| Forum | Europe Travel Guide | Ecology | Facts & Trivia | Genetics | History | Linguistics |
| Austria | France | Germany | Ireland | Italy | Portugal | Spain | Switzerland |
 Eupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
|
Watch the NETFLIX series MESSIAH:
https://pt.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mess...elevis%C3%A3o)
After, reflect about this short video.
I've been watching this show, I'm on the third episode. It is very interesting!
I've been watching it too. It's the first thing I've watched on netflix in a long time. I had been thinking of cancelling and rejoining only if something that looked interesting showed up.Originally Posted by Jovialis
Instead I've been watching a lot of amazon prime. I stumbled on a lecture series called "The Rise of Rome". Unfortunately, it's 24 half hour episodes and it's leaving November 1st, but the few episodes I've picked and chosen are interesting.
Non si fa il proprio dovere perchè qualcuno ci dica grazie, lo si fa per principio, per se stessi, per la propria dignità. Oriana Fallaci
Thanks for the advice Jovalis, wasn't aware of it!
I have seen the first two episodes. What is IMO is really good is the interaction between the Roman and Germanic world, no black and white but with a right eye for the complexities. And It's the same regisseur as in the Viking case, so the same kind of dark atmosphere. The only thing that sounds odd in my ears is that the Germans speak nowadays "high German" a kind of archaic Low German would be better IMO. The Romans in the serie do speak a kind of Latin don't they?
Last edited by Northener; 30-10-20 at 23:52.
I really appreciate the grittiness of the show, it was a good production. I just finished it yesterday.
I have binge watched them all (the rest) yesterday evening. Of course it's entertainment....but what is most interesting for me is 'Ari' living in 'two worlds'....and especially how he 'played' with that in the final chapters. That's masterly. And of course recognizable for many even nowadays.
I'm curios what in the end for youis most remarkable....It is very interesting!
Gives it in the end a good and real insight in the Germanic and Roman world of that time? Or are it stil nowadays projections on those days?
I think it could be a mix of both
Spoiler alert:
I found it interesting how he grieved for both his real father, and his adopted Roman father, Varus. Particularly, how he was truly convinced of what he should do, when he discovered that despite his merits, he could never achieve more than what was offered to him, because of his origins. That is when he completely knew he needed to free himself, and his people. I think that could also serve as a projection on the dynamics of modern societies. People need to be treated based on their merit, and deeds, in order to have a peaceful society. But it also showed that some of the people he was fighting for could be just as duplicitous as his enemies. For example, the uncle of his friend, that ambushed them while they slept, and Segestes. In real life Armenius was assassinated by other members of his tribe. I wonder if there will be a second season, they seem to leave it open it it. Perhaps it will go into these events, as well as the return of Ari's brother, Flavus.
I think there was more than a bit of projection going on, especially given it was German made and the number of Turks, among others, living there.
Rome was not the modern world. Their world view was not ours. It was, in fact, increasingly far less obsessed with ethnic identity in terms of advancement as time passed. In reality, more than one "Barbarian" broke through the "glass ceiling", some reaching the Imperial throne. Nor do we really know the main character's motivations. We do know it ended badly for him.
No group is totally noble or totally rapacious. There may be no "good" conqueror, but there is no "Noble Savage" either, and each group that is conquered either has already or will in the future become a conqueror. Look at the Aztecs, look at the history of any civilization you can name. There is no black and white, only shades of grey.
I do hope that the message seen in Europe is not that once a "foreigner" or "alien" always a foreigner, and the ultimate loyalty will always be to "blood", although there are even some scholars of the ancient world who have held that trusting "New Romans" was indeed one of Rome's greatest mistakes. I also hope that the makers weren't aware that it could be seen that way.
Good series, though, and it raises interesting questions.
Indeed not modern so the modern 'identity' thing was alien to the Roman world.
Nevertheless 'barbarian' was not a neutral word I guess. The Roman imperium was a kind of 'colonisator' with a stretch unseen of before or even after. (Therefore the obsession from the Nazi's with das Dritte Reich?).
Anyhow barbarian may have a functioning dehumanizing people: the Roman War machine crushed 'barbarian' people in an efficient way. And not to take the Germans very serious (may be arrogance is a better word) like Varus shows is IMO not unthinkable....
The process in which Rome engaged after a land was conquered was called, aptly enough, "Romanization". There's a lot written about it. It isn't hard to find. There's also a lot written about "identity" in the Roman world particularly after the Empire. Identity was layered, but it seems that both a North African and a Northern Brit could identify as "Romans".
It also happened in Italy itself. Livy was not a Latin, but he fiercely identified as a Roman.
It's one reason their empire lasted 500 years instead of not even 20 years.
If you're looking for a gritty crime series on Netflix, try Hinterland. I'm really getting into Welsh movies and tv series. The latest one I watched is on amazon if you have Acorn. It's called "Bang". The actors speak a mix of Welsh (subtitled) and English. There are plot twists and a lot of character development, great acting, and these are people I understand.
Sometimes, with "foreign" crime procedurals I experience some jarring moments because the characters don't behave, in social terms, in ways I would expect, but that's not the case with these people.
Oh, another great one on Amazon Prime is called "Line of Duty". I really liked it. "Prime Suspect" used to be on it but no longer is. You have to pay for the other British Channel on Amazon prime: BritBox.
I usually rent Acorn when a few new good things show up, then do the same when good stuff shows up on BritBox or PBS. That way I'm only paying for one extra channel a month.
Indeed:
https://openaccess.leidenuniv.nl/bit...df?sequence=12The “barbarian” figured prominently in the context of the Roman, and later of the Spanish, British, French, and the other Western European colonial empires.38 The Roman Empire sustained a strong sense of center versus periphery. Rome operated as a control panel, imposing laws, policies, educational norms, and military structures upon the provinces. In this context, being barbarian was not (always) an irremediable state, but one that could be “cured” through a civilizing process that involved Roman education (Heather 241). This idea can be compared with the civilizing mission of European colonialism. However, as opposed to the European missionaries who systematically tried to convert colonized peoples, in the Roman Empire it is not the task of the Roman to (collectively) educate and lead the ignorant barbarians to civilization.39 The educational process towards Romanitas took place more on an individual rather than on a collective level. It was primarily the responsibility of the barbarian, who should consciously wish to rise above his or her state and the society that produced him or her. In Rome, the promotion from barbarism to Romanitas was more an option for the barbarian than a systematic mission for the Roman.
However, not every barbarian was a potential Roman citizen. There were conquered barbarians within Roman borders: those were the groups that could potentially share the benefits of Romanitas. But there was also a barbarous exterior of savagery, turbulence, aggression, and lack of organization, “waiting to be conquered” (Goffart 280). This external barbaricum, which was defined in more absolute terms, contributed to the self- perception of the Roman Empire as the order that warded off chaos from the civilized world (280).40
What I didn't realize is that this Teutoburger Forest battle, was not thought on the schools in Germany since WW2, because before it was a kind of nationalistic zenith point:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/28/a...s-netflix.html
Der Spiegel (kind of German Newsweek), is quite ironic (Germanic soap) and also makes the remark about the language I initially made (use of Latin but the Germanic is nowadays).
"Barbarians", Netflix
Time budget: six episodes of 50 minutes each (don't watch it)
For fans of: "The Fall of the Roman Empire"
Do the Romans actually speak Latin in this series? That's daring. Seriously. Is it really for German television, or can you imagine that for ARD and ZDF? In the case of "Barbarians", this would-be series highlight about the struggle between Teutons and Roman occupiers, it was also in terms of innovation.
The big advantage of the dialogues in Latin is that they at least sound nice - and not as wooden as those performed in razor high German. So far as to pamper the viewer with the most beautiful primitive Germanic, the will to authenticity does not go with Netflix. It would have been better, but also difficult, as we hardly know anything about this Cheruscan prince Arminius, who first served the Romans, then switched sides and started the battle in the Teutoburg Forest. So the "barbarian" makers paint the world of antiquity as they please. The result is a Germanic soap in which Arminius, his future wife Thusnelda and an invented Germanic warrior form a love triangle that gets the story rolling. Roles also do plenty of heads. Men with funny pigtail hairstyles and in pretty clothes swear vengeance with a grunt, there is also room for a lot of pathos - as befits a series that obviously emulates role models like "Vikings" and "The Last Kingdom". Unfortunately, "barbarians" sometimes looks like an amateur playgroup is rehearsing in the open-air museum, which gives the matter of pathos an involuntary comedy. That has at least the advantage that you don't have to take the fluffy finale, crammed with stupid war rhetoric, seriously.
I've tried to watch a number of films, series, lately, which I found unwatchable. Maybe I'm just too old for them:
HBO Max
Euphoria
Nightmare Alley
Station 11
Raised by Wolves
Saints of Newark
Cry Macho
Many I didn't even click on, like the "updated" Sex and the City as I detested the original
I did go back and watch Big, Little Lies with Nicole Kidman, Reese Witherspoon, etc. I gave it a pass for years because I thought it would be some predictable, feel good, totally unrealistic "woman's movie", most of which I can't abide. Instead, it was really good. These are women I completely recognize, from the basically nice to Medusa in high heels. I swear to God the author must have lived in my town. :) I know a lot of men get the hives at the idea of watching a movie where all the leads are women, but give it a try. It's really good.
Some oldies but goodies I rewatched, like The Unforgiven and 3:10 to Yuma, but then I'm partial to Westerns. I like the moral clarity in most of them.
Netflix
Haven't watched anything on it for ages.
Power of the Dog-got terrific reviews, but I opted out after half an hour. Knew directly where it was going. My God, enough!
Is the Vikings thing watchable?
Angela: Ozark is pretty good, but the plot line is pretty rough. MHZ is running Don Matteo and has I think the first 7 seasons on it. I am in well into season 3. The plot lines are fairly predictable sometimes but still very good the acting is great (They Call Me Trinity Terrance Hill (i.e. Mario Girotti) and Nino Frassica), the food always looks good, the women lovely :) and the Umbria scenery beautiful. Of course if you have already seen the show, my apologies. Cheers.
I saw the whole "Inventing Anna" mini-series, honestly it just annoys me. Why is this person being idolized by anyone? She's just a dishonest, shabby, narcissistic, thieving loser. The whole thing seemed unrealistic, I doubt it was actually as they portrayed. Then again, a lot of people are probably dumb enough to fall for her tricks. I'm sure if she hadn't been arrested, somebody would have just killed her, and that would have been the end of her.
The only thing I've found to watch on there in the last month or two is the latest version of "Kingdom" and some new episodes of Midwife. Everything else is ruined by Wokeism (a black Regency Rake and Viking chieftain, really?) or they're about people I hate.
I keep on cancelling it and then paying for a month when there's a couple of things I want to see. It's becoming a wasteland. HBO Max and even Amazon are better, imo.
My wife and I just finished watching "Drop out" on Hulu, based on the true story of Elizabeth Holmes. She makes Anna Delvey look like small potatoes. We also saw the Tinder Swindler. Which is about an Israeli guy that poses as the son of a billionaire, and tricks women into wiring money to him.
I don't know how these people can live their lives knowing there's a massive lie they're hiding that will destroy everything. How do you even enjoy the money with that over your head? Doesn't seem worth it to me.
The earlier seasons are outstanding up until the point Ragnar Lothbrok dies then it goes down hill
The new Vikings Valhalla is pure woke and a historical mess
Last Kingdom is absolutly superb all the way through, no wokeism and more or less as acurate as can be apart from moving Uhtred back in time a little to fit the story
Thanks for the heads up about Vikings Valhalla; I won't bother.
Yes, I've watched Last Kingdom all the way through; excellent.
I tried to watch the new British import, Anatomy of a Scandal, and it was awful; typical "Me Too" retread. All women are to be believed, even the ones having an affair with their married bosses, who are into "risky" behavior, all men are rapists, especially rich, powerful, white men. One line had me absolutely livid: he's too handsome, never trust really handsome men; usually rapists.
I'm so annoyed that I ordered it for a month. If something good doesn't come on I wasted that money.
Amazon doesn't disappoint as much. I've been watching the Wallender series with Kenneth Branagh. The stories are well written, character, not technology driven, and he's a really wonderful actor.
My top Netflix series: New Amsterdam, Money Heist, Brigderton, Inventing Anna.
yesterday I started wathcing Dead to Me - not that popular, but very interesting
A great series.
Watched House of the Dragon and The Rings of Power, both of them prequels: the first of GOT and the second of The Lord of the Rings.
I like House of the Dragon, although it's not GOT, at least not yet. As for the Rings of Power, I was ready to write it off after the first episode, but the second really picked up.
However, and I write this as a woman: does every series have to have women as the strongest or ruling characters, and women often stronger and better fighters than any of the men around them? In the case of Rings of Power does a full third or more of all the characters have to be black, when they weren't described that way by Tolkien? Don't we owe historical material some deference instead of imposing our own sensibilities on it? I mean, the Queen of Numenor, ancestress of Aragorn, Boromir and Faromir is black?
Or maybe we don't: Arondir the elf is my favorite character in that series. I don't see his color at all, which is what happens with good acting. You just see the character. He has that gravitas mixed with grace and a sense of ancient wisdom that are the hallmarks of the elves, traits which Galadriel doesn't possess at all. Also, since when was Galadriel a warrior? I also don't think the actress playing Galadriel is doing a good job at all. She may look like the Tolken character, but she doesn't personify her at all, imo. The strength of the older shows was partly the great acting. They should have invested more in actors, especially in The Rings of Power.
imo Tolkiens world is too outdated to make a modern show that is free from stereotypes, if you want to stick to the source material.
for example in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, the last humans fighting Sauron are Gondorians and Rohirim which are a mix of various european cultures. Rohan seems to be based on ancient germanics. not sure about Gondor, they seem to be a mix of western european middle ages and the roman empire. they are generally described as having fair features.
the "easterlings", who are described as beeing swarthy and having yellowish/olive sktin tone and straight black hair, were serving Sauron.
the Haradrim or "Southrons" were also on Saurons side. their skin, hairs and eyes are dark. they come from Harad in the south of Gondor and if you go even further south the people start to look like half trolls.
the orcs are squat, broad, flat-nosed, sallow-skinned, with wide mouths and slant eyes. Tolkien wrote himself that he based these characteristics on "(to Europeans) least lovely "Mongol-types"
the elves which were the most noble creatures in Tolkiens universe were also the fairest.
it's hard to make a modern show that is based in a world like this without feeding stereotypes. lord of the rings was written by an english man between 1937 and 1949 and i think the world of middle earth mirrors this a little bit. so i kinda understand that the producers can't really stick to the source and try to mix things up a bit.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote