Forum debate: HBO's Rome series criticized for aging poorly

Rome: The series that aged from cult classic to flop

There is consensus that TV fiction about Antiquity lives on a budget that rarely materializes. But there is a more uncomfortable paradox: the series long sold as the definitive production on the Roman Republic is now seen by part of the audience as having weak scripts, overacted performances, and cinematography outshone by Gladiator, despite the latter’s greater age. The discussion isn’t new, but the tone of the verdict is.

The starting point of the discontent is the cast. A Julius Caesar who, instead of rallying crowds with memorable speeches, appears as a bitter old man barely opening his mouth. An Antony described in this reading as giggling like a madman throughout the series. An Octavian portrayed as a dim-witted child humiliated at home. And a mother presented as an overacted harpy. The diagnosis is harsh: characters pulled from a cheap video game, not history.

The problem isn't the actors, it's the script

The most repeated criticism targets the screenplay rather than the performers. Regardless of whether the historical material offers tragedy and epic scenes, what reaches the screen, according to this view, are high-school theater antics. Moreover, the two protagonists aren't the big names but secondary military figures: one portrayed as stupid and a prostitute, the other as smart but sens, repeating supposed jokes to show how evil men are. A trope that grates today.

Against this stands the classic defense: the series succeeds in showing everyday Rome, slum neighborhoods, chickens in the streets, and brawling people, instead of a parade of red tunics and plumed helmets. For this camp, the charm lies precisely in bringing great characters down from their pedestal. The issue is that this virtue doesn’t compensate, for critics, the lack of emotion and grandeur.

Why do people say Rome aged badly?

Because time has exposed its technical seams. Comparison with Gladiator is recurrent: an older film maintains better photography, effects, and music. In the series, the budget shows in the near-total absence of battles. After one well-characterized combat scene, no others appear: neither Pharsalus, nor Actium, nor the expected siege. The circulating explanation is that money ran out and the last three chapters condensed what was planned for two seasons.

That lack of resources, however, doesn’t explain everything. Some argue the fundamental flaw is one of judgment: a production was made with historical intent but without conviction, resulting in something halfway between documentary and soap opera. The assassination of Caesar scene is saved; the rest, in this reading, leaves no lasting impression.

The battle the series never filmed

The absence of Pharsalus hurts especially because it is one of those rare battles. Caesar, outnumbered, hid infantry behind his cavalry to dismount Pompey’s when they pursued his own. The combined effect of seeing their horsemen retreat and their flank threatened broke enemy sarracena. A plan prepared beforehand, almost like a chess trap. The series, instead, resolved the matter with dialogue.

The contrast with what could have been done is the main reproach. Punic Wars, Persian Wars, Scipio’s campaigns: any episode of Antiquity would suffice for a production of journeys, battles, invasions, and betrayals. The underlying lament isn’t just aesthetic but industrial: Europe lacks major in-house producers handling these topics with quality, letting history be butchered elsewhere.

What works and what doesn’t

Not everything is demolition. Some defend that the characterization of Brutus, full of contradictions before the Ides of March, or the series’ Pompey, work better than in any other production. Material detail is also praised: centurions with transverse crests, legionaries with mail armor, houses without exterior windows. Errors exist, such as Cato depicted as sixty when he committed suicide at forty-eight.

For the critical sector, the balance remains negative. And the question hangs open: if ancient history offers so much, why is it so hard to film without looking like a puppet show?