn't know the history of the real Commodus even noticed how creepy the powder in the drink scene was. It reminded meimmediately of all other scenes with poisoned drinks, e.g., when Sophonisba pours a poisonous powder into a drink in Cabiria and kills herself.
DeletePeople stole my ideas! But, one thing that I noticed that nobody has mentioned is the Gladiator fights themselves. Spartacus has been the only movie that had only two Gladiators fighting at one time. Every other movie had a lot of combatants at once. In Gladiator, they made it extremely difficult for Maximus to fight, which would never actually happen.
ReplyDeleteGood job, you did find something no one else had mentioned yet!
DeleteAspects of the gladiator fights in Gladiator were extremely inaccurate such as: when Maximus and the other slaves are chained during a gladiator fight, wild animals are brought into the fight between Tigris and Maximus, and multiple gladiators fought against more armed gladiators. Gladiator fights were supposed to be fair in antiquity, but this movie shows them as slanted so much that death is inevitable.
ReplyDeleteWell, you may say it in more detail and more elegantly, but basically, this is what Alec referred to earlier already.
DeleteI found Commodus's charactor to be very well done. He was a great actor but the way that he was portrayed wa slightly inaccurate. Ridley Scott left out major details of the life of Commodus like his love for circus races, and how he wanted to rename Rome. They accurately displayed his creepiness, but not his crazy.
ReplyDeleteYou are right. I was surprised, in fact, that this movie, unlike its model, "The Fall of the Roman Empire", almost downplays Commodus' megalomania.
DeleteOne of the many historical inaccuracies in the movie Gladiator is the context of Marcus Aurelius' death. It is said that he actually died of plague rather than being murdered by Commodus. Also, the movie implies that Rome was to become a republic again if Commodus hadn't interfered, but this never actually happened.
ReplyDeleteYes, the historical M. Aurelius seems to have died of natural causes, and no one would have seriously entertained the idea of restoring the republic at that time. The republic had died 224 years earlier when Brutus and the other Caesar assassins failed to use the opportunity of Caesar's death to resurrect it.
Delete