The Stolen Eagle

The sets look cheap akin to a back lot with minimal use of 'location' but the worst thing is the porn. Give 'Caligula' a run based on the first 20 minutes I viewed before I shut it down. The Brits usually give a good performance but when they imitate Romans they're epecially driven to jump from som,e stage to their moment on screen. It doesn't work and that's why they shove in the porn. The guy who played Caesar was especially 'sour' and I wouldn't think he could ride a horse if his life depended on it - Caesar did it's how he took down Vercingetorix.

If you love depravity then watch it - if you want to be engaged watch the original 'Spartacus'...this is a waste.

This is the episode and series that first brought HBO to my attention and won my admiration. 'Rome' is an absolute triumph of television.

If like me, you are a Roman history fanatic, you will find no other movie, TV or visual representation of any kind that even comes close to equaling the visual splendor, historical accuracy, and entertainment magnificence of HBO's 'Rome'. And this is my attempt to restrain my praise. I've watched and re-watched this entire series at least 5 times and intend to keep watching. I need my 'Rome' fix at least once per year.

But don't for a second think that the story holds less promise than the visual perfection. You cannot get a richer, more captivating true story than that of the life of Julius Caesar. The script writers went a step further and wove in the characters of Vorenus and Titus Pullo around whom the historical context revolves. And they are superb characters who, while fictionalized, are still based on real individuals mentioned in the writings of Caesar himself. The opening battle scene with Vorenus and Pullo on the front line mirrors quite closely what Caesar wrote about them in 'The Gallic War'.

Back when its first season was airing Rome was praised for its high-end and polished production. But this episode also proved the show had more to offer than impressive sets and well designed costumes. So beside a believable Ancient Rome the story was also quite interesting and intriguing. The Stolen Eagle arc was just an excuse to introduce us to the numerous and charismatic characters. However it was far from anecdotic as the events developed connections and gave birth to new relationships. Of course it focused on the two male protagonists but the other characters also had an important role to play. It was fascinating to see what some of them were capable of doing to meet their own agenda, even manipulating their loved ones and betraying supposed great friends. In some way they reminded me of the show The Tudors but I found the acting more convincing and their stories far less superficial.

The battle at the beginning was intense and brutal but too short and less bloody than in films like Braveheart. However I didn't mind its graphic violence level as it was more about covering the fundamental differences between the protagonists. One acted more like a happy drunken berserker, the other was more rational and responsible. In fact the contrast between them was also palpable in other elements. For example the dialogs weren't all black and white as they offered a second lecture to the careful viewers. One minute some character was defending the Republic, the next it was setting traps against it. In one scene it was also brilliant to use a young boy to lecture two veteran soldiers about what was really going on. So it wasn't just about the physical strength, it was also a lot about the mind, education and strategy. An other scene I really enjoyed was the one where the Eagle was actually stolen. It was dark, dynamic, unexpected and nearly mystic. In fact it wasn't the only one and a few others should surprise you as well. After all the astonishing opening credits revealed the Ancient Rome was a lot about rituals and myths. Let's also not forget the gorgeous women, gladiatorous men and other homages to Dionysus.

Firstly, I have no interest in accents or historical accuracy.

The aspect of Rome that stood out the most were the sets. The art direction and attention to detail are magnificent.

While that is probably a bad thing; I have always respected television shows that feel they need to put money into sets and detail.

Judging by the pilot, the story that will run throughout the duration of the series will be the power struggle between Gaius Julius Caesar, and Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus.

Rome is governed equally between these two men. Ceaser has been away at war in Gaul for eight years and has gained popularity due to his success. Pompeius is threatened and jealous and wishes to throw Ceaser out of government. The struggle begins.

My biggest problem with the pilot is the dialogue. I found it extremely amateur, many lines were dull or cringe worthy.

However the pilot kept my attention and I will give Rome a few more episodes to improve.

I watched this first episode just after I had watched four episodes of the BBC docu-fiction series about the Roman empire in general. I do not think it is easy to make a comparison since the BBC series tries to highlight certain important personalities and eras of the Western Roman world through out its history while Rome develops the personal history of a certain cast of characters during the final years of the Republic just before the emergence of the Principate. The opening titles of the series is impressive as well as character development which tries to have a "real" flavour.And one important detail Rome is much more sexually explicit than the BBC series which means that it will fare better commercially.