Talk:Rome (TV series)/Archive 3

message: This is not a discussion board for whether or not the show is correct in the history behind ancient Rome, nor is it a place to critque the show. Please be reminded that all discussions here should relate directly to the accuracy of the article itself. Please keep your opinions about the show to yourself, or kindly find another fan forum to do so, such as IMDb or HBO. MagnoliaSouth 14:53, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reminder!

message: Okay, HBO has confirmed that Rome will be cancelled after season two. Does anyone disagree with correcting this portion of the article? MagnoliaSouth 07:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Second season and Rumours of a Third (?)

message: Generally I'm not one to complain re bad language, but even though this is in context, I think we need some way of filtering use of the word cunt. Just pointing out where some may complain! Also, Ancient rome is studied by smallish children, and they're gonna chuck "Rome" into google, getting this as the third result. Angry Parents+Lawyers=UHOH! Thefloogadooga (talk) 09:38, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is the use of language appropriate??? 

message: If you look more closely, especially parts of those episode descriptions have been taken from HBO's website with verbally copy and paste. I do not see any specific information indicating any permissions. And even if on HBO's web site, those preview paragraphs are replaced with more elaborate versions, this could still result in a copyright issue. Please do not do this, and rewrite if neccessary. 
*At first I added simpler versions but several other users began pasting the official summaries. I added taken from official site to give HBO credit. Hope that solves the problem. Sfufan2005 20:04, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure it actually does solve the problem though. You see HBO has the summaries copyrighted, which means whether or not we credit them here doesn't matter. The only way we can safely copy and paste them here is if HBO provides express written permission. Would you be interested in rewriting those summaries, by chance? I'd be willing to work with you if you like. MagnoliaSouth 15:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Do not copy and paste! 

message: I'm looking over this section and am not really sure why this is here. About half of the information listed is duplicated from the episode list. The other works listed, doesn't pertain at all to Rome but to the individual listed, so if someone is interested in them, they should go to their page. While I agree that artists who were part of the Rome team should be mentioned, I don't think it fits in with the article the way it is designed. Perhaps a shorter, to the point version is in order. Comments? MagnoliaSouth | Talk 07:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Production credits

message: If anyone is even listening, I am in the process of making major edits on the article. The article is longer than the standard article should be to begin with, so I'm creating sub-pages and moving portions of text to those. I'm also beginning to implement the table changes as well. The plan here is to create a more solid encyclopedic article, as well as provide information that many users would like to see. All the lists and tables really doesn't belong in the main article. MagnoliaSouth | Talk 10:02, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Editing (major)

message: Has anybody seen legionaries in this series using the Roman salute gesture. There is some controvercy if this gesture was invented in the XVII century. Mieciu K 13:23, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In the military context, several soldiers are shown saluting their superiors. There are a two examples in The Stolen Eagle that I could find easily enough just now: when the soldier brings Caesar news of his daughter's death and when Vorenus leaves Mark Antony after being tasked to find the eagle. The salute appears to be a closed right fist against the heart then extended palm down, thumb out parallel with the ground or slightly elevated. -Anþony 22:43, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is [[Roman salute]] ever used? 

message: I'm not completely sure about this but maybe someone could clarify this. I've been watching the Rome DVD this week and I noticed to things. After Evander (Niobe's lover) gets killed by Pullo, and Niobe and her sister are at the house in distress for a second a man walks right behind them that looks just like Evander. Also after the gladiator scene, on the beginning of the next episode (upon the reenactment at the theater) there is a close up of an old man crying near the end, the cut is confusing since most of the crowd is heard cheering at the presentation, 
yet the man looks a lot like the last gladiator who just got killed, only without all the makeup. Are people coming back from the dead as extras in Rome? or is my tv just small and my sight poor?
:It's just an old tv trick. They've already paid the ACTOR, so re-use him as much as they can. Just because it's the same ACTOR doesn't mean he's playing the same Character
::Actually, if the same actor played a different character they would have to pay him again, so my guess is that it's your eyes playing tricks. TAnthony 19:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  dead people come back to life? 

message: I changed the following sentence:
:the only two "regular soldiers" mentioned in Caesar's Commentarii de Bello Gallico.
This is not quite correct since Vorenus and Pullo in Caesar's text are centurions and thus, not rank-and-file soldiers but low-ranking oficers - and they are not the only low-ranking officers mentioned by name in the Gallic Wars: there's at least one aquilifer mentioned by name during the crossing of the Channel, and if memory serves, the aquilifer who has the idea to cut down the Venetians' sails is also mentioned by name. -- Ferkelparade π 19:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reference to "Gallic Wars" 

message: The series summary section starts thusly:
:The series is a historical drama depicting the period of history surrounding the violent transformation of the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire; a change driven by the class struggle between Patrician and Plebeian (in Latin the patricii and the plebeii)...
I haven't seen the show, so I wonder if the terms patricians and plebians are actually used therein.  The two phrases denote not economic classes, but hereditary castes; while in the early days of the Roman state the patricians were rich and the plebians were poor, by Caesar's day there were plenty of wealthy plebians.  The main political conflict of the period under consideration, to the extent that it could be said to be class based, were between the "populares" (populists, more or less) and "optimates" or "boni" (the best or the good).  There were plebian leaders like Cicero in the optimates, generally considered the party of the rich, and patrician leaders of the populares, Caesar being the most obvious example.
Anyway, sorry to go on like this.  My question is mainly if this is a mistake in the TV series or just in the article.  If the former, it should be noted in the appropriate section.  If the latter, it should be fixed.  --Jfruh (talk) 02:30, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There are a handful of wealthy plebeian characters, and the politics does indeed seem to center more around a populares vs. optimates conflict than a rich vs. poor conflict. I'd say the article is wrong.--24.22.147.202 23:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

text: This has already been corrected. TAnthony 00:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  patricians and plebians 

message: The very first bullet point in the section states that Egypt is inaccurately portrayed as too ancient-Egyptian.  However, unlike the earlier Ptolemies, Cleopatra had a keen interest in ancient Egyptian language and culture, and did much to resurrect the waning Egyptian religion and customs.  Doubtless, Egypt during her reign was still very much Hellenic, but is it possible that she "re-Egyptized" it at least to some extent?  I do not have sufficient expertise in the history of antiquity to edit this portion of the article, but I believe that this is something the experts should consider.  As it is, the statement in question appears facile to me.  When all facts are taken into account, the degree of the show's departure from history in this regard is probably difficult to assess.Redisca 17:13, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I was the one who added that bullet point. I've since revised it to be more precise, but basically, it comes down to this: You're right in that Cleopatra was more interested in Egyptian culture than her predecessors. But that's not the big picture: The point is that in the episode, we don't see a single trace of Greek culture, when actually it should have been visible everywhere. And not in a small way. The best example is Alexandria, where most of the action takes place: It was a Greek city; meaning Greek architecture, a mostly Greek population wearing Greek costume, and a Greek-style royal palace with Greek-style guards. This is all verifiable - check out the relevant wikipedia entries if you're in doubt (many of them are linked to in the entry on the Caesarion episode). Now compare to what we see in that episode: Ancient Egyptian-style buildings and courtiers, soldiers and inhabitants wearing costumes that have no resemblance to anything historical other than Ancient Egypt (wigs etc.), and not a single hint at Greece. I don't think that makes the degree of the show's departure from history difficult to assess at all, if I may say so. Frederic Anklin 17:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'd echo the point by Redisca; Cleopatra was of course Greek but was also self-consciously immersed in all things Egyptian, probably from political necessity though maybe also from a young age, and this was the image broadcast to the Romans: for example here, her worship as Isis.  The show portrays Egypt from Rome's pov so it's fair that it appears v Egyptian.  No reason to make it look Greek, I mean if the audience knows who the Ptolemys are, as the Romans did, there's no need to. Hakluyt bean 02:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Much of ancient (pre-Christian) Alexandria had Egyptian architecture and statuary in place. In order to make nice with the Egyptian people, many of the Ptolemys brought statues and other artwork from other parts of Egypt to Alexandria to "dress it up". Many of these "recycled" artifacts wound up under Alexandria harbor. They are now being recovered by marine archaeologists such as Jean Yves Empereur. Check out the PBS website on his recent dives . Additionally, the Divernet website  shows several images of artifacts still in the water of Alexandria harbor, and almost all of them are classic Egyptian artifacts: sphinxes, stelae, etc. The city of Alexandria had become a hodgepodge of styles by Cleopatra VII's day. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.142.75.231 (talk) 02:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

text: It was recently added and obviously in correct, so I took it out. Thanks. TAnthony 20:46, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible inaccuracy in the "Historical deviations" section 

message: Will there only be ten episodes in season 2?  Is there any good source available yet on the number of episodes?--thirty-seven 20:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Number of episodes in Season 2 

message: I removed the following line from the "Historical deviations" section:
Cato is portrayed as an old man, while in history he was only in his 40s. {This is a somewhat ridiculous note. In this period, the average life expectancy for a plebian would have been around 35-40, while the upper classes could probably expect to live to perhaps 50. A man of 40 would be an 'old man'.}
Cato was 48 or 49 at the time of his death.  Karl Johnson, who plays Cato, was around 56 years old when he played the role of Cato.  That's not a terribly large difference.  Also, as the note on the end of the of the line suggests, differences in life expectancy and living conditions would likely account for the difference between the charcter's appearance and how modern people from industrialized countries would expect a man in his late 40s to look.  If anyone disagrees with this, feel free to do so.  Thanks.  Jim Campbell 00:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed "Historical deviation"

message: Removed a note that said the project was mostly developed by a British cast and crew. First off, casts have next to nothing to do with the actual development of a TV show like this (ie, no stars). Second, John Millius and William J. MacDonald are both Americans, while Bruno Heller has lived in Los Angeles for 10 years (this is the trio that created and developed the show)  RoyBatty42 19:32, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Created by

message: Battle scenes in Rome depict Roman infantry fighting techniques including the tightly-packed "Roman Wall" of shields, gladius thrusting techniques above and below the "shield wall", and the rotation of troops on the front lines every 1 to 2 minutes. These techniques are largely conjectural, as we have no such detailed descriptions surviving to us. However, they are possible considering Roman ingenuity and the need to replenish the front ranks during times of intense combat. Rotation of troops is unlikely to have taken place as frequently as 1 to 2 minutes, however.
I was wondering if it's considered unlikely to have been 1 or 2 min rotations (and I don't know whose opinion this is) then why did the programme-makers give that impression?  Also the bit about 'Roman ingenuity' I'd replace; it's common sense + a number of things: different culture (celtic tribes had a warrior culture which extolled the individual, and 'pound for pound' are commonly regarded to have been bigger and better, but this didn't lend itelf to co-ordinated tactics) sharp sense of patriotism (celtic peoples lacked this), virtue of group discipline - it's a big subject. Hakluyt bean 02:53, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  historical deviation - fighting techniques 

message: * According to this article at the New Yorker there will be no Season 3. So be sure to complain at www.HBOcom/rome --Neilrieck 12:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you noticed, the last episode was also called the "Series Finale" --67.175.193.148 05:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea, but why everytime we see the TV series or movies about Rome, they are about the history since Caesar or after him, the history about Roman Republic before him is not so attractive as a subject matter of TV or movie?  ——Nussknacker胡桃夹子^.^tell me... 09:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

text: We love the idea of 1 man who changes all. before caesar there was only hannibal who one his one threatened rome and the republic, like there aren't movies about that. 81.69.203.77 06:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No Season 3 

message: I recommend heeding the above advice, click here and voice your opinion on a third season.  It's not often we get good historical dramas, especially period pieces so purpose built and extravagant!  Let's push them to keep it coming.  :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 211.30.75.123 (talk) 04:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea, but why everytime we see the TV series or movies about Rome, they are about the history since Caesar or after him, the history about Roman Republic before him is not so attractive as a subject matter of TV or movie?  ——Nussknacker胡桃夹子^.^tell me... 09:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

text: We love the idea of 1 man who changes all. before caesar there was only hannibal who one his one threatened rome and the republic, like there aren't movies about that. 81.69.203.77 06:53, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Attention Rome Fans

message: Different edits don't necessarily mean controversy, even if not everyone is happy.  Particularly the RAI edit, where I don't think there can have been any expectation of showing all the sex and nudity.  In that sense the edit is 'normal' rather than 'controversial'. Hakluyt bean 12:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  controversy 

message: Does that mean that he has a special status or something else in the Senate? It makes him conspicuous in the Senate while the others wear the white ones.  ——Nussknacker胡桃夹子^.^tell me... 09:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does Cato Jr. always wear a black robe? 

message: Some important events are not mentioned in Rome, including Caesar's campaign against King Pharnaces of Cimmeria (the campaign which spawned the famous saying Veni, Vidi, Vici)
this IS mentioned, Caesar is holding a party where he says the people of Pontus are weak and it was no wonder Pompei defeated them so easily. 
so it is mentioned 81.69.203.77 06:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  veni vidi vici 

message: That is a good question!  He is wearing a black robe to mourn the Republic.  He believes the Republic is lost with the “tyrant” Caesar in power.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skatter heart79 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mourning the Republic 

message: Is the table comparing Cast and characters between the two seasons really necessary?  As far as I can tell there is only one character who is portrayed by different actors, and it just seems to be taking up space unnecessarily.
:I think the point was differentiating between characters that don't appear in both seasons. TAnthony 03:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cast and characters 

message: The following images were tagged for not having a fair use rationale; I have added one to each image, removed the tags, and cleaned up the alerts on this talk page. 
*:Image:Ep12.jpg
*:Image:Ep11.jpg 
*:Image:Ep10.jpg
*:Image:Ep09.jpg
*:Image:Ep05.jpg 
*:Image:Ep04.jpg
*:Image:Ep02rome.jpg
Please let me know if I have not followed protocol. TAnthony 05:40, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale

message: As the title says.--JSH-alive 06:29, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. This was announced far and wide in Italian media, but very sparingly in the US and UK. See  for one of the few examples where the three-way coproduction is mentioned. It is also discussed here:  (this latter link also discusses how the series flopped in Italy). Still, both the BBC and HBO official websites state that the series was a coproduction between the two of them alone. (The official Italian website of the fiction on the RAI server  obviously disagrees and actually discusses the three-way production extensively.) Methinks this divergence should be mentioned somewhere in the article. --Nehwyn 08:43, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did [[RAI]] truely involved in the production? 

message: Videmus Omnia (who tagged the article) is correct that the use of non-free/fair use images in inappropriate for lists, per Wikipedia:Non-free content#Unacceptable images. I am removing them from the episode lists, but they still appear in the appropriate individual episode articles. TAnthony 21:48, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Image removals

message: There is nothing about the intro music for the sure, who made it or created it. Thought that should be in the article. Govvy 12:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro music. 

message: I've created the (horribly named) List of broadcasting data for Rome (TV series) to preserve the info deleted here pending a discussion on its value and what may be done with it. I supposed the issue should be discussed on the list's talk page. — TAnthonyTalk 00:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Broadcasting

message: You could say something about filming techniques, such as the public crier acting as a narrator (something is said in the list of minor characters) or the dark indoors scenes, presumedly corresponding to the lack of cheap efficient illumination of the period. --Error (talk) 02:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Commentary like that is tricky without sources, meaning that someone outside Wikipedia needs to have published such analysis in, say, a magazine or reliable website. If you know of some, by all means guide us there and someone will add this info to the article. — TAnthonyTalk 02:52, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Filming

message: Support -- John (Daytona2 ·  Talk ·  Contribs) 18:15, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge 

message: In most of the episode articles a list with inaccuracies or mistakes is given. Most of the historical inaccuracies do however not refer to any history book. I think this is as important as references in any other article on history.
TJR Lanjouw (talk) 12:42, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inaccuracies and references 

message: Can someone upload this image for me. http://www.amazon.co.uk/Rome-Complete-Seasons-Kenneth-Cranham/dp/B000UOOVDI/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1215900793&sr=1-3 --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 22:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please Upload this image for me 

message: Be Black Hole Sun has created Rome (season 1), a list which is redundant of List of Rome episodes and also includes redundant award/nomination information copied from this main article. The editor insists this new list is "needed" and "supposed to exist" because Stargate SG-1 and other series have such "season" articles/lists. I have redirected the new list purely for the sake of its redundancy, but Be Black Hole Sun maintains that the new list is needed. I have tried to explain that in the case of Rome, there are a finite number of episodes, and the existing list is not so large or cumbersome as to need to be split itself. The new list has no additional information that, if merged into the existing list, would make it too large or cumbersome.  Stargate SG-1, by comparison, is a series with many seasons and many episodes, and the additional information included in each "season" article would make the already-overblown List of Stargate SG-1 episodes completely unmanageable (though I actually think most of the Stargate season articles are themselves somewhat redundant and lacking in additional information). Despite Be Black Hole Sun's assertion here that I am the "the only person which has anything against this," I believe I'm simply the only person who has noticed Rome (season 1) thus far. I'd appreciate other editors weighing in on the issue. — TAnthonyTalk 02:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, with only two seasons, a breakdown for each individual season on top of a very manageable list for the entire series seems redundant.  Even a redirect seems unnecessary, but if needed for conformity, then OK SeaphotoTalk 06:33, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Redundant list

message: According to 
http://www.bafta.org/awards/television/latest-winners-and-nominees,91,BA.html
, the winner is "the Street"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Athos.jingle (talk • contribs) 12:56, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Did Rome won BAFTA in 2008?