As Bad As It Gets

It occurs to me that perhaps bad is bad in real life and bad might be good in reel life. 

Please allow me to explain. 

Since my family is away and it is just our pet Fred and me at home, I asked Fred if he had any objections if I took on a marathon project of watching the full 5 DVD disc BBC TV series of I. Claudius in one or two sittings.  

He struck a deal with me.  He said, ‘you take me hiking during the weekend mornings and I won’t bother you in the afternoons.’  That was too good a deal to pass up.  So we shook hand-paw on it. 

I, Claudius is such a fantastic series, that I am compelled to share it with you here.  Amazing acting, with the best of the British acting on tap.  Great writing.  Robert Graves is considered the father and pioneer of historical fiction.  A cast of characters that give credence to the saying that truth is stranger than fiction.  There is a link towards the very end of this write-up with Derek Jacoby winning an award for his performance as emperor Claudius.


To finish off the ‘research,’ I bookended this TV series with Kirk Douglas' Spartacus, Charlton Heston's Julius Caesar, Elizabeth Taylor’s Cleopatra and Robert Taylor’s Quo Vadis.  These are magnificent productions in their own right with reasonably accurate portrayal of history. 


This is a mature topic -  has some pretty strong stuff, that I have tried to tone down as much as I can, without losing fidelity (pun intended!).

I have tried to capture why we need to care about this topic at all, in a brief section titled 'So What?'

Introduction:  The early principal actors

These are not the words for polite company, but it is the stuff (apparently) of ancient mores – fratricide, depravity, debauchery, cruelty, sadism, incest, infanticide, folly and megalomania.  Sometimes all in one person, and in an entire family and across generations!  

Such is the stuff of the Roman Empire. There were many great empires in human history – Egyptian, Ottoman, British, Greek, Mughal and so on.  But if you rank empires based on three variables – duration, geographic scope and cultural impact – it is tough to rival the Roman Empire.  The Empire lasted 1400+ years, geographically covered Britain, Western Europe, Egypt all the way through to Eastern Europe.  It lasted 7 times as long as the Mughal Empire.  It was 4 times the spread of the Egyptian Empire.  And it was the primary vehicle for Christianity to flourish as one of the world’s foremost religions. 

It seems to me the most of us would know four names right away – Julius Caesar, Mark Antony, Brutus and Cleopatra.  I would not accuse these four of the horrible behaviors mentioned above (although Cleopatra practiced incest as was custom of the Pharaohs), but rather it was a mark of the later emperors and their families to come.  There is a good reason that these four are well known by all.

Julius Caesar – always considered Alexander the Great his hero and benchmark (cried in front of his statue once).  Gains power through political maneuvering in Rome, conquests and the formation of the first triumvirate.  He refuses the crown offered to him three times offered to him by Mark Antony and is declared by senators as dictator in perpetuity.  He is then assassinated on the Ideas of March for wanting to be named emperor.  Made famous by Shakespeare.  Also, my own ignorance, but I thought Caesar was spelled Ceasar!  

Brutus – the assassin.  Who give a great speech on why he killed Caesar.  Ranks along with Judas as world history’s great betrayers.  Played with brilliance by James Mason in the movies.  

Antony – gives a greater speech than Brutus on why Brutus was wrong.  Character made famous by Marlon Brando. 

http://www.americanrhetoric.com/MovieSpeeches/moviespeechjuliuscaesarantony.html  

Cleopatra – the world’s most beautiful woman, who married both Julius Caesar and later Mark Antony.  A famous personality all by herself.  One might argue that Elizabeth Taylor became Elizabeth Taylor when she played Cleopatra.  

This much, we mostly all know.  A couple of interesting facts about these four.  Caesar married Cleopatra and a had a son Caesarian.  After Caesar died, she married Marc Antony and had twins.  Brutus was killed by Marc Antony.  Finally of all the various Roman greats, Marc Antony’s family line is most sustained over several family lines and several generations in terms of royalty. 

From Republic to Empire

Here is perhaps a not so well understood fact about the Roman Empire.  It was not an empire at Julius Caesar’s time.  It was a ‘republic’ complete with democratic elections and senators.  Julius Caesar was the first dictator of this republic, after a civil war with another prominent Roman named Pompey.  Julius Caesar’s dictatorship ended the Republic. 

It became an empire after Caesar’s death.  Brutus wanted to keep it a Republic and this is why he killed Caesar.  Marc Anthony, a Caesar loyalist joined forces with Caesar’s grand-nephew Gaius Octavius to fight back.  Gaius and Mark Antony win this civil war.  And Gaius is made emperor and assumes the name Augustus.

Here is something interesting.  The Roman Empire starts with Augustus.  (And prior to watching I, Claudius, I had NO idea about this).  Augustus who starts the empire ruled for 41 years.  (Julius Caesar was dictator for only 5 years.)

Augustus & Livia

Augustus was married to Livia.  She was the wife of another Roman noble, and Augustus forces a divorce and marries her.  She is an extraordinarily sharp, and ruthless woman who is bent on the successful establishment of the Roman empire and wants her son Tiberius to be the next emperor.

So as a result she kills Augustus’ sons and her own second son and Augustus to do so!  (here is the first of those terrible behaviors that I mentioned above –fratricide).  And at the end of her life asks her son to make her a Goddess, so that she does not suffer the consequences of her terrible murders, which is what the Romans believed (a second behavior – megalomania).   

From Empire to Entitlement

Livia commits many many fratricidal acts to ensure that her son Tiberius becomes emperor.  In order to do this, they force him to divorce his wife and marry his step-sister, Julia  (incest).  As a result Tiberius develops a great abhorrence for his mother, Livia. He hates her.

Tiberius is a disengaged emperor and spends a lot of time away in Corsica indulged in extreme, abhorrent self-indulgent behavior  (a third behavior – debauchery).  


He hands over the reins of power to his ‘chief of police’ Sejanus.  Sejanus is an incredibly cruel man and rules with ruthlessness and kills many many enemies and perceived enemies and children of enemies (infanticide).  On top of that Sejanus indulges in an affair with a daughter in the ruling family and kills the emperor’s son.

It is a time of great turmoil, cruelty and instability in Rome.  All potential inheritors of the throne are executed except two.  An insane individual named Caligula and an invalid named Claudius.

With no one left, Tiberius names the insane Caligula emperor.

From Entitlement to Depravity

Caligula is one of the ALL TIME bad guys of world history on par with people like Pol Pot.  He is so over the top bad that he has all the bad behaviors above all rolled into one and rolled into 4 short years as emperor.  I had no idea Caligula was a Roman Emperor, much less this bad.  Several movies and dramas have been made of him, which have left audiences horrified.

His depravity includes:

Incest – he has a public affair with his sister

Megalomania – he declares himself and his sister living Gods

Debauchery – his self-indulgent behavior makes Tiberius’ behavior seem tame.

Folly – creates a bridge of boats since he is afraid of water and takes these boats away from trade and commerce and causes a famine

Fratricide, Cruelty – kills his sister and many many more relatives.  Except the invalid Claudius, who he thinks is a fool

Genocide – during one of the games at the Coliseum, he gets bored and asks the guards to empty a full stand of spectators and throw them to the wild beasts on the grounds.

The Roman senators cannot stand Caligula’s insane behavior anymore – so they assassinate him, exactly like Brutus assassinated Julius Caesar many decades ago. 

From Depravity to Decline

There is no one in the royal family left except the invalid Claudius.  He has a limp, is hard of hearing and has a revolting neck twitch.  He has been treated like a fool his entire life and is now made emperor by those who don’t want to lose their vested interests.

So Claudius is an accidental emperor, who had no wish to be one.  But he is actually pretty clever and manages to rule well.  However, he hates the idea of empire and wants it to become a republic again. 


He ensures that Nero becomes his heir with this very very famous saying, “Let all the poisons that lurk in the mud, hatch out”.  Basically meaning that if Nero becomes emperor, he will be worse than Caligula and that will be the end of the Julio-Claudian dynasty.

True to his plan, Nero is just terrible and indulges in the types of behavior that Caligula did and is most famous for ‘fiddled when Rome was burning.”  (folly) 

This is a bit of a myth because there were no fiddles during Nero’s time.  But he was insanely cruel as well – in particular throwing who he believed to be Christians live into a fire on his grounds for more light  (cruelty)

There is enormous instability in Rome after Nero is also killed.  Nero was the last in line from Julius Caesar.  Then other families take over.

From Decline to Sustained Power

But unlike Claudius’s plan the Republic does not return, but the empire continues under other families.

Two emperors are noteworthy in the next 1300+ years of rule:

Marcus Aurelius:  Famous for being a Stoic Philosopher and for his book ‘Meditations.’ He is considered one of the 5 good emperors by Machiavelli.

Constantine I:  Who changes the Roman beliefs from Pantheism and paganism to Christianity  (HUGELY important point).  One can make the case, and I strongly suspect so, that the change to Christianity and Christian ideals brought a lot of the abhorrent behavior described above under control and thus lengthened the rule of the empire.  He also founds Constantinople (present day Istanbul)

From Sustained Power to the End

Finally in the 1400s the Roman Empire cannot sustain itself and gives into the Ottoman Empire and other powers.

So what?

Why the interest in the Roman Empire and why is it relevant?  A few points on this:

1.    Reading all this, we can be thankful we live in the age of Democracy.  Like Churchill said, it is the best of the worst alternatives!

2.    Here is the perfect example of Lord Acton’s famous quote: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

3.    How an empire can be a vehicle for social reform and propagation for religion  (Christianity under Rome, Buddhism under the Mauryas, Islam through the Mughals)

4.    We live comparatively tame lives!!  I don’t feel bad about my occasional cigar anymore….  :-)

5.    In the long sweep of history, our modern times are but a blip.


Hope you find the time to watch these well made productions!

If interested in this topic here is some more reading: 

A terrific review of I, Claudius from IMDB:

In writing his epic novels `I, Claudius' and `Claudius the God', from which this series is adapted, Robert Graves reinvented the genre of historical fiction. And he could hardly have chosen a more fascinating subject than the Julio-Claudian dynasty. Even a tame retelling, based strictly on verified historical fact, would have made an interesting tale. But by embracing the lurid, sensationalistic hyperbole heaped upon the founders of the Roman Empire by later writers (Suetonius and Tacitus in particular), Graves concocted the ultimate in dysfunctional families, weaving a tale of scandal and debauchery capable of shocking even the most jaded of modern audiences. The more eminent classicists, naturally, sneered, as eminent classicists tend to do toward anything that threatens to make the ancient world more accessible to `hoi polloi'. One is forced to admit that, as history, Graves' juicy narrative is bunk. But o ye gods, what enjoyable bunk it is!

The drama gives an insider's view of the Julio-Claudian Dynasty, the first emperors of Rome. Over the course of his long reign, Augustus has managed to bring peace to his nation after nearly a century of off-and-on civil wars. But he remains a man divided, hoping for the eventual return of the old Republican government, but knowing that the best hope for a lasting peace is the continued concentration of power in a single person. Augustus therefore sets himself to the task of grooming a successor, one who shares his dream and will continue laying the foundations for the restoration of the Republic. His wife, however, Livia Drusilla, is determined to thwart his plans, and embarks on a slow, murderous scheme to place her own son (whom she fancies she can control) on the throne. The tale is told through the eyes of Claudius, step-grandson to Augustus, who suffered from the crippling effects of a childhood illness and was thus despised and ignored by much of his own family. Regarded as an idiot and of no threat to anyone, he alone remains standing while the poison flows and the daggers flash. To the surprise of all (none the least himself) this drooling, stuttering, limping old fool turns out not to be such a fool after all, and in one of history's great ironies, wins the prize everyone but he is after: absolute power.

Again, the historical facts alone make this an interesting tale. But it is the tantalizing glimpse into the inner workings of the world's first `First Family' that makes `I, Claudius' so much fun. Bill Clinton's philandering and the endless public spectacle that is the British Royals just seem so incredibly dull and tame compared with the bad behavior of Augustus' clan. Matricide, patricide, fratricide, regicide, suicide, incest, rape, pedophilia.and that's on a slow day. Poisonings, stabbings, betrayals, double-crosses, triple-crosses, madness. And one gentle soul sitting in the corner watching it all. Robert Graves' story brings out the tremendous irony of a nation finally at peace with itself, but ruled by a family embroiled in its very own civil war. It's the sort of sordid tale one finds only in the most disreputable of tabloids, but then rendered in gorgeous prose and delivered by the finest actors. To the uninitiated, it might best be described as a guilty pleasure cleverly masquerading as a stuffy British period drama.

I don't think anyone could have hoped for a more faithful transition from book to film than what the BBC achieved. Working with a 12+ hour running time, screenwriter Jack Pulman was not forced to content himself with a `Cliff's Notes' version of the story. Events progress in a naturally expansive manner, and characters grow and mature (or fail to do so) believably over time. In recreating the novels for the stage (after all, let's face it - this is predominantly a televised stage play) Pulman was constrained only by a modest budget and the limitations of the television studio. Action is confined to indoor sets, and the more spectacular aspects of daily life in ancient Rome (attending the Circus Maximus, for example) are left to the viewer's imagination, hinted at by the sounds of roaring crowds but never actually seen. For those audience members not put off by such, or by the drab color and lighting usually reserved for daytime soap operas, the entire production is a treat from beginning to end.

The acting is superb at every turn. Derek Jacobi lends tremendous dignity to his portrayal of Claudius, whose physical handicaps might have come off as insulting or hammy from a lesser actor. He is utterly believable as the `wise' fool, the only person in the entire family NOT scheming for power, and therefore the only one worthy of it. As Livia, Siân Phillips is a study in controlled, cunning evil. The role is reminiscent of Eleanor of Aquitaine in `The Lion in Winter', except that even Katherine Hepburn's Oscar-wining performance in that film is utterly outdone here (ironically, Siân Phillips also played the role of Queen Eleanor, in the BBC's adaptation of `Ivanhoe'). John Hurt's gleefully decadent turn as Caligula is fascinating to watch. Hurt's eyes, throughout his portrayal, remain chillingly cold and lifeless even as he smiles and laughs - except of course, for his expression of shock upon realizing that his sister Drusilla is, in fact, mortal. 


The most impressive moment in the entire production, however, came from Brian Blessed (Augustus), whose slow, quiet, passing away remains the most convincing screen death I have ever witnessed.

There are simply not enough superlatives in the English language to express my opinion of the towering triumph that is `I, Claudius'. And seeing the 9.5 user rating here on the IMDB, apparently I'm not alone.

A terrific review of Cleopatra from IMDB:

That a film as good as CLEOPATRA is was created at all under the madness and panic of it's legendary production is indeed an amazing feat. That CLEOPATRA has been given such loving care in its restoration in this DVD of the "Road Show" print and the attendant bonus materials is a wondrous gift to those who love this film. The documentary, "Cleopatra: The Film That Changed Hollywood" is in on it's own an engrossing and informative two hour movie. For anyone who knows little of the history of CLEOPATRA, or who was not around at the time, this documentary will give them the feeling of what those last days of old Hollywood was like. And therein one can find the reasons why this intimate epic is indeed the wonder that it is. Many thanks should go to the Mankiewicz family and the producers of the documentary. The print and the sound of CLEOPATRA seems now to surpass what I recall it to be in its first presentation nearly forty years ago. The depth of the colors and the richness of the shadows are indeed splendid. In this restoration, it is hard to believe this film is as old as it is. The commentary track is in and of itself like finding the lost treasures of the long dead monarch. For there are wonderful recollections by Martin Landau, Tom and Chris Mankiewicz, and even the one of the films publicists Jack Brodsky gets to read sections from his book "The Cleopatra Papers" which gave a blow by blow description of everyday events on the set. 


But I must give special mention to Landau's part. With his keen eye for the art direction of John DeCuir one sees things in the background and along the edges of the scene that one never noticed before. Such lovingly detailed sets and interiors will never be seen again. The costs today are just too prohibitive. Also his insights into what was cut from the film, particularly his and Richard Burton's contributions in the second act give one the idea of what Mankiewicz was intending. Poor Richard suffered the unkindest cut of all. The presentation of the DVD menus is so clever and exotic. The creators of this DVD are to be commended in their art direction. At last we now know what is behind the massive 20th Century Fox logo!

The film itself remains what it has always been. It is a good film that might have been a great one if only Zanuck had trusted Joe Mankiewicz' original vision. It is said that they are still looking for the missing film; one can only hope that they succeed in this task. The performances range from good to excellent. Particular praise must go to Rex Harrison, Richard Burton, Martin Landau, Robert Stephens, Andrew Keir, and Roddy McDowall. Lastly in this department there remains Elizabeth Taylor's performance as Cleopatra. At the films release the brickbats were reserved for her and for reasons that had nothing to do with her performance. Many reviewed her behavior as seen through the narrow focus of the tabloids and emerging paparazzi. Even today it is sometimes hard to separate the history of the lady from her film roles. But here is the moment in time, in this film where she became the ELIZABETH TAYLOR she has remained in the mind of the world ever since. In this fact alone she is perfect in the role. 


But she is more than that. As Cleopatra she is at once regal and commanding, strong and tender, soft and hard. These are all the contradictions that have always been at the heart of Cleopatra herself. She and the Queen are masters of a public enigma wrapped within a mystery. In her performance as written by Mankiewicz Elizabeth Taylor is probably not too far off from the historical Cleopatra. Finally, ever since Judith Crist gave CLEOPATRA the needle in 1963 and in the act made her name, the public, for the most part, has viewed this film a failure. But today, stripped of the scandal, hype and hysteria of its release 


in June of 1963 it is now possible to view CLEOPARTA as the film it is. A near great film that is the signpost of when Hollywood passed from one age into another. 

Historically this is an important DVD and I recommend it highly. CLEOPATRA remains as seductive, beautiful, and intelligent as it was in Walter Wanger's original conception. "Age cannot wither her, nor custom stale her infinite variety."

Review of Quo Vadis from IMDB: 

In his autobiography, 'Take One', Mervyn LeRoy has some great stories about 'Quo Vadis'. Such as: while filming one of the really big crowd scenes, a voice pipes up from the extras: 'Hey Moy-vin!', and it's Jack Benny. And in a scene right out of one of his pictures, when 'Quo Vadis' is screened in San Francisco, and LeRoy is present, the theatre happens to be right near the corner where the big-time director once sold papers as a kid. He revisits the corner after the screening and sheds a few tears. LeRoy was an extra in C.B. DeMille's first 'Ten Commandments', so the desire to deliver something DeMillian was realized at last, and with smashing success. 

We all agree on Peter Ustinov's ingenious performance, so all I need to add is that in his own autobiography, 'Dear Me', Sir Peter's recollections of the filming are as wonderful as his performance. Whatever his capabilities as an actor, I always thought that Bob Taylor's performance was pretty darn good, and appropriate, too: what high-ranking Roman officer wouldn't be pompous? In any case, the story is much larger than Marcus' character, and the story comes to dominate the picture. It is indeed a pity that the excellent Rozsa score wasn't handled by the Warners sound department, where it would have been been presented to full effect Much of its impact is squandered by its being kept in the background. I don't think Merv LeRoy had so much to do with this decision, as his alma mater was Warners (try watching 'Anthony Adverse'!) 

It seems that it was probably MGM policy. With sensitivity, a DVD version could perhaps offer the picture with a 'sweetened' soundtrack. The quality of the camera work by solid professionals Bob Surtees (later MGM's UltraPanavision 70 specialist) and Wm V. Skall (his work on 'The Silver Chalice' was outstanding) really cannot be overstated. Along with the delights of Sir Peter's performance, I still get choked up when noble Buddy Baer takes on that bull, and when Marina Berti's character displays so much love and devotion to Leo Genn's. Genn is right up there with James Mason in quality, and indeed, Mason may have taken a few pointers from Genn's performance for his own acting in subsequent epics. Patricia Laffan is decadently sexy without being campy. 

It is a credit to Merv LeRoy for allowing great actors like Peter Ustinov and Leo Genn to 'do their thing'. 

'Quo Vadis' is a classic: a stunning spectacle, intelligent, good script, fine performances by practically everybody, and it remains long in the memory, and holds up well indeed. 

If you are interested here is some more:

I'm Spartacus - The Slaves Revolt:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKCmyiljKo0


Bad Acting and Singing: Parody of Cleopatra:  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQVa1Nb0eKI

Good Acting: Trailer of Cleopatra

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGDyZHlHklo 

As Bad As It Gets: Nero's cruelty because of the Fire in Rome 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkDrflc8v9E 

As Good As It Gets:   Derek Jacoby Award for role of Claudius: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ud60QOE-Jk 

Hopefully that was a good explanation of ...... bad is bad in real life and bad might be good in reel life!