MovieChat Forums > The Scorpion King (2002) Discussion > Seven Goofs and historical inaccuracies

Seven Goofs and historical inaccuracies


Sure, it is only a movie...it was manufactured by the same people who believe 3,000 year-old mummies are able to bend their limbs in digital grandeur style, but PLEASE do not insult the average movie goer by allowing all of these historical inaccuracies to take place. But I will hear all about it from those who cannot understand it is only a movie, after all.

1) The opening narration: "Before the time of the pyramids..." The age of the pyramids existed between 2630 BC until about 1530 BC and the age of the Ancient Egyptians existed during 3300 BC to 30 BC (they fell after the Romans defeated Cleopatra VII's forces at the Battle of Actium in 31 bc and were absorbed into the Empire). So, this would mean the Scorpion King existed (as opposed to living concurrently with the Egyptians in The Mummy Returns) thousands of years before the Egyptians and organized mythos.

2) Also, in the opening introduction: "And swept across the lands of the ancient world..." The lands were not so 'barren' as the movie would depict. In the late 20th century archaeologists discovered evidence of human habitation before 8000 BC in an area in the southwestern corner of Egypt, near the border with Sudan. Nomadic peoples may have been attracted to that area because of the hospitable climate and environment. Now exceptionally dry, that area once had grassy plains and temporary lakes that resulted from seasonal rains. The people who settled there must have realized the benefits of a more sedentary life. Scientific analysis of the remains of their culture indicates that by 6000 BC they were herding cattle and constructing large buildings. By 4000 bc there were settlements in Upper Egypt, at locations such as Hierakonpolis (ancient Nekhen), Naqada, and Abydos.

3) Steel? Yes, the word "Steel" is spoken when the Mathayus the Scorpion King walks through the market place, "Made of the finest steel." Historically, steel did not exist in weapon form, however The earliest iron implements discovered by archaeologists in Egypt date from about 3000 bc, and iron ornaments were used even earlier; the comparatively advanced technique of hardening iron weapons by heat treatment was known to the Greeks about 1000 BC. Further, The alloys produced by early iron workers, and, indeed, all the iron alloys made until about the 14th century AD, would be classified today as wrought iron. It wasn't until the 14th Century AD that steel manufacturing came into wide use.

4) Anubis. In order for Mathayus to become the Scorpion King he had to have made a deal with Anubis. Apparantly, the producers, et al., did not watch The Mummuy Returns to view this time-line. Anubis, the jackal headed god of embalming and the dead, did not exist until a civilized land was formed. The uniting of the two Egypts, the Upper and the Lower, did not happen until Menes was Egypt’s first monarch. He reigned around 3100 BC. And, more or less, wasn't the Scorpion King depicted as being evil? Something Mathayus, the lovable lug, was NOT. An assassian, yes... Evil?

5) Akkadian. The earliest records in Akkadian date to the time of Sargon of Akkad. Sargon (2334 BC - 2279 BC) was the first person in recorded history to create an empire, or multi-ethnic state. His empire encompassed the region of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, and part of what is present-day Turkey. His capital was Akkad. If Mathayus, the Scorpion King, were Akkadian then he was well ahead of his time, especially if he was around before the "time of the pyramids" (see #1). Furthermore, he states he is the LAST of his kind...hunh! Did all of Akkad sprout from his loins? Doubtful, but this is the fun of watching the movie.

6) Gunpowder. The movie flagrantly shows a caucasian, clearly of European descent, talking about a magical powder he got from China. Gunpowder did not exist during the time-frame of this movie There are two types:
Black powder—invented by the Chinese in the 9th Century—was the only widely-known and used practical explosive until the 20th Century. However, it is now primarily only used for fireworks, model rocket engines and in reproduction weapons.
Smokeless powder replaced black powder as a propellant at the end of the 19th Century and is used in all modern guns.
Both forms of gunpowder burn producing a subsonic deflagration wave rather than the supersonic detonation wave which high explosives would produce. This reduces peak pressures in a gun, but makes it less suitable for shattering rock or fortifications.
Although historically gunpowder meant black powder, as in the Gunpowder plot, modern references usually imply smokeless powder when referring to the propellant in small arms.

7) China. China, as a country nor a region, existed at this time-frame in the movie. Travel of such great distances were nearly impossible since almost all civilizations of the day felt the earth was flat and all known lands were discovered. After the questionable date this movie takes place, "China" consisted of two kingdoms: the earliest began at 2500 BC (Sanhuangwudi was the ruling entity) until 2205 and were "Mythical" (The answer for #1 predates even the Chinese). The second kingdom was the beginning of China's great dynasties: 2070 BC - 1600 BC, Xia Dynasty, is the first dynasty to be described in Chinese historical records.


Please feel free to dispute my findings. They can be found on www.encarta.com and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page.

Oh, and remember: It is ONLY a movie!

reply

[deleted]

emick23 Sure, I never took the scorpian king as a work of fact, just a work of fiction, and there was no mummies in it.

But there is a movie that claims to a work of fact but is vetry much fiction , apart from the names used, thats 'murder in the first'.

The scorpian king never as far as I know a work of pure fact, it is a comic book hero as should treated as such, give it a rest.

reply

Here's a little goof and historical inaccuracy of you own:

"Black powder—invented by the Chinese in the 9th Century—was the only widely-known and used practical explosive until the 20th Century."

This would indeed be news to Alfred Nobel, inventor of dynamite in circa 1863, by the 1880's nearly every civilized person in the world had heard of dynamite.

Mr Nobel also created the Nobel Prize.

Guess ya shouldn't count on those on-line 'pedias to much....

http://www.scandinavica.com/culture/famous/nobel.htm

reply

dynamite is made from black powder

reply

"dynamite is made from black powder"

No $hit

reply

Actually, dynamite is *not* made from black power.

Dynamite has no black powder in it at all.

Dynamite is an explosive based on nitroglycerin using diatomaceous earth (Kieselguhr) as an absorbent. Dynamite is considered a "high explosive", which means it is much more powerful than gunpowder.

reply

Words...Words...big words...screw it...you're right!

"Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the Gun" - Army of Darkness - Ash (Bruce Campbell)

reply

You forgot camels. Domesticated camels were only introduced in the middle east by 1200 bCE

reply

Camels had been domesticated in the Middle East for at least several centuries by the time the of events of the hit movie, "The Scorpion King".

reply

[deleted]

First off - you're complaining about historical accuracy in a movie franchise that has undead mummies, arcane magic, and a man who is turned into an immortal half-man, half-scorpion by the god Anubis?

Secondly, if you're going to complain about history, you should probably get YOUR facts right. I'm going to address your points one at a time...


1) So, this would mean the Scorpion King existed (as opposed to living concurrently with the Egyptians in The Mummy Returns) thousands of years before the Egyptians and organized mythos.

He did. The Scorpion King is an actual historical figure, who existed in Egypt in the Protodynastic period. In other words, not only before the pyramids, but before the Pharaohs. For the record, this would be somewhere around 3100-3000 BC.

However, since the First Dynasty formed around the same time (or shortly after the time of the Scorpion King), it wouldn't be ENTIRELY wrong to assume they COULD have existed concurrently.


2) Also, in the opening introduction: "And swept across the lands of the ancient world..." The lands were not so 'barren' as the movie would depict.

Except that, even in Pharaonic times, the main culture of Egypt clung to the Nile as a source of life, because life became VERY difficult the farther you travelled from the center. Much of the region WAS desert.


3) Steel?

I'll grant you this one... though, since EVERYONE IN THE MOVIE should be speaking Egyptian (or another ancient language), this could be assumed to be a "translation convention".


4) Anubis. In order for Mathayus to become the Scorpion King he had to have made a deal with Anubis.

WRONG. Anubis, as a RELIGIOUS CONCEPT, did not exist until Egypt was quite civilized... but if we're assuming that Anubis is a GOD, and not just a myth, then he most certainly existed prior to the reign of the Pharaohs. In much the same way, one could say that Jehovah, as a concept, did not exist before the period of 1000-500 BC, since that was when the Hebrew culture first articulated their religious beliefs - but Jehovah as a "real" divine force existed since the beginning of time.

As for the Scorpion King being evil, you're missing a very important point - THIS movie took place at least 10 years before the scene in The Mummy Returns, when he made his deal with Anubis. A LOT can change in 10 years, especially if the person in question has a degree of political power (power corrupts).

Though, if you watch the initial scene, it describes him more as a conquerer than a total villain (no butchering of innocents or roasting alive of babies), who doesn't "cry out for vengeance" until after his armies are destroyed. As history is written by the winners, there's the possibility that his initial attacks were provoked by other factors...

In other words, this isn't a flaw until we see more of that 10 year period between appearances.


5) Akkadian. The earliest records in Akkadian date to the time of Sargon of Akkad (2334 BC - 2279 BC)

I'll grant this, because it DOES agree with the current point-of-view of scholars. Though at least one historian (Nabonidus) once claimed Sargon ruled over the Akkadian Empire in 3800 BC - which would fit the timeline as presented in the story.


6) Gunpowder. The movie flagrantly shows a caucasian, clearly of European descent, talking about a magical powder he got from China.

First, I find it ironic that you're objecting to the gunpowder aspect while ignoring the fact that he's caucasian - at this point in history, the caucasian races would have been THE most primitive in the world... and yet the only one we see is a learned sage.

Of course, we can only hope you've accepted that a number of characters (like Memnon) look caucasian because they're played by caucasian actors, and that that's not the most telling of details. The man as presented could easily have been meant to be an older Egyptian.

THAT being said, your statement on gunpowder is accurate. Though it's almost a cliche that any time you have an anacronistic fantasy movie like this one, SOMEONE is either going to invent or discover a mysterious exploding powder.


7) China.

At the point the movie took place, China would have been a collection of warring tribes, as even the mythical founding dates don't place it's creation as a nation before 2500 BC or so. That being said, the name CHINA would be wrong regardless, since the Chinese never called themselves that. In fact, since the EARLIEST possible derivation of the name China would be due to the Qin (Chin) Dynasty, this would be impossible before 200 BC or so. A number of modern scholars actually dispute this origin, though, which would make the name even more recent.

One can assume that this is another "translation convention", wherein whatever he actually said in ancient Egyptian referring to "the distant East" or whatever was translated into something a modern audience could understand...


You also missed the number of Greek and Persian names used in the movie, even though both Greece and Persia did not yet exist.


Out of curiosity, did you use Wikipedia for most of your research? A number of your arguments seem almost word-for-word from some of its articles...

reply

[deleted]

I am not going to attack you, I am sure you sought out your answers diligantly and with kind consideration to others who may view your answers. However, should you find these rebuttals offensive, please disregard any further reading:

First, "And, more or less, wasn't the Scorpion King depicted as being evil? Something Mathayus, the lovable lug, was NOT. An assassian, yes... Evil?" I never said he WAS evil just depicted as such...

Second, I may have relied too heavily upon online 'cylopeias, however, at least I gave the sources for my findings in verbatim. Anyone can go to those websites and dispute those findings (or even change them). I did notice you took the time to view the Wikipedia site to challenge the findings.

Third, how do YOU know "THIS movie took place at least 10 years before the scene in The Mummy Returns, when he made his deal with Anubis"? Didn't say this at the beginning of the movie.

Fourth, what the hell is your concept of a "translation convention"? Steel DID NOT EXIST. Period. There is NO "translation convention" lost here.

Fifth, your statement "As history is written by the winners" cannot go ignored, either. This is only true when the Americans are doing the writing. Did you know the Japanese, until recently, have been teaching their school-age students about the "American atrocities" committed upon them during WWII? They re-wrote their history and have presented it to a number of generations as being the truth. Which is why many African Americans are now finding their plight, as relatives of slavery and racism, in the schoolroom. Was slavery written by the "winners" or the ashamed as an example how to cover your history?

reply

>>> memnon in greek mythology was half caucasian

Actually, there are at least three Memnons, in history and myth, so it's hard to say which one this is supposed to be based on. Since all three would have existed after the time period of the movie, it's hard to point to a specific one.


>>> I never said he WAS evil just depicted as such...

Yes, but he was depicted as himself for all of maybe a minute in the flashback before he was warped by Anubis' power, and everything else we know about the character is what Evie said about him in the present. And since history is written by the winners...?

For all we know, he was happily married to Cassandra and had a bunch of kids, before the future-Pharaohs had his family butchered, thus explaining why he wanted to conquer them in the beginning of The Mummy Returns.

Anything that he does on-screen AFTER he's all Scorpioned out, as it were, could be more Anubis' influence than his own personality...


>>> Second, I may have relied too heavily upon online 'cylopeias, however, at least I gave the sources for my findings in verbatim. Anyone can go to those websites and dispute those findings (or even change them). I did notice you took the time to view the Wikipedia site to challenge the findings.

I never said it was a BAD thing, I was just curious. After all, it DID sound familiar.

As for me, I ALWAYS use Wikipedia for looking stuff up I'm clueless about, or am aware of, but not entirely sure of the details.


>>> Third, how do YOU know "THIS movie took place at least 10 years before the scene in The Mummy Returns, when he made his deal with Anubis"? Didn't say this at the beginning of the movie.

The director said it when the movie first came out, because people wanted to know how long before the flashback in the Mummy Returns this movie took place. Couldn't tell you flat-out where to find proof of it online, though.


>>> Fourth, what the hell is your concept of a "translation convention"? Steel DID NOT EXIST. Period. There is NO "translation convention" lost here.

Do you know what a translation convention is? It means, translating something in another language into the language of the viewer, even if the MEANING OF THE WORD MUST BE CHANGED. This usually crops up in terms of translating, say, the Martian scale of distance into Miles in a sci-fi movie.

My point is, if this were actually a historical piece, then the literal translation of what he said could be something like "the sharpest metal you've ever seen, far sharper than anything else ever forged anywhere", and it was just abbreviated to "steel".

Then again, like I said, I didn't deny it could just be the writers not caring about historical accuracy either - mostly because I don't think the majority of people who went to see this care how historically accurate it is.

Neither The Mummy or The Mummy Returns were all that real-world accurate either, after all...


>>> Fifth, your statement "As history is written by the winners" cannot go ignored, either. This is only true when the Americans are doing the writing.

This is such an utter *beep* statement that any other arguments you had are completely invalidated in my eyes.

Do some research on Richard III, and you'll find evidence of history having been rewritten within a generation of events happening. That, along with nearly every "historical" play Shakespeare wrote, clearly altered factual events to please the current rulers (the House of Tudor).

Consider that the reason many people have poor opinions of Babylon as an empire is because nearly the ONLY thing we know about it comes from the Hebrew Bible - a book written by their enemies.

Was the Viet-Nam war a crusade against Communism, or American Imperialism valiantly opposed by the noble Vietnamese people? Most people in Viet-Nam have been taught to think the latter.

Most of what we know of Carthage comes from Roman writings - and we have good cause to doubt just how objective those writings are. The same thing goes for the Gaulish and Brython Celts.

Most North Koreans believe that the majority of their southern neighbors WANT to be unified, but that the agressive power-hungry Americans want to keep them apart. North Koreans have been taught in schools for more than 40 years to hate Americans.

As for your examples, there's a problem - unlike NEARLY EVERY OTHER NATION IN HISTORY (pre-1800 or so, anyway), the US didn't KEEP the territory it "conquered" in WWII. That means the American elite wasn't there to monitor what was being taught in schools, nor were they there to shape public opinion. The entire point of the winners writing history is that the losers are USUALLY DEAD.

Most of the time, it also means that whoever wins has the power to suppress and destroy any evidence of a world-view beyond their own - much as the Catholic Church did its best to eradicate all heretical faiths and writings. If not for a chance find in the desert, we'd know hardly anything about the Essenes today, or the Ebionites, or any number of other "lost" cultures.

reply

unlike NEARLY EVERY OTHER NATION IN HISTORY (pre-1800 or so, anyway), the US didn't KEEP the territory it "conquered" in WWII.
The only territories the US actually "conquered", as opposed to helping its allies regaining lost territory, was Japan and parts of Germany. And hehe, US troops did stick around in Japan and Germany after the war... But then backed out because it was more economical to let them rebuild everything themselves. There was never any question about who was boss anyway.

reply

Ehem, ehem ... what about northern Mexico?

reply

Thank you I LIVE in northern Mexico aka California.

reply

hey...just something i was thinking about from the movie ...since everyone here seems to love history...like me...especially egyptian....can someone help?...ok...in the movie they say it was before the time of the pharohs...but then they refeer to the valley of the dead as the valley of the dead...this wouldn't be true since they called it so because only pharophs were burried there...and this was way before that time.....plus since they found evidence the scorpion king was real and not a legend...shouldn't they change the order of the pharohs...im almost 15 here soooo don't make fun its just a question...oh and no they did find real evidence...i'm nnot saying this because of the movie

reply

Wow you don't know much about PROPER history do you. We DID commit atrocities on the Japanese during WW 2. They had Honor...we took it from them. Did YOU know they sent us a warning just before the Pearl Harbor attack? News Flash buddy, they did. Did you know that we imprisoned thousands of Japanese Americans in Concentration camps of our own? where many of them died of diseases rampant in those camps. Of Course the American Government didn't call them Concentration camps...they called them Interment camps. But the Concept was the same. The American Government is highly corrupted...and we lie in our history books. We've used Germ Warfare in our history...and now we are scared our karma will catch up. Slavery in the United States DID happen, but we forget one other thing, 30 Million African Slaves were sold to Dutch and French and English slavers...FROM THEIR OWN COUNTRYMEN. No one remembers that Jews and the Romani are the TWO Single most oppressed groups in history, barring none. Both almost got wiped out in W W 2. So before you start telling lies about the Japanese...make sure you know what you are talking about.

reply

They had Honor...we took it from them.....So before you start telling lies about the Japanese...make sure you know what you are talking about.


Oh, good lord. In a thread filled with some bizarre historical discussions, you somehow manage to stand out. I'm guessing "we" is a lie. I doubt you're an American. You sound like someone living in Japan and being brainwashed by the current party in power in Japan.

Rape of Nanking. Bataan Death March. Comfort women. Japan's own version of the death camps with vile human experimentation. The list goes on and on. By many estimates, Japan was responsible for more murders of civilians than Germany in WWII, and there are entire swaths of Asia who can attest to the cruelty and monstrosity of the behavior of Japanese troops and their government at the time. They routinely violated every convention of war imaginable, including murdering POWs and people who had surrendered. Even their allies in Germany showed more respect for the rules of warfare. They did use biological and chemical weapons, especially against the Chinese, and had they had nuclear ones, there's no reason whatsoever to believe they wouldn't have used those as well. This isn't rumor or conjecture or propaganda. The absolutely horrific behavior that Japan engaged in at the time is extremely well documented, and in all the world, Japan's far right party is the only group who disputes these facts...and they do it for the same reason neo-Nazi's deny the Holocaust. The Japanese of the era, at least the military and the people in power, didn't have anything remotely resembling honor, and can be considered worse than the Nazis in many ways. If such a thing as evil exists outside of vague conceptual concepts, they were evil. You can deny history all you want -- many stupid people do -- but that doesn't change the past one whit, and the world knows it.

Also, there's absolutely no credible evidence whatsoever that they warned about Pearl Harbor. There's some somewhat nebulous evidence that American intelligence knew Pearl Harbor was one of the places Japan was considering attacking, but none whatsoever that they were warned. You've been taken in by an urban myth. Not because it's convincing, but because it says something you desperately want to believe.

reply

"[...]the caucasian races would have been THE most primitive in the world... and yet the only one we see is a learned sage."

Thank you for the compliment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebra_skydisk

Ok, the skydisk is "only" about 3500 years old, but it is no inferior to the Egyptian knowlege and technology of that period if time.

Do you know what is needed to forge such a disk?

Mining, math, science, infrastructure, trading centers und routes, a sort of currency, craftmanship and many more.

This is a work by specialists, but if you got only farmers or hunter who produce just enough to survive, you can't develop a society with that kind of diversification.

There a structures like "Hünengräber", and the Germanic people of that time got swords!

But I know, in "The Gladiator we were portrayed as cavemen by the Americans.

I hope you are an American of Asian oder African descend, otherwise you've point with one finger at us, but with three finger at yourself.



reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

The best arguments here have to do with the weaponry - these people didn't have swords anything like those presented in the movie, they were barely using iron, and certainly gunpowder was still millenia away. The poorest argument probably deals with Anubis - if we accept the premise that Anubis is a god, then he would have existed eternally.

reply

The " The Scorpion King " ( 2002 ) was in some respects historically inaccurate I do not dispute. But to paraphrase your last sentence this was intended to be an ENTERTAINING movie about the man rather than a documentary. I am glad to see that you do have a sense of humour about it. I just hope all fans of this film take it like that. Otherwise " The Scorpion King " ( 2002 ) runs the risk of becoming like " JFK " ( 1991 ) in that people will mistake the dramatization of an historically-based point of view as a document-based fact.


Anybody want a peanut ?

- Fezzik, " The Princess Bride " ( 1987 )

reply

What is this whole thing about Caucasians?. What most of you fail to realize is that Caucasians are not just from Europe. Caucasian is not just a scientific word for White people. Caucasians cover a very large variety of different people. Mesopotamians, Ancient Egyptians, Turks, Arabs, Indians, Persians...though from Asia and Africa....these people were and are all Caucasians themselves (Ancient Egyptians were disputably a mixed race of both dark-skinned caucasians and Black people). It seems to me that you all believe that if someone has dark skin and Black hair they can't be caucasian. The Rock himself is also a dark skinned caucasian (actually a mixed race between Pacific Islander (Caucasian)and African). Y'all are using Caucasian like it covers only a specific group of people...Casucasian is a very big word for y'all to be using when your only referring to Europeans. Is it honestly that hard just to say that they're White or that they're rather pale to play the role of an Egyptian or Mesopotamian?

"Caucasians were the most primitive of all races at this point in time"

I understand what message your trying to get through and I agree that although not entirely Cavemen, 'EUROPEANS' (with the exception of Mediterranean peoples in Greece etc.) were rather primitive in comparison to people living in North Africa and the Middle-East and the Far-East. But again the term Caucasian refers to a very large group of very different people, disputably the most diverse of the 3 main races. the people of the Middle-East, who at this time were the most advanced people on Earth, were infact Caucasian...this ofcourse doesn't mean they had blond hair and pinkish-white skin, they were my colour (Brown with a slight tint of orange and yelow) and had my colour of hair and eyes (black). The point your making is actually very true, being half-European I won't argue that matter, it's just your use of the term is wrong as Caucasian is far too large a term when you really are refering to people that are termed 'White'.

reply

I'd think Caucasians originate from the Caucasus region ??

reply

Funny how everything I've read states that Caucasians include people from Europe to India and everything in between. And taking a second to actually look at us all you will notice similarities bwtween us all (us being people form Europe, India, the Middle-East, Latinos (exceptional as were a big mix), etc.)that one will not notice in Black or Mongloid(East-Asian peoples,almond shaped eyes)peoples especially in the shape of our nose, eyes and mouth(along with our lip size) and even(to a point) skin texture.

reply

no offense, but i dont see how u can take anything wikipedia has on it seriously. apparently u havent seen the news about the guy who wrote something on there about his buddy murdering the president. do you really think that happened? *answer is no* people write things on there, not people who have any education, just anyone who wants to, i mean you could be getting ur info from 10 yr old kids for all you know, so you shouldnt use that as an educational tool, try using the REAL encyclopaedia.

reply

The less similarities between the Scorpian King and the Mummy returns, the better. I got free tickets and I still felt I wanted a refunded.

reply

I did. I already know about the unreliability of Wikipedia. The sources I use are mainly from books, Kingfisher's Encyclopedia is one, and the occasional case of www.encyclopedia.com . Anyways my point is white people and East Indian people are form the same race. For the last time goddamnit, there are 3 major races in the world. The Negroid (Black), The Mongloid(light yellow-dark yellow and in the case of Native Americans, Red)and the Caucasoid (White,yellowish brown,lightBrown,Dark Brown,albino.....lemme know if u know other colours that humans can b)

reply

"historical inaccuracies"
Wow....you people dont think this is real.....right??...........hey did you know it's a movie....no........awwww, poor you. plain and simiple....IT'S A MOVIE!!!!
EVERYONE IS ENTITLED TO THEIR OWN OPINON, JUST MINES BETTER!!!!

reply

[deleted]

And the Chicken Dance was much, much later.

reply

Indeed...well put

reply

i am on the scorpion king board right?

Mrrrrrrr Kennedyyyyy....Kennedyyyyyyy

reply

Hey Kev999! I LOVE YOUR SIG! MR KENNEDY HAD BETTER DAMN WIN THE TITLE!

Oh yeah, the SK. This genre is frought with made up parts. Last Samurai, Gladiator, Troy, the're all historicaly inaccurate. What's next, you demand that movies are spoken in the language of the time and place?

reply

Just wanted to tell you that the only thing this movie did for me,besides make me laugh at the bad acting,was get me reinterested in ancient history.Thanks for pointing out the inaccuracies,it made for interesting reading.

reply