I desire to discuss about the perception of Rome during the film and the juxtaposition between the film and real historical facts. Also I see to understand the adaptations made in order to bring the film into the light of modern media and garner positive public perception. Overall, the movie was merely a movie based on history, not replicated by it and by fully interpreting the circumstances facing Rome we can have a deeper insight to the movie than what we understand on the surface.
The movie was based on 130 AD during the Roman expansion in Italy. During that time, Emperor Augustus established the Roman army as a public good by establishing a central military fund. Augustus also created a pension structure, severance fund and bonus structure …show more content…
The coliseum was a bloodbath of animals and combatants likely numbering over 5 thousand gladiators and thousands of animals every year. The gruesomeness of combat that was featured in the movie was based on historical record. The largest inaccuracy or lack of intricate effects would be the absence of naval battles in the coliseum. While the coliseum was built to be flooded and show naval war battles, this aspect was completely ignored during the film.
To further elaborate on the juxtaposition between the film and historical fact and what was changed in order to garner public attention, Historian Allen Ward spoke of the use of historically accurate facts in the movie Gladiator:
“Creative artists need to be granted some poetic license, but that should not be a permit for the wholesale disregard of facts in historical fiction.”
To which Ward continues to discuss the movie as a highly inaccurate ranging from the initial battle of the film and the use of specific weapons including the darts and catapults saying that it was “was certainly dramatic but probably …show more content…
In the film, Maximus defeated Commodus although historically Commodus was actually strangled to death by his wrestling partner after failing to be killed by poison. The time between his appointment to emperor and death was greatly reduced in the movie to a much shorter time period compared to the historical record of 13 years. This change was made to keep the audiences interest and ultimately create a more linear storyline around the hero Maximus. Maximus, according to historical fact, did not exist but is a combination of actual historical characters. Avidius Cassius should have been the general who was shown in beginning battle of the film to be historically accurate instead of Maximus. After the death of Marcus Aurelius, Cassius declared himself as emperor but was undone by the assassination of his own soldiers. Maximus’ character also draws from emperor Diocletian, who like Maximus, found favor of the emperor, became a Roman General, named an heir and ultimately became emperor of Rome. This strategic power movement of Maximus in the film was adapted from historical record and polished with a clean progressive timeline that would allow audiences to follow the fall of
The movie was based on 130 AD during the Roman expansion in Italy. During that time, Emperor Augustus established the Roman army as a public good by establishing a central military fund. Augustus also created a pension structure, severance fund and bonus structure …show more content…
The coliseum was a bloodbath of animals and combatants likely numbering over 5 thousand gladiators and thousands of animals every year. The gruesomeness of combat that was featured in the movie was based on historical record. The largest inaccuracy or lack of intricate effects would be the absence of naval battles in the coliseum. While the coliseum was built to be flooded and show naval war battles, this aspect was completely ignored during the film.
To further elaborate on the juxtaposition between the film and historical fact and what was changed in order to garner public attention, Historian Allen Ward spoke of the use of historically accurate facts in the movie Gladiator:
“Creative artists need to be granted some poetic license, but that should not be a permit for the wholesale disregard of facts in historical fiction.”
To which Ward continues to discuss the movie as a highly inaccurate ranging from the initial battle of the film and the use of specific weapons including the darts and catapults saying that it was “was certainly dramatic but probably …show more content…
In the film, Maximus defeated Commodus although historically Commodus was actually strangled to death by his wrestling partner after failing to be killed by poison. The time between his appointment to emperor and death was greatly reduced in the movie to a much shorter time period compared to the historical record of 13 years. This change was made to keep the audiences interest and ultimately create a more linear storyline around the hero Maximus. Maximus, according to historical fact, did not exist but is a combination of actual historical characters. Avidius Cassius should have been the general who was shown in beginning battle of the film to be historically accurate instead of Maximus. After the death of Marcus Aurelius, Cassius declared himself as emperor but was undone by the assassination of his own soldiers. Maximus’ character also draws from emperor Diocletian, who like Maximus, found favor of the emperor, became a Roman General, named an heir and ultimately became emperor of Rome. This strategic power movement of Maximus in the film was adapted from historical record and polished with a clean progressive timeline that would allow audiences to follow the fall of