Author: Chartener

Gladiator: Inaccurate but Riveting

Gladiator: Inaccurate but Riveting

By | | Comments 0 Comment

Having never seen it before, I decided to watch the 2000 film Gladiator. As I had never seen it, Gladiator seemed like a natural choice. The film follows the protagonist, Maximus, and shows his redemption arc. Though he once started out as one of Rome’s top generals and was a close friend to (and heir apparent of) the emperor Marcus Aurelius, his whole life was turned upside down when Marcus Aurelius’s hotheaded son, Commodus, kills his father and wishes to have Maximus dead too. Maximus escapes, but ends up getting sold into gladiatorialship. Through noble fighting, Maximus works his way back to Rome, eventually taking on Commodus in a fight that he finds himself victorious but mortally wounded in. He does not die in vain, however, and his death (and the killing of the unpopular Commodus) bring about positive political change to Rome. 

The movie is certainly likable. Being a big-budget Hollywood movie, the production is of high quality. The cinematography of Gladiator is excellent, and in contrast to plenty of other movies from this time period, the computer generated imagery still holds its own today. These two aspects of the movie help to give the viewer a feel of ancient Rome. Sure, the ruins of many ancient Roman buildings still exist today (and some are very well preserved), but as a whole it is difficult for the average person to imagine what ancient Rome actually looked like. Gladiator does this well, and though it certainly isn’t a perfect recreation of Rome it’s difficult to not be inspired by the Rome that the movie puts on screen. 

But how does it hold up as a Roman film? A common criticism of many action movies aiming to be historically accurate is that they often sacrifice facts for a stronger storyline. A quick Google search reveals that the movie’s director, Ridley Scott, actually wanted Gladiator to be mostly historically accurate, and Scott even hired historians to help him achieve this goal. That said, Gladiator is still a Hollywood movie, as such, has some ideas that simply wouldn’t have held water if this movie was trying to be truly realistic. 

I’ve seen lists of historically inaccurate movies and noticed Gladiator was on there (this is one of the reasons why I haven’t had much interest in watching it before), but facts aside, perhaps the most glaring is the plotline itself. Most audiences love a good redemption arc, but Maximus’s simply would have been extremely far-fetched. Maximus would likely have been properly killed or exiled early on, and if the latter happened it would have been difficult for him to get back into Rome. The chances of him being sold into gladiatorship would have been slim, and though the idea of him fighting his way back to Rome certainly sounds nice it’s unlikely that this would have happened. If he had managed to stay alive as a gladiator, it’s more likely that he would’ve ended up in the same boat as Proximo and trained future gladiators. And, of course, during Commodus’s death, it’s likely that he would have simply been killed earlier by his guards had they been distasteful in him, rather than refusing to assist him during his fight with Maximus.

At the end of the day, however, Gladiator doesn’t actually need to be historically accurate. It just needs to be interesting, which it definitely is. Similar to other historically inaccurate but engaging action movies (such as Saving Private Ryan, Pirates of the Caribbean, and 300), movies like Gladiator, in having a compelling story, get people interested in historical topics they might otherwise not come into contact with, and for that reason I think Gladiator is an excellent film.

Selfie Art: The Pantheon

Selfie Art: The Pantheon

By | | Comments 0 Comment

When I visited my family in Rome in January and March, I saw many important Roman sites, but none were as impressive as the Pantheon. Attached is a picture I took of it, and although I snapped many awe-inspiring pictures of it I do not have a selfie with it. That said, I do have a picture with my father at the Piazza Navona, which is about a thousand feet away, which I’ve also included in this actum. 

The Pantheon in my picture was made in the second century AD, and was built by the emperors Trajan and Hadrian. However, prior to the construction of the Pantheon, there was another Pantheon on the same site that was built by Marcus Agrippa, who was one of Augustus’s closest allies. Hadrian decided to keep the inscription honoring Agrippa as a result of this. The current building sits on top of that old foundation, and though the basic structure was built by the Romans in the second century, the building was converted into a church and the current interior was built during the Renaissance. 

Like many of the ancient Roman buildings that still survive, the Pantheon is made largely out of stone, but much of the dome is made out of concrete. The most noteworthy feature of the Pantheon is its dome, which to this day is the largest freestanding concrete dome in the world – and it’s nearly 2,000 years old! This awe-inspiring dome has an oculus in the middle that lets ample natural light in, and is part of the dome’s structure.

Being a massive stone building, the Pantheon is displayed exactly where it was built two millennia ago. However, as the city of Rome has evolved, it has found itself nestled snugly into the buildings built up around it, and from the street isn’t visible from more than a block or two away. 

Perhaps the most obvious Roman theme that the Pantheon embodies is the general design of it. Being one of Ancient Rome’s most impressive structures, the Pantheon is a poster child for Roman architecture. Domes are a common Roman feature on buildings, and the corinthian columns are also of classic Roman design. In fact, these columns came from Africa – the Romans shipped them to their capital city. The engineering and logistics required to bring them thousands of miles from Egypt to Rome is a marvel in and of itself, and serves as a marker to the ancient Romans’ ability to pull off seemingly unthinkable feats. The logistics of transporting hundreds of tons of stone are something that would have been impossible until only recently.

The dome itself also stands as a testament to the unmatched engineering prowess the Romans had in the ancient world. They successfully made the largest concrete dome in history, and only recently have domes made out of modern materials exceeded the size of the Pantheon’s.

Additionally, the Pantheon stands for the opulence and prowess of Ancient Rome. The building is a massive masterpiece of engineering, and few other ancient societies could produce a structure as large, complex, and well-made as this one. The fact that it’s been used almost continuously since its construction (and is still mostly the original building) stands testament not just to the architectural and engineering abilities of the Romans, but also more broadly to their ability to make a structure in antiquity that was useful for centuries after Rome fell. Its longevity and usefulness has stood the test of time, and the Pantheon is a building emblematic of Ancient Rome: gone, but still very much integrated in our society today.

css.php