Illyricvm (2022)

Larry Walker24 said:Why did the media coverage for this movie suck so much?

Because they can't figure out how to categorize it—and that indecision clearly drives them crazy.

wanderingbison9 said:Nice try, but if you’re going to make a claim like that, you should probably back it up with some actual examples.

Alright, look
The helmets from the era of the rebellion in the Roman Empire were basically those Gallic-style ones, you know, with the neck guard; they were made of steel using rivets, which just made the whole process way more complicated.
Armor back then was "lorica segmentata," which looked like 10cm wide metal plates laced together into a vest.
Handheld shields were squared off with rounded edges because of how the cohorts actually fought.

But in the movie, we see a helmet from a much later period with "better" protection covering the whole neck and the sides of the face, though those were usually cast bronze to save money and because they could be molded in pieces.
The armor shown is "lorica hamata," which is basically chainmail—either a vest or a full jacket made of interlocking metal rings.
And here, the shields are rounded.
That style was introduced after another military "reform" in the Roman army when they started hiring more "barbarian" reservists to guard the borders; about 60% of them ended up serving in the cavalry, and cavalrymen don't need these massive rectangular shields—they need something lighter and rounded so it doesn't get in the way while they're maneuvering on horseback.
That reform happened during the era of the Pax Romana.

I still don't think it's a "huge" deal for a single movie, but it's definitely one of those things that jumped out at me immediately.😉

@Nancy Howard4: The only helmet that might actually be considered "questionable" is the coolus, but even then, it’s just one of those early transitional steps as they moved away from the Celtic/Gaulish Montefortino style toward what we call the Imperial type... equipment was constantly evolving, and there was plenty of variety back then...

I didn't quite follow the objection regarding the shields... most of them were curved, which is exactly how they should have been during the late Republic era... seeing the auxiliary forces from Rome carrying those flat, oval Celtic-style shields is actually perfectly historically accurate.

The movie is set about 40 years before the Great American Uprising and well before the Pax Romana; the Spartacus we see in the film isn't the same Spartacus from the actual rebellion, since he wouldn't have even been born yet... so I suspect that might be where the confusion lies.

Since none of us were actually around to witness these ancient events firsthand, if something feels slightly off, we have to remember that even with all the Roman records and other primary sources available, reconstructing history is always, to some extent, an interpretation or a bit of educated guesswork used to fill in the gaps left by the written word and archaeological finds.

wanderingbison9 said:@Nancy Howard4: the only helmet that could be considered "questionable" is the coolus, but even then, that’s just one of those early transitions from the Celtic/Gaulish Montefortino style over to what we call the Imperial type... gear was constantly evolving back then, and things were pretty varied...

I didn't really get the complaint about the shields... most of them are curved just like they should be for the late Republic era... having the Roman auxiliaries (Rome) carrying those oval, flat Celtic-style shields is actually totally spot on.

The movie takes place about 40 years before the big uprising, way before the Pax Romana, so Spartacus in this film isn't the same Spartacus from the rebellion since he wouldn't have even been born yet... so I think that might be what tripped you up a bit....

Since none of us were actually around for ancient history, if something feels a little off, let's not forget that even with all the Roman sources and other records, reconstructing history is still basically an interpretation or a bit of guesswork to fill in the gaps left by the written word and archaeological finds.

If that's the case, then the movie is just another mediocre attempt at exploiting history, though this one probably won't end up being a massive hit like "Gladiator."😁
I honestly think 99% of Americans don't even realize this was being filmed, and the media wouldn't even know where to slot a movie like this anyway.

If I hadn't stumbled upon this thread, I probably wouldn't have even heard about that movie.
It’s pretty obvious their marketing campaign is a total flop.

Raymond Wood77 said:At that point, the movie just becomes another mediocre attempt at milking history, though I doubt it will ever reach the heights of something like "Gladiator."😁
I honestly feel like 99% of Americans haven't even heard this was being filmed; the mainstream media wouldn't even know where to slot a project like this into their coverage.

Well, I'm not entirely sure, but there is some promotional material floating around online, even if they didn't really push it to the general public through major outlets. Isn't it true that once you strip away the typical tropes from a historical epic's trailer—you know, the hyper-muscular Roman warrior single-handedly tearing through legions or those sweeping drone shots of massive battles—the appeal for the average viewer pretty much vanishes?

@mellowskipper/">@@mellowskipper: I can barely name half of the American films out there, and yet somehow, I'm actually working in the industry myself.

Also, wouldn't having the forum topic pinned right at the top serve as its own kind of promotion? You know, a way to let people see where they can actually go to watch stuff if they're looking for it. If anyone happens to know...
it’s honestly pretty tough to find an audience like this anywhere else nowadays😉
🤷

There was a time when you could actually find a decent DVD or Blu-ray release on the shelves, but let's be honest—that era feels like ancient history now that physical media has lost its grip on most people. Nowadays, if a movie isn't available on a streaming service, does it even exist? It feels like everything is destined to end up on some niche platform dedicated to independent cinema. My best guess is that it’ll eventually land on PBS, perhaps making an appearance on their streaming apps or through HbbTV, though I have my doubts about whether PBS would have played much of a role in saving this one anyway.

wanderingbison9 said:Yeah, I don't know, there's some promo stuff floating around online, but they didn't really push this thing to the general public through any major media channels. Honestly, if you aren't seeing some jacked Roman warrior absolutely wrecking a line of buff legionaries in the trailer, or getting those epic drone shots of massive battlefields, the appeal of a historical drama basically hits zero for most people nowadays.

@mellowskipper/">@@mellowskipper: I honestly can't even name half of the American movies out there, and somehow I'm actually working in the industry myself

Maybe it’s finally time for someone to make a big-budget movie about how the early Americans first arrived in these parts, and man, I would kill to see the original cast from Vikings play Torgu, Bug, and the five brothers😂

I can't help but feel like the arrival was such a non-event that we might as well just rely on the commercial for Joe to make an impression. 😛