Entertaining, But Historical BS! - Imperium: Nerone (2004) Discussion

[–] temple-3 18 years ago

And it only gets worse!

reply

It's nice if you don't have an interest in Nero, or history for that matter but not gullable enough to believe it's accurate... It's bad rating is mainly down to its lack of historical facts.

-

Shooting Stars [HMC Site] - http://sophie-lou.tripod.com/

reply

[–] togam-movere-iussi 17 years ago

Don't you think that the story of the late Julio-Claudian line is interesting enough that you don't have to totally butcher it? What were the screenwriters thinking? Maybe they had a large Christian population they wanted to appeal to so they worked in Acte, but she was not necessary. Argg! Nero was just obnoxious, but not in a nero-like way. I bet the screenwriters had a list of deaths, and the line of emporers (without dates) and went on from there. What's the point of such a movie if it's not historical?

reply

[–] paciseden 17 years ago

I think it's meant to be more of a work of art. If you want history, watch the history channel.

reply

[–] dss-6 17 years ago

I think they made some mistakes (like the licentiousness of Nero's early years and an actor that's at least 10 years older than the real Britannicus), but overall the sequence is quite true to history. Acte was a real slave that Nero liked, but she died before Nero was killed (or committed suicide, depending on the source). And if the majority of historical records that exist don't favor Nero, it's because they were all written by the senatorial class, and Nero's policies favored the lower classes.

reply

[–] Mithrandir-Olorin888 16 years ago

Actually I thought Acte buried Nero after his Suicide?

Baldwin08.com
The next best thing to Ron Paul!

reply

[–] Kawada_Kira 9 years ago

I think it's meant to be more of a work of art. If you want history, watch the history channel.

If you don't want history, then why would you watch a film about an ACTUAL HISTORICAL FIGURE, which claims to be a representation of his life? It isn't fiction, it isn't even historical fiction, it's a movie about history. If you don't want history, then don't watch something that's explicitly about history, and don't say stupid things like this to people who do want it and expect some kind of accuracy from it. It's people like you who don't hold filmmakers to any kind of standard that give them the freedom to screw stuff like this up because they figure "nobody cares, so why work hard on it?".

Also, the History Channel is terrible, not much better than movies like this. And I know you wrote this in 2006 but now all the History Channel talks about is aliens anyway (and their rare returns to their history roots, such as their "The World Wars" series, are utter catastrophes).

The people, and the people alone, are the motive force in the making of history.
-Mao Zedong

reply

[–] ContinentalOp 9 years ago

Also, the History Channel is terrible, not much better than movies like this. And I know you wrote this in 2006 but now all the History Channel talks about is aliens anyway (and their rare returns to their history roots, such as their "The World Wars" series, are utter catastrophes)

It barely even talks about aliens actually, having exiled them to H2 (other than on ''special days''), they now just have things like 'Storage Wars. At least aliens making monuments is fake history! Things like 'Storage Wars' are merely reality shows.

This movie wasn't that bad and I like the way much of the cast was actually Italian. It is a bit more accurate than the standard Hollywood movie about any event in Roman history, and is only slightly less accurate (and more accurate in some places) than the often praised 'I, Claudius' which people seem to believe is a docudrama... ignoring 'The Caesars' by ITV, which was far more accurate and could be counted as a docudrama at times.

Formerly KingAngantyr

reply

[–] Mithrandir-Olorin33 8 years ago

I like Pawn Stars, you do learn things about History watching that, and it does it in a fun fake reality TV way.

"I knew it, I'm surrounded by @$$Holes"

reply

[–] ContinentalOp 8 years ago

Yeah I have a fondness for Pawn Stars for the same reason. A lot of the other shows are garbage sadly though it has been improving a bit recently in the UK

This damned jury's getting me. If I don't get away soon I'll be going blood-simply like the natives.

reply

[–] Mithrandir-Olorin888 12 years ago

Nero was a well intentioned leader at the start who was Corrupted by Power.

And actually the people always liked him, the negative Histories came form the Senatorial class.

reply

[–] krspas2 11 years ago

Nero was born in AD 37. Caligula was assinated in AD 41. That would make
Nero 4 years old when Caligula was killed. In the Movie it shows Tigellinus
killing Nero's Father when he was about 9. Tough for Tigellinus to do since
he would not become the Praetorian Prefect until AD 62 and was a Fishmonger
until that time when discovered by Nero during one of his nighttime escapades.
All in all by the time Nero was 16 Caligula was long dead and was
Claudius' step-son after Claudius married Nero's mother. Nero became Emporer
at age 17.

reply

[–] 8 years ago

[deleted]