Rome vs The Tudors

Whenever I mention that I have a web site that reviews historical movies, the conversation inevitably turns to the recent crop of historical series put out by HBO, Showtime and AMC. After debating whether Band of Brothers is grimmer than The Pacific, the odds are that the next topic will be why The Tudors is not as good as Rome. My fervent defence of The Tudors usually produces an expression of disbelief, so clearly there is a need to set the matter straight.

Rome is the more entertaining series but The Tudors is by far the more important series.

Yes, the writers on Rome created characters that cared about each other, therefore the viewers genuinely cared about them, which explains much of the loyalty to the series. The Tudors seemed populated by nasty, scheming, deceitful, hypocrites concerned only about their position on the pecking order. Even the characters who were motivated by less base desires, like Thomas More and Thomas Cromwell, lacked the charisma needed to create concern for their welfare. Rome balanced tragedy with humor, while the Tudors simply combined tragedy with pomp, torture and more tragedy.

Furthermore, Rome had more than enough bloody fights to satisfy the most discerning viewer. There were battles between gangs, battles between armies, foiled assassination attempts, successful assassinations, and even a legionnaire slicing up several gladiators. The very first three minutes of the first episode of the first season showed why Roman legions were unstoppable. Titus Pullo even bit off a guy's tongue and spit it at him. If you watched the show and wanted more blood, you need help.

Despite running for four seasons, twice as long as Rome, the Tudors had at best a handful of swordfights, and I suspect that I am being generous. Worse, the fight scenes were, well, rather lame, and they usually featured extras, not the lead actors, so it was hard to be involved.

However, The Tudors presented genuine struggles over faith and the willingness of people to die for their beliefs. Instead of the fake, idealized courage of people who go smiling to their executions, which never seems believable, it was a real courage where people do not want to die, but can not face life if they betray themselves and their beliefs. The scene that stuck in my mind was when Bishop Fisher was about to be executed and he admitted to the crowd that his faith was not enough, so he needed their support to face the chopping block.

Admittedly, religion was a significant part of Rome, and the characters took curses seriously. The scene where Servilla of the Junii cursed Caesar in the temple was creepy and disturbing. However, religion took a back seat to politics. While the debate over the merits of a republic versus an empire would have been fascinating, instead of showing the debate, the series focused on the struggle for power between factions. First, Julius Caesar against Pompey, and then Octavian against Marc Antony. Nobody really seemed to believe in any cause other than themselves, which is probably an accurate portrayal of most politicians.

Most important, The Tudors showed that the king was number one and everyone else was at best number two, but only as long as he wished it. Once his favor was withdrawn, someone else would be number two and the previous number two would most likely be dead. Everything revolved around the king.

I know, Rome dealt with the transition from a republic to an empire, and it was interesting to see the senators crowding around to stab Julius Caesar on the senate floor. However, first Julius and then Octavian had to maneuver and plot to consolidate their power against their rivals. Octavian only achieved absolute power by the end of the series. In The Tudors, Henry inherited absolute power and it was never questioned throughout the series. The only checks on his power were a weak Parliament and the Church. Destroying the Catholic Church and seizing the monasteries gave Henry enough money that he did not need to seek funds from Parliament, thus eliminating the only other forces in his kingdom.

Jonathan Rhys-Meyers’ refusal to play a fat man with graying hair near the end of his reign definitely weakened the show but King Henry was supposed to have been quite fit when he was younger, and the final season did show him deteriorate physically.

I have to confess that I did not notice the feminist aspect of The Tudors at first, but while every single person in the kingdom was at the mercy of the king’s will, the various queens were placed in a particularly unenviable position. They lived at the center of power but were discouraged from expressing their own ideas. The series also showed that bad parenting could produce horrible consequences. Mary had been ignored by her father and his religious choices doomed her to spinsterhood, which helps explain her fervent willingness to shed blood to restore England to Catholicism. It may seem to be a generalization, but given the huge power concentrated in the monarch and the lack of self-help books, unresolved childhood issues with your parents could manifest in an extreme fashion if you sat on the throne.

Although both traditional Catholics and the newer Protestants were presented as being brave enough to die for their faith, the producers were definitely biased in favor of the Protestants. However, they captured perfectly the desire of the Catholic Church to keep religion mysterious in order to maintain their control. If people could read the Bible, then what did they need priests for?

Admittedly, one of the king's sisters is completely absent in the series, which is especially odd since she married King James of Scotland, thus providing the connection that would result in the Stuarts ascending to the throne of England after Elizabeth died childless. Since she lived in Scotland, there was no need for her character to play a large role in the series, or any role at all, but to not even refer to her was sloppy writing. Cutting out one of the many, many sex scenes would have left space to mention her, and would have only slightly decreased the show's steaminess factor.

Rome was the perfect blend of entertainment and history but The Tudors' focus on religious debate and persecution helps viewers realize how far we have come and the need to resist religious zealotry.

Boardwalk Empire

I have to admit that I was underwhelmed by the much-touted pilot episode directed by Martin Scorsese, but after watching a few more episodes, the series is growing on me. I would have thought that a period gangster series would right up Scorsese's alley, but I just realized that I have come to expect a certain style from HBO and Scorsese's lack of a sense of humor dragged down the pilot.

Although I originally checked the show out because of the gangsters and Prohibition, I am more interested in its portrayal of the time. Soldiers back from France who want their wives to do French sex tricks using their mouths, the Klu Klux Klan is recruiting, Henry Ford is spreading racist conspiracy theories about the Jews and many men have open contempt for the idea of giving women the vote.

The acting is excellent but some odd decisions were made when casting the lead actors. Steve Buscemi's Nucky Johnson is surprisingly nuanced and I am curious to see where the character goes. The real Thompson was larger-than-life with huge appetites but executive producer Terrence Winter probably did not want do another Sopranos, and it is nice to see Buscemi have his own show after so many years as a character actor. Al Capone was a big, meaty Italian with a savage temper. Stephen Graham is a small, British guy who plays Capone with a savage temper. Thompson nailed Baby face Nelson in Public Enemies, but is laughably miscast here.

Big Jim Colosimo, the leading gangster in Chicago, was executed by Frankie Vale because he refused to get involved in bootlegging, preferring to go for carriage rides with his new girlfriend. It seems likely that Vale did the hit as a favor for Torrio, since they used to work together in New York. Torrio was the man most likely to benefit from Colosimo's death, since he was Big Jim's right-hand man. Capone quickly became Torrio's right-hand man because he trusted Torrio's judgment on when to employ violence. Most important, soon after succeeding Colosimo, Torrio persuaded the main gangs in Chicago to agree to stay out of each others' territory but time is moving slowly on the show because the treaty has not appeared. Rothstein is great in the series. He was brilliant and famous for marathon poker games, but the idea of him threatening a hardened thug like Vale is a bit hard to take seriously.

Finally, the Prohibition Bureau agents quickly became a byword for corruption, which is why alcohol was sold openly, but the only honest Prohibition agents in the United States appear to have been assigned to Atlantic City.

Otherwise, everything is great, especially the weird relationship between Thompson and Margaret, the suffragettes' struggle for the vote and the re-emergence of the KKK, which had existed for less than a decade after the Civil War and then fizzled out. While the contraception methods shown may seem bizarre, Margaret Sanger, an early birth control advocate, had produced pamphlets advising women to use douches of cleaning agents like lysol to prevent pregnancy. Life was a lot different before condoms and the pill.

While the producers have jumbled up the history a bit more than I would like and it is no Deadwood, Boardwalk Empire is definitely worth watching.

Taiwanese make Chinese envoy feel right at home.

There has been a lot of hoopla over the past few days about whether or not martial law has returned to Taiwan. Just because the citizens of Taiwan (officially known as the Republic of China) were not permitted to wave the national flag, wear T-shirts that had the word Taiwan or sing songs with the word Taiwan during the five days when Chen Yunlin, head of ARATS (Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits), China's official organization for dealing with the renegade province known as Taiwan that it officially refuses to recognize, was in Taiwan. Yeah, it can be a little confusing at times.
Anyway, Chen was in town to sign agreements for direct flights across the straits, so that Taiwanese businessmen no longer have to fly through Hong Kong, as well as agreements about direct cargo shipments by air and sea, and postal exchanges. Several weeks earlier, his deputy, Zhang Mingqing, had been pushed to the ground by Tainan City legislator Wang Tingyu, during a visit to Tainan. Wang says Zhang tripped and fell. The Tainan District Attorney General disagreed and indicted Wang for assault and eroding public order with a recommended sentence of 1.2 years in prison, while six of his associates received 6 to 8 months each. The investigation and indictment took a mere eight days, which is a testament to the efficiency of Taiwan's legal system.
Wishing to avoid a repeat of this violence, the Taiwanese government assigned 7,000 police to ensure that Chen's stay in Taiwan was as smooth as possible. Unfortunately, many, many, many Taiwanese were hell bent on ensuring that Chen had a lousy time, presumably in the foolish hope that if Chen gave Taiwan a thumbs down as a tourist destination, China would not want to invade. However, no matter what they did, the police were waiting. If there was even a chance that Chen could see protestors waving their national flag, the police cordoned off every street connecting to his route. Former vice-president Lien Chan hosted a banquet for Chen at the hotel where he was staying but a group of opposition legislators thought they were smarties by renting a room in the hotel and unfurling banners saying that Taiwan is a free country. Apparently, they were not as smart as they thought they were; the police simply locked them in their room, showing that you can talk about Taiwanese independence as much as you want, as long as it is behind a locked door. Outside the hotel, police and protestors engaged in a frank and clear discussion of the merits of freedom of speech, and when the discussion appeared to become a little too heated, water cannon were brought in to cool the protestors down. Some of the protestors employed more subtle means to get their message across. A record store near the hotel played patriotic Taiwanese songs until the police arrived and forced the store to close, refusing once again to waste time with warrants or explanations.
As would be expected, the DPP (the opposition party) have held numerous press conferences criticizing the government for excessive force, and expressing fear that these harsh methods signal a return of the White Terror (the period of martial law from 1949 to 1987 when 140,000 people were killed or imprisoned for criticizing the ruling Kuomintang). However, I think they are overreacting. The rigorous but fair policing methods were only applied during the five days of Chen's visit, which makes me believe that the Kuomintang (KMT) government was simply trying to make him feel at home. I think the problem is that the vast majority of DPP legislators have spent little or no time in China, so they do not realize that what they consider to be police brutality is just maintaining order in China. Protests are illegal and unnecessary in China because the Communist Party already represents the people. Well, I am confident that Chen appreciates the government's efforts and he probably felt so much at home that he thought that he was in China the whole time. Another way of looking at the situation is that many members of the KMT advocate reunification with China, and they thought it would be nice to give those Taiwanese who have not traveled in China the opportunity to experience it firsthand in their own country. Consider it a five day free trial, although they may want to look closely at the fine print in the money back guarantee.

RIP, Charlton Heston

It is a pity that Charlton Heston is going to be remembered either as the guy wearing the short robe in Ben-Hur or as the fiery NRA poster boy.
To be honest, I find Ben-Hur basically unbearable, aside from the chariot race, which is simply insane, in a good way.
As regards Heston's service as president of the NRA, any reader of his autobiography will quickly understand that guns were a big part of his life, so it is somewhat fitting that his last major role was as mouthpiece for the NRA. However, it should be remembered that he became president when he was 75 years old. Despite the endless number of wise old men portrayed in Hollywood movies, people don't always become open to new ideas as they grow older. Instead, they often become grumpy and inflexible. By the by, I find it strange that people criticize Michael Moore for making Heston look frail and old during the interview for Bowling for Columbine. Heston was president of the NRA and one would expect the president of an association to explain the policy and actions of that association. If you can not perform that simple task, then maybe you should retire. Anyway, whether he was used by the NRA or not is beside the point. I don't want to remember him clutching a musket and saying "from my cold, dead hands."
No, I want to remember him in his prime, when he was one of the top stars in Hollywood, and he decided to make movies without happy endings, movies that challenged people's perception of the established order. Let me make it clear, he was no rebel, but he was a smart man, and more important, he was not afraid to risk his image. Perhaps only Burt Lancaster was as willing to take chances.
Between 1965 and 1980, he played a villain (The Three Musketeers), an artist who lived only for his masterpiece (The Agony and the Ecstasy), a powerful noble whose fighting ability could not save him from his lust (The Warlord), a great British general beaten by an Arab rebel (Khartoum), a tough cowboy who was afraid to settle down (Will Penny), and a mountain man who could not adapt to changing times (Mountain Men). Khartoum in particular stands out, since his stunt double commented that he remembered when they used to win these things.
However, it is his three science fiction films that will prove to be his true monument. Planet of the Apes, Omega Man and Soylent Green all showed a future where mankind had failed in one way or another. Not even the alpha male Charlton Heston could win, at best he could survive a little bit longer than everyone else. Worse, he would come to feel that we deserved our fate. Omega Man and Soylent Green are just a little too bleak for repeated viewings but I never fail to become involved in Planet of the Apes, even though I know the story almost by heart.
In the end, Planet of the Apes is how I want to remember Charlton Heston. The actor who was not afraid to play the guy who tried hard but still lost.

Richard Widmark, RIP (1914-2008)

Although he never acheived the popularity of peers such as John Wayne or Robert Mitchum, Widmark was a successful leading man in his own right, who is probably best known for his roles in The Alamo (1960), Judgement at Nuremburg (1961) and Madigan (1968). Actually, the main reason why true stardom eluded him is that he adapted his performance to suit the movie, rather than picking movies that matched his on screen persona. Widmark never took roles where he simply rode into town, beat the bad guy and won the girl. Instead, he preferred more conflicted roles where there were no easy answers and often no happy ending.

My favorite Widmark movie is Warlock (1959), directed by Edward Dmytryk, where he played a former outlaw who visibly struggled with his loyalties and fears to face his old gang in order to make up for his past crimes.

While his filmography does have its share of embarassing films, every movie benefited from his presence, an achievement equaled by few of his more charismatic peers. Even though there are no Richard Widmark collections available, you could do far worse things with your time than explore the work of an actor who never really received his due.

Boycott, boycott, boycott.

Well, they're at it again. Those monks with their international conspiracy of chanting constantly and refusing to engage in violence, even in self-defence. This time it's Tibet. No wonder the Chinese government felt it was necessary to kill a few monks and Tibetan civilians. If they would just accept that they are now and always have been part of China, even though they do not speak Chinese, have anything in common with China or actually want to be part of China, then none of this would be necessary. Anyway, what's the worst that can happen? There might be a sphincter clenching visit from a UN envoy with thinly veiled criticisms of your housecleaning methods and calls for renewed dialogue with the dirty little troublemakers.
Look what happened to the dictatorship in Myanmar. A few monks get beaten after leading protests against the dictatorship and the UN was right in there, making suggestions and trying to serve as a communication bridge with the activists. You know, no one likes to hear criticism. I have heard that Senior General Than Shwe was moping around for days after his last meeting with the UN envoy, but none of the reporters asked how he felt.
If only there was some important event that mattered to the Chinese government more than a few troublemakers. Oh, wait, there is. The Olympics.
The Olympics certainly matter to the scummy dictatorship that rules China. It matters so much that the reservoirs in Hebei and Shaanxi provinces are being diverted to Beijing to ensure that the flush toilets actually have water and to transform the Chaobai River from its previous resemblance to a desert into a suitable venue for the rowing and canoeing competitions. The residents of those provinces truly deserve to be called heroes. Anybody else would be pretty ticked off if their taps were dry just so that some team can paddle their canoe to win glory for their native land.
The powers-that-be have so far been united in their reaction to the situation. Many late night phone calls must have been required to determine who gets to use which permutation of "please show restraint when beating unarmed protestors." As ever, Taiwan is kept outside the diplomatic loop and apparently was not permitted to use the word "restraint" in its official reaction. Instead, it had to settle for condemming China's use of force. Sigh, when will the cool countries let Taiwan hang out with them and follow the same fashions.
International Olympic Committee head Jacques Rogge has said that a boycott would be unfair to the athletes. Apparently dead Tibetan protestors, massive environmental damage in China, and an overall failure to grasp the concept of human rights is less vital than seeing who saunters off with the gold in badminton, synchronized swimming, and table tennis.
I just want to state that I have no problem with cooperating with scummy people, it’s called a job. You give them a portion of your time and mental energy in exchange for money, which you can use to pay for rent, beer and an Internet connection with which to download porn. This arrangement makes Western society the stunning achievement that it is today. The problem with the refusal of many powers-that-be to call for a boycott is that the scummy people that rule over China get what they want, namely respect, without having to give anything in exchange.
The cynics among you are probably saying that if the Chinese dictatorship is really so scummy then a boycott won’t work, therefore we might as well watch the women's beach volleyball team (a personal favorite). Actually, a boycott might work. Hu and the rest of the board of dictators are not insane megalomaniacs like Mao who did not blink an eye when millions starved to death. They want to stay in control but they want more pull in the international community than a country like Myanmar. The scummy dictatorship is all too aware of China’s rich history of violent change of leadership and pretty much non-existent history of peaceful handovers of power. That is why they recently passed several laws guaranteeing health insurance and paid overtime for workers. These laws seem like they will be effective since a number of Chinese companies have whined that they will no longer be competitive if they have to pay a living wage and Taiwan’s government has been swamped with inquiries about whether there is any space left in the new science parks.
As I have said, there is nothing wrong with making a deal with a scummy dictatorship. By all means, let the Chinese have their Olympics and those of us who appreciate the finer details of women's beach volleyball can have what we want as well. However, would it hurt to mention that no one will take part in the Olympics unless the dictatorship actually talks to the Dalai Lama, releases a few of its dissidents, and maybe even lets the people in Shaanxi province have a shower twice a month.
Or everyone can continue to look the other way in the hope that the Chinese dictatorship will decide on their own to play nice and take the lead out of the toys, the viruses out of the computer gadgets and the beatings out of peaceful protests.

I have been neglecting the History in History on Film

It has been pointed out to me that my history related posts have been few and far between, so this is a perfect opportunity to mention an interesting article by famous historian Antonia Fraser (http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/film/article3446528.ece). Fraser points out while that there is more artistic license than history in the recently released film The Other Boleyn Girl, it is still a fun and interesting movie.

I was impressed that when she met director Sophia Coppola to discuss bringing her biography of Marie Antoinette to the screen, she immediately told Coppola that anyone who wanted to see her vision could read the book, so Coppola should film her vision. As an historian, it is practically a knee jerk reaction to criticize inaccuracies in historical films but she rightly points out that the late George MacDonald Fraser was correct when he commented that Hollywood's version of history is far more vivid and accessible than the works of great historians such as Tacitus and Gibbon.

Fraser (Antonia not George MacDonald) deftly compares The Other Boleyn Girl with the numerous other films that have dealt with Henry VIII and Elizabeth I, showing that even though each of the films has its own flaws, they all serve the purpose of exposing viewers to historical periods that they would otherwise have zero interest in. I have met an endless number of people who said that they routinely dozed through their high school history classes but are more than happy to discuss Hollywood's most recent historical blockbuster. Personally, I consider gritting my teeth a few times in the theater or while sitting on my couch a small price to pay to have people actually talking about history and wanting to learn more. Hopefully, more high school teachers (I am sure some already do) will start incorporating historical films into their lesson plans so that students discuss history instead of nap.