Great film

I'm really surprised with the number of errors many have underlined in their reviews of this film. I'm a college student who is studying history and my main focus is Roman history. I'm in the process of writing a research paper on Nero. To be honest the movie does take some liberties with it's history but is still more than likely close to as accurate as some historians write about Nero. In most modern works done about Nero, historians have seen the man for who he was rather than how some of the anti-Neronian works that were written shortly after his death as propaganda. Unfortunately, we have little to go on about his reign that is unbiased. Nero was banished from Rome during Caligula's reign along with his mother and there is little, if no account of what happened during his exile, so we don't really know if he met Acte during this time or not, it does seem unlikely but we can't say for 100%. Regarding Nero's father, he died when Nero was only 3, most do agree it was from natural causes. Brtianicus was not a child when he died, he was 14 or 15. His sister Octavia, who became Nero's wife and was killed (most likely on orders by Poppea, Nero's 2nd wife) and she was 22 or 23 when she died. Agrippina probably shouldn't have called her son Nero so early but Nero was a family name and he did seem attached to it, rather than his given name which was wrongly stated before, his birth name was Lucius. Trust me I've done the research on this and the facts are all there. I didn't think this was an excellent movie but certainly a breath of fresh air. I was very glad to finally see a movie that didn't berate Nero as history too often and unfairly does.