HBO's ROME

[Fast Learner]

Oh, and Mark, great post, great points.

 

[Mystery Man]

So... you can't appreciate someone's desire to not have nudity in the film? I don't get it. I agree that complaining that this show has nudity doesn't make much sense, but you can't appreciate people not wanting a show to have nudity? How come?

Knowing about it beforehand and complaining about it after is my point. TV-MA warning. Mature audiences. It means a high probability of nudity, sex, and/or somebody dieing in a gruesome fashion. Get over it or don't watch it.

 

[BadMojo]

I enjoyed it, nudity, blood and all. I think the show will be quite historically accurate, as HBO tends to be pretty good with that sort of thing (see Deadwood).

I did find the first episode to be a bit slow, which is to be expected. All in all, I think I'm going to enjoy this show. I'm already developing a soft spot for Pullo, unreliable drunken lout and combat maniac that he is.

Now that I think about it, I would have been disappointed if there wasn't some ox blood and a crucifiction or two in the first episode!

 

[Tarrasque Wrangler]

After unfortunately catching some of the silly premier party with folks gushing about the show's realism, it struck me as funny to see bouncing gobs of silicone 10 minutes in.

I hate to tell you this (well, no I don't ) but according to MrSkin.com, Polly Walker is as natural as the day she was born.

And curses to you, Dread Pirate Murphy, for making me go to that vile site to find that out! Curses!

 

[Queen_Dopplepopolis]

On another level, it is meant to inform us about her character. How she conducts herself through the sex act, and just afterward, is more important than any words she could speak. It tells us much more than if the writers would have given her narrative lines to emote during, say, a trip to the market or a conversation with a confidante in her villa.

Further, it sets a tone that the 12 hour series is going to challenge our sensibilities and put us in the middle of very intimate situations. It says to the audience, "If *this* is too much for you, get out now. We've only just started."

I agree totally, but don't see how any of that couldn't have been accomplished without having to see her totally naked. It's not too much for me, just seems that there are ways to establish all of those important character points without having a screen full of T&A. The scene itself is fine, but could have proved the same things if she - say - had on a cotton shift or simply didn't show all the bits and pieces. There are ways to do sex without being so blatant, but I suppose it is HBO.

EDIT - I also found it interesting that many people's wives found the bull scene disturbing. I found *that* scene to be very interesting, revealing, and - in many ways - quite beautiful.

 

[Hand of Evil]

It will be interesting to see who they get for Cleo, so far, the guys have looked like images of the characters they are playing.

 

[Mark CMG]

I agree totally, but don't see how any of that couldn't have been accomplished without having to see her totally naked. It's not too much for me, just seems that there are ways to establish all of those important character points without having a screen full of T&A. The scene itself is fine, but could have proved the same things if she - say - had on a cotton shift or simply didn't show all the bits and pieces. There are ways to do sex without being so blatant, but I suppose it is HBO.

It's a matter of impact. It's meant to be blatant. That's part of the intent. The ACTUAL nudity IS an element in what they were trying to do in all three cases described above. Faux nudity would be a substitute ingredient. To remove or downplay the nudity weakens the impact and changes the artistic intent. Could they have changed it and done it your way? Sure, but then it wouldn't have been what it is, it would have been something else, something the artists hadn't intended.

 

[DreadPirateMurphy]

Just a clarification - there is nothing wrong with nudity on TV. If anything, Americans are too prudish about it. The reason there isn't more male nudity is because it is censored more heavily.

My critique of the show is that there was nudity that had no purpose other than to appeal to the young male demographic. It was basically blatant marketing, not art, and in my mind no better than a product placement.

If they can up the pacing, tone down the melodrama a teensy bit, and avoid crass displays of boobies and gore for demographic appeal, then the show could be really good television.

BTW: I don't care what Mr. Skin says. Real breasts MOVE when you bounce up and down.

 

[Mystery Man]

Just a clarification - there is nothing wrong with nudity on TV. If anything, Americans are too prudish about it. The reason there isn't more male nudity is because it is censored more heavily.

My critique of the show is that there was nudity that had no purpose other than to appeal to the young male demographic. It was basically blatant marketing, not art, and in my mind no better than a product placement.

I'll have to agree with Mark's analysis of the nude scene and conclude that perhaps you've missed the point.

If they can up the pacing, tone down the melodrama a teensy bit, and avoid crass displays of boobies and gore for demographic appeal, then the show could be really good television.

There was no "crass display". This wasn't Porky's or some other bad 80's teen sex movie.

 

[Storm Raven]

Just a clarification - there is nothing wrong with nudity on TV. If anything, Americans are too prudish about it. The reason there isn't more male nudity is because it is censored more heavily.

That may be true, but the reason probably has more to do with the belief (held by many entertainment industry bigwigs) that female nudity increases the draw (and therefore profit) of a movie or show, while male nudity is, at best, profit neutral.