![]() ![]() The the new actor had none of the seriousness, or smarts the original actor had, and he smiled in all the wrong places. ![]() In either case, they did a terrible job replacing him. Or, perhaps he was just too young to play an adult leader. I'm beginning to think that the first actor who played Octavian was too likable, and in history Octavian was not a likeable character. Second: The new Octavian can't hold a candle to the original actor. Three things bothered me about this series: First, our two fictitious friends whose family, and enemies are so beautifully written to keep us all wanting more, should not be mingled in with the actual history itself. Writers, directors, and producers have a responsibility to their audience when they are presenting productions based on history.especially Roman history, because of the length of time they ruled the world, and how all other governments on this planet took some of Rome's example. It's one thing to have fictitious characters in a story to see it from a misanthropic perspective, or to help move it along, and it's another thing to mix fictitious characters into real events to make it more convenient for the story tellers. However, it still took artistic license too far in my opinion. This Roman history lesson is all you will ever get from Hollywood that is anywhere close to the truth. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |