Historical accuracy does count

Rating: Null/10 (12 May 2000)

Okay, I have seen many comments saying "Why gripe about inaccuracies in the film?"
Well, I agree, it is an enjoyable film. But the inaccuracies were a bit distracting to anyone who knows something about the period.
Imagine if you saw a political thriller about the Cuban missile crisis, and, in a final dramatic scene, there is a threatening call from President Lincoln to President Yeltsin about the Chinese missiles being placed in Cuba. What? It makes no sense? But who cares about historical accuracy?
Now, I know most Americans (and perhaps others) know little about Rome from the end of the New Testament until Constantine reaches the Milvan bridge and spots a cross (maybe with a little bit about "Hadrian's Wall" in between), but there are many who know that Commodus didn't die a few months into his reign, know that Lucius Verus Iunior (I suppose that would have been his name) never existed, and that the republic was not restored circa 185 (or ever). And for those of us who do know this, seeing an eight year old child saying he is Lucius' son, or seeing Commodus' death is just as disconcerting as seeing President Lincoln ordering that General Lafayette drop the atomic bomb on Serbia.