Romans over the Years
In
this paper I will be arguing that over the period of time from 1913 to 1963 the
portrayal of Romans became more negative and villainous. I will cover the emotionless qualities of the
Romans that had been increasing in film.
I will discuss how the Romans were portrayed more and more militaristic
over time. I will speak of the cruelty
of the Romans in film and how it grew.
As society changed so too did the perception of the ancestor of the
western world.
The
Romans in film became more emotionless.
While not a villainous quality in itself, emotionless behavior is perceived
as alien and logical behavior. Though
this can be respectable, it is generally also perceived as inhuman and intimidating. In Cabiria the Romans, including the hero
Fulvius Axilla, are often seen as intelligent and dashing. In Ben-Hur (1927) the Romans are cold and
precise, though many of them would show some form of emotion, like Messala,
they only do so in the company of friends.
The
Romans in film became more militaristic.
As the film industry grew so too did their budget and the world around
them. In Cabiria the Romans were a
military force, but we got to see them act through craftiness, and even, by
means of Archimedes, suffer losses. In
Ben-Hur they were a huge military power who could not be defeated, and the hero
fails to do so. This increase in
militaristic perception is likely due to both a rise in world militarization in
powers like America and an increase in the option of movie effects, inciting
directors to create more interesting military dynamics.
The
Romans in film became crueler. In
Cabiria they were the clear good guys. A
Roman girl was the victim; a Roman man was the hero. Anything questionable that the Roman’s did,
like kidnap an innkeeper and force him to speak lies to his people, was
justified by their motives in the film.
However, in Ben-Hur (1925) this changed.
The Romans in Ben-Hur were cruel, selfish and egotistical. As Messala said, “To be Roman is to rule the
world.” In the very beginning of the
movie the Romans are seen harassing innocent Jews. Later they beat slaves rowing their ship with
lashes and chain them to the ship. While
there was a good side to the Romans on display, such as consul Arrius and his
honor and support of his adopted son, the Romans were doubtless on the crueler
side in the movie. This increase in
cruelty may have come from a post world wars opinion against war.
So
as the portrayal of Romans changed, they became more than the heroic ancestors of old and
very much an empire of questionable intent.
Word Count: 453
Hi Bryce--I really like this idea and you've supported it very well. You mention in your thesis the films between the period of 1925-1963. Are you thinking of mentioning Cleopatra or Ben-Hur (1959)? If so, I think there is evidence that points to Romans being both militaristic (war is very important to both Antony and Caesar) as well as advanced (Roman political structures like the Senate are a major part of the story). For Ben-Hur 1959, there are many examples that you already mentioned for the 1925 version--the cruelty of the Romans, for instance.
ReplyDeleteNice job. I feel like what you've written is really good. Your evidence seems to provide a stable argument. As Olivia pointed out, will you be using Cleopatra and Ben-Hur (1959)? I don't see any evidence for these two films in your abstract, which are vital to the topic proposed by Professor Knorr. For example, you could talk about how in Ben-Hur (1959) Messala went back onto the rooftop and discovered that the falling roof tile truly was an accident and did nothing to save the Ben Hur family as a piece of evidence for your claim. Just two things to keep in mind when writing your actual essay: all of your body paragraphs begin with "The Romans…" so try to mix up the first words of each paragraph to ward off monotony, and secondly try to avoid so much repletion ("I will…I will…I will..") it tends to bog down your introduction. Over all--not too shabby!
ReplyDelete