MovieChat Forums > Plebs (2013) Discussion > Deliberately or actually ignorant?

Deliberately or actually ignorant?

posted 11 years ago by Unwritten_Law
35 replies | jump to latest

Look, I found the show amusing. I will keep watching. However I just can't tell if those writing and making the show know absolutely nothing about ancient Rome and the society or if they're being deliberately trying to be ignorant?

I'm not complaining about the fact it's just modern people in Rome. That they are being contemporary. It's more the little things which are just so out of place, that look like those making it didn't put a single thought into it being in ancient Rome. That they never even read a single book on the subject matter or turned thought to such matters.

Which I think is a shame. I don't want a historical, accurate approach, but what's the point of setting it in ancient Rome if the writers know nothing about Rome? Where on earth will that leave the show once they get past whatever basic things, they think they know.

Come on corn in ancient Rome? A Venus di milo statue? As some examples. It's not about pointing out historical inaccuracies, but more that it looks like no thought was put into it.

[–] borgter 11 years ago

Actually, it's them trying to be contemporary in Acient Rome that is the biggest problem - it just doesn't work at all.

[–] Unwritten_Law 11 years ago

See I can grant them that, if they were at least clever and put a twist on it. Making it relatable but in a foreign setting.

As it is, it is too contemporary and has too little knowledge and connection to ancient rome.

[–] Gummbystien 11 years ago

"Which I think is a shame. I don't want a historical, accurate approach" then why are you whinging?

[–] Unwritten_Law 11 years ago

It's more accepting of the fact this isn't a documentary.

However the level of ignorance is amazing.

[–] borgter 11 years ago

The thing that was jarring was the Orgy thing, with them trying to hide it and such from their boss evidently implying it may not be an acceptable thing - which is a more modern, post-Victorian era view rather than a contemporary Roman perspective.

It's just jarring.

[–] wolfgangvonposakilla 11 years ago

Romans had institutionalized orgies in some contexts (religious ceremonies for deities of love), and they were an occasional pastime activity for the rich (males) who had a taste for it, but people really need to shake the image that going to an orgy in roman times was like going to the movies nowadays. It wasn't a common practice for neither plebs nor nobility.

I think you could compare it to modern day swingers conventions: some people do it, those who don't are divided between the accepting/understanding/tolerating ones and the ones who frown upon it. Swingers conventions are for a particular kind of people, a select part of the general population and so were orgies back in the day. The oversexed and decadant image we have of roman life is a distortion through christian influences and modern day fiction (like caligula and spartacus)

Furthermore, the ancient man (greco-roman world) was free to have extramarital sex with the following: UNmarried common woman, married other men of any social rank, married or unmarried slaves of either gender. So bassicaly anybody but married women who weren't slaves. The married Roman woman of common or noble birth was expected to be chaste untill marriage and remain exclusive for the entire relation.

[–] borgter 11 years ago

...Ok. True chat.

[–] Lopsided55 11 years ago

I was bugged by the potatoes. The show is amusing, but I wish it were more Roman. There's so much comic potential wasted.

[–] enloynz 11 years ago

Oh my god, its a 20 Minute Comedy show, not some serious documentary, its funny that's what its made for.
Its fiction not fact.
Do you have the same problem with Sci-fi shows?
What I think is ignorant is this thread

[–] scribe_ninja 10 years ago

Amen! It's a shame that not many people get absurdest humor.

____________________
"If I call you names, I'm attacking your argument! Don't take it personally!"

[–] Xsplizzle 10 years ago

In the episode that just aired they were using london 'gangsta' slang.... what do you think?

[–] scribe_ninja 10 years ago

I thought it was funny because it was absurd. Of course we know that they didn't talk like that because in that time they most likely spoke Latin, which is why I got a chuckle out of it.

____________________
"I attack your argument not YOU, so please, please don't take it personally!"

[–] DamianGein 11 years ago

I don't have problem with it , think about it, it's kinda like The Flinstones or The Jetsons in a way...a caricature but with real people. I loved it and I can't wait for series 2.

Esta es mi firma

[–] moggsy71 10 years ago

It's called Plebs!
Would you expect a show with that name to be historically correct? I think the mistakes are there to make you laugh. And there are plenty. I think there was a lot of thought put into the mistakes you mention.

The show is funny, the things you have mentioned make it even funnier to me.

Maybe we see this show totally differently.

[–] wez-chad9 10 years ago

Moggsy. Nail. Head.

[–] ccharlie183 10 years ago

i think it's deliberate, they refer to Gaul a few times then call it france later. It seems like the inconsistencies are supposed to be there to point out the differences in their society and ours. the bureaucratic setting and multicultural hell hole society in decline theme seems to be the only things that haven't really changed along with the every day squabbles and relationship issues.

[–] benjamin-s-yeomans 10 years ago

On last night's episodes they were eating potatoes... something as obvious as that must be deliberate, right?